Displaying posts categorized under

BOOKS

Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset: Bruce Abramson

https://bda1776.substack.com/p/klaus-schwabs-great-reset?token=

Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, Covid-19: The Great Reset (Forum Publishing, 2020);

Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, The Great Narrative for a Better Future (Forum Publishing, 2022).

For all the hype and confusion, “The Great Reset” is the actual title of Klaus Schwab’s take on global government responses to Covid-19, written in mid-2020.  “The Great Narrative” is his follow-up, written in 2021 upon consultation with fifty notable thinkers and futurists. 

For those keeping score at home, Schwab heads the World Economic Forum (WEF) and its famed Davos confabs.  (His co-author, Thierry Malleret, is a long-time collaborator).  As such, Schwab does indeed loom large in many conspiracy theories.  He also has many adoring fans.  These books allow us to see through those filters to the thoughts he most wants to share.  They’re important books and relatively readable (as such things go).  They’re also deeply disturbing books.  They have the potential to do to the twenty-first century what The Communist Manifesto did to the twentieth.

Longtime readers know that I credit The Communist Manifesto with teaching me that the key to understanding radical literature is remembering that diagnosis and prescription are distinct skills.  All good radicals have (at least) one thing in common: They’re unconstrained by mainstream thinking and conventional wisdom.  Radicals challenge the very basic assumptions that trip up their mainstream contemporaries.  That vantage point can let them see what others miss.  As a result, the best radical observations and diagnoses of deep, broad societal problems are often far more insightful than anything that their more respectable peers can present.

At the same time, however, smart, untethered radicals tend to flatter themselves into thinking that because they alone can see through the fog of conventionality, they alone know how to solve the world’s problems.  From there they tend to become dangerously utopian and authoritarian. 

The challenge for readers is thus to appreciate the insightful descriptions and diagnoses at the heart of radical problem identification while rejecting the disastrous prescriptions that these same radicals are eager to sell. 

No one exemplified this distinction better than Marx.  His discussions of the shortcomings of nineteenth century capitalism are truly perceptive.  In one of my favorite passages, he explains (without using the words) that capitalists are addicted to constant growth.  For Marx, that addiction was a problem.  Like the neurotic green folks constantly worried about resource depletion, Marx reasoned that there had to be “limits to growth.”  Once the capitalist system hit those limits—that is, once it found itself unable to replace the pre-existing modes of production with a new and superior set—the entire system would implode. 

I’m hardly alone in appreciating that passage.  Joseph Schumpeter cited it as the basis of his famous theory of “creative destruction” that has come to underpin our understanding of the innovation economy.  It’s insightful in ways that few other bits of nineteenth century economic writing can even approach.  And though Marx was wrong in foreseeing those limits as imminent, his analysis provides a dire warning: Whenever a political movement downplays growth, it threatens to undermine the entire capitalist system. 

Marx was absolutely right about our addiction.  Those of us who have benefited from life under market capitalism—meaning nearly everyone alive today—are indeed junkies.  We need our next growth fix.  The moment the economy stops growing, we shed our generosity, become belligerent, and threaten to fight anyone who looks like they might take our stuff.  When and where that situation persists (Venezuela?) freedom and prosperity crumble into dictatorship, economic planning, and misery.

Scoop’ for Today By John Rossi

https://www.realclearhistory.com/articles/2022/04/12/scoop_for_today_826782.html

Ben Rhodes, President Barack Obama’s foreign policy guru, once boasted how he had created an “echo chamber” in the press corps to publicize the administration’s foreign policy moves: they were just a bunch of 27-year-olds who know nothing about foreign policy, he said.

With war booming between Russia and Ukraine, and our foreign correspondents brushing off their flak jackets and camouflage gear, it might be time to return to the definite study of how the foreign policy elite cover a war, Evelyn Waugh’s “Scoop. ”

“Scoop” appeared in May 1938 — if you are interested in coincidences, or  what Chesterton called “God’s way of punning” — it was published less than two weeks after George Orwell’s “Homage to Catalonia,” which was a failure at first, but now like “Scoop” is considered a classic.  “Scoop” was largely based on Waugh’s experiences covering the Italo-Ethiopian war for the Daily Mail in 1935.  The experiences in that war left Waugh with unpleasant memories, and he particularly came to detest the cynicism, outright distortions and lies of the journalists covering the war.

“Scoop” subtitled “A Novel About Journalists” — was the fourth and, in my view, the funniest and most savage of his satiric novels — “Decline and Fall” runs a close second in my view.  The protagonist William Boot writes a nature column, “Lush Places,” for the Daily Beast, the largest newspaper in England. Lord Copper, the all-powerful owner of the paper mistakenly orders the wrong Boot to cover a civil war that is supposed to have broken out in the mythical country of Ishmaelia, a thinly veiled version of Ethiopia. The editor, Salter, a comic foil for Copper is told that Boot possesses a high-class style, and checks out his latest column: “Feather-footed through the plashy fen the questioning vole…”  “That must be good style,” he observes, “At least, it doesn’t sound like anything else to me.”

The View from the Cocoon One has to wonder what kind of Beltway cocoon Continetti inhabits.  By Paul Gottfried

https://amgreatness.com/2022/04/11/the-view-from-the-cocoon/

A review of The Right: The Hundred-Year War for American Conservatism, by Matthew Continetti (Basic Books, 496 pages, $32)

Sometimes one begins a book with such low expectations that one is delighted to find the printed material is not quite as bad as what one expected. This is precisely my impression of Matthew Continetti’s much touted monograph, The Right: The Hundred-Year War for American Conservatism. As someone who holds the honor of being Bill Kristol’s son-in-law (and who holds his father-in-law’s vacated place at Fox News), and a prominent NeverTrumper to boot, Continetti is hardly an unbiased interpreter of conservatism. A revealing passage from his book tells us clearly where on the ideological divide he stands: “The one hundred years war for the Right is to conceive of it as a battle between the forces of extremism and the conservatives who understood that mainstream acceptance of their ideas was the prerequisite for electoral success and lasting reform.” 

As the world’s most notorious critic of misused political taxonomies, I shall allow myself to quibble about Continetti’s eccentric use of the term “Right.” For him and his well-connected friends, the designation mostly serves as a synonym for “Republican.” There are two groups on his telling, both located in the GOP, that are fighting to be the true face of the Right, but only one passes muster as “non-extreme.” This is where I start to part ways. Today, I would argue, the populist Right is the true American Right because it alone is fighting the cultural Left and its allies in the deep state, media, and educational establishment. I have no idea what makes its neocon and Republican establishment adversaries any kind of Right, since on most domestic social issues and certainly on foreign policy, this group happily cooperates with leftist power elites.

In explaining how the current populist Right came along, Continetti stresses the divisive character of the Iraq War and the failure of the George W. Bush Administration to carry along all self-identified conservatives. That prolonged struggle “delegitimized the conservative movement in the eyes of populist independents, conservative Democrats, and disaffected voters crucial to past GOP victories.” This observation is entirely correct. Bush’s invasion unleashed acrimonious debate at home, and a populist Right was able to consolidate itself by standing in opposition to a course of action heavily endorsed by neoconservative journalists and policy advisers. But cultural and moral issues, often intertwined with economic ones, soon became the sustaining themes of the populist revival, which has taken cultural wars and the plight of the working class more seriously than neocons and establishment Republicans have done.

David Mamet Is a Defiant Scribe in the Age of Conformity The playwright won’t play along with woke signaling, talismanic masking or deference to petty tyrants. Barton Swaim

https://www.wsj.com/articles/david-mamet-book-recessional-free-speech-covid-mask-vaccine-mandates-lockdown-transgender-lgbtqia-sogie-woke-crt-critical-race-theory-blm-hollywood-theater-11649424996?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

“Woke signaling, blind compliance with public-health authoritarianism, deference to theater critics and tyrannical city officials—Mr. Mamet doesn’t play along.”

Back in the 1980s and ’90s, innumerable films, TV documentaries and history textbooks instructed us that the 1950s were years of conformity and conventionalism: “The Donna Reed Show,” McCarthyism, “The Organization Man,” TV dinners. In fact, the ’50s were a time of extraordinary artistic creativity, boundless technological innovation, original thinking in politics, intellectual diversity in journalism and higher education, new energy in religion, and enormous progress in race relations. What the ’80s and ’90s mistook for conformity was a naturally evolved cultural solidarity—something nearly everybody, on the left and the right, longs for now.

An informed observer of present-day America might reasonably conclude that our own decade—at least among the educated and advantaged classes—is far more imbued with the spirit of conformism than the ’50s were. Corporate managers and military leaders parrot nostrums about diversity, inclusion and sustainability that few of them believe. Museums and orchestras studiously avoid programming that might offend ideologues. Reporters and producers in the mainstream press seize on stories—or ignore them—solely because that’s what everybody else in the press is doing. Large majorities in wealthy cities dutifully comply with public-health restrictions they know to be largely ineffective, mainly because refusing to do so would invite the ire of friends and neighbors complying with those restrictions for the same reason.

Maybe America’s deciders and describers (to use Nicholas Eberstadt’s phrase) aren’t the independent-minded lot they think themselves to be.

Alice Walker Disinvited From Book Festival Can you guess what the organizers discovered? Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/04/alice-walker-disinvited-book-festival-hugh-fitzgerald/

Alice Walker, the author of The Color Purple, has been disinvited from a book festival when the organizers discovered her long history of antisemitic remarks about Jews and Israel, the Jewish state that she often compares to Nazi Germany. A report on the reasons for her being uninvited is here: “California Book Festival Rescinds Invitation to Author Alice Walker Over Past Antisemitic Comments,” by Shiryn Ghermezian, Algemeiner, March 29, 2022:

A book festival in California has disinvited Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist and poet Alice Walker from its event due to the author’s history of making antisemitic remarks about Jews and Israel, The Jewish News of Northern California reported on Friday.

Walker, 78, was scheduled to interview writer Honorée Fanonne Jeffers, at the latter’s request, at the headlining event of the annual Bay Area Book Festival, which will take place May 7-8 in downtown Berkeley and is set to feature over 250 authors. The festival is the main project of the Foundation for the Future of Literature and Literacy, a California non-profit organization.

Organizers cancelled Walker’s participation in the festival on Thursday after being informed about her past hateful comments, according to The Jewish News of Northern California. Jeffers subsequently pulled out of the festival in response, the festival’s publicist Julia Drake told the outlet.…

Walker, who was the first Black woman to win a Pulitzer Prize for fiction for “The Color Purple” in 1983, has repeatedly compared Israel to Nazi Germany and is an avid supporter of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. In 2011, she claimed, “I think Israel is the greatest terrorist in that part of the world. And I think in general, the United States and Israel are great terrorist organizations themselves.” That same year she said Israel is “as frightening to many of us as Germany used to be.” Walker has also made antisemitic claims about Jews and Israel in her poetry.

Walker has been obsessed with Jews and Israel for years. She frequently compares Israel to Nazi Germany, and attacks the Talmud as an evil and racist document. 

Who Broke Climate Science? There is a complete disconnect between the reality of climate science and the authoritarian designs of many climate agitators. by Steven F. Hayward

https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/who-broke-climate-science/

In 2021, the American Political Science Review generated a storm of controversy by publishing Ross Mittiga’s “Political Legitimacy, Authoritarianism, and Climate Change.” A political science professor at Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile and former Democratic candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates, Mittaga raises a problem he does not solve: must we sacrifice democracy to save the planet? (I posed the same question in these pages 13 years ago: “All the Leaves Are Brown,” Winter 2008/09).

The most overwrought, assertive climate change activists have a “transformative” agenda to halt and reverse global warming. The problem is that there’s no evidence voting majorities in any modern democracy are willing to be transformed by Green New Deals or other, even wilder schemes. And if the people reject the climate agenda? There must be ways to enact it despite them. There may even be ways to insist that this thwarting of the popular will is, in fact, a more noble rendering of democracy than mere government by consent of the governed.

Mittiga denies, strenuously yet unconvincingly, that he advocates authoritarian governance. Democratic governments that fail to take vigorous measures to solve the “climate crisis,” he argues, will lose their legitimacy by failing to protect the health and safety of their citizens (the same citizens who at the ballot box resist such measures as carbon taxes). Democracies can only retain legitimacy by enacting climate policies that may require suspending civil liberties and other democratic procedures while taking direct command of the economy—in other words, authoritarianism. Heads-I-win, tails-you-lose.

Beyond the Reach of Debate, Evidence and Logic: Michael Greene

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/review/2022/04/beyond-the-reach-of-debate-evidence-and-logic/

Even as the wave of wokeness seems at its peak, there are signs it could be about to break. ‘Defund the police’ is being replaced in many US cities that embraced it in 2020 with ‘Refund the police’. The 2021 Virginia gubernatorial race was won by Republican Glenn Younkin, in part a voter rejection of the teaching of critical race theory in schools. President Biden’s deep trough of climate change and social spending demanded by the Democrats’  Bernie Sanders wing crashed in the Senate. The re-emergence of serious geopolitics with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has re-oriented energy policy in Europe and elsewhere. And women are pushing back against the transgender activists to protect their sports and facilities from encroachment. It’s encouraging, despite the depressing grip woke agendas have rapidly gained in many public and private organisations.

Encouraging, too, is that the once isolated critical voices, such as Jordan Peterson, are becoming a choir, even if not yet a massed choir.

Joining the chorus is John McWhorter, an associate professor of linguistics at Columbia University and regular New York Times columnist. And he’s black. He wrote his new book, Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has
Betrayed Black America, on his porch in the summer of 2020, when the US was engulfed in the civil unrest following the killing of George Floyd.

Fortitude: American Resilience in the Era of Outrage  Rep. Dan Crenshaw

In 2012, on his third tour of duty, an improvised explosive device left Dan Crenshaw’s right eye destroyed and his left blinded. Only through the careful hand of his surgeons, and what doctors called a miracle, did Crenshaw’s left eye recover partial vision. 

And yet, he persevered, completing two more deployments. Why? There are certain stories we tell ourselves about the hardships we face – we can become paralyzed by adversity or we can adapt and overcome. We can be fragile or we can find our fortitude. Crenshaw delivers a set of lessons to help you do just that. 

Most people’s everyday challenges aren’t as extreme as surviving combat, and yet our society is more fragile than ever: exploding with outrage, drowning in microaggressions, and devolving into divisive mob politics. The American spirit – long characterized by grit and fortitude – is unraveling. We must fix it.

That’s exactly what Crenshaw accomplishes with Fortitude. This book isn’t about the problem, it’s about the solution. And that solution begins with each and every one of us. We must all lighten up, toughen up, and begin treating our fellow Americans with respect and grace. 

Fortitude is a no-nonsense advice book for finding the strength to deal with everything from menial daily frustrations to truly difficult challenges. More than that, it is a roadmap for a more resilient American culture. With meditations on perseverance, failure, and finding much-needed heroes, the book is the antidote for a prevailing “safety culture” of trigger warnings and safe spaces. Interspersed with lessons from history and psychology is Crenshaw’s own story of how an average American kid from the Houston suburbs went from war zones to the halls of Congress – and managed to navigate his path with a sense of humor and an even greater sense that, no matter what anyone else around us says or does, we are in control of our own destiny.

Fit to print Last Call at the Hotel Imperial: The Reporters Who Took On a World at War by Deborah Cohen reviewed by Anne Sebba

https://spectatorworld.com/book-and-art/fit-to-print-hotel-imperial/

Last Call at the Hotel Imperial: The Reporters Who Took On a World at War Deborah Cohen

In January 1936, Harold Nicolson, the British politician and author, reviewed Inside Europe, by the Chicago-born journalist John Gunther. He praised the “American type of wandering or perambulatory foreign correspondent” such as Vincent Sheean, H.R. Knickerbocker (known as Knick), the Mowrer brothers, John Gunther and (the only woman) Dorothy Thompson, as “one of those improvements to modern life that the British would do well to imitate.”

According to Nicolson, the virtue of the book, which famously described Adolf Hitler as a “blob of ectoplasm,” was not merely that it was exciting but “so personal that it may seem dramatic and at the same time educative.” Now Deborah Cohen has provided a rivetingly raw account of the group (with cameo appearances from others, including Rebecca West and “Mickey” Hahn) and the way they worked, switching focus at various points as she joins the dramatic global story with often painful and deeply personal accounts. From 1931 onward, this group of roving American reporters — friends and sometime lovers who occasionally fell out with each other, slept with each other’s partners, suffered tragedies and setbacks — saw what was happening in Europe with great clarity. They wrote powerfully about the rise of the fascist dictators before they were household names and warned about constant violations of the Treaty of Versailles: not always with the same viewpoint or approach.

For example, when Knick published The Boiling Point; Will War Come in Europe? in 1934, Thompson criticized her erstwhile junior for “a hasty production in which he had reported what he’d been told as if he were taking dictation unctuously rather than rendering judgment.” The most important attribute of the journalist, according to Thompson, was brains, not feet.

The Black Agenda is a Nihilistic and Socialist Agenda When the end goal is to crush the American Dream. Jason Hill

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/03/black-agenda-nihilistic-and-socialist-agenda-jason-hill/

The Black Agenda: Bold Solutions for A Broken System, edited by Anna Gifty Opoku-Ageyman, a twenty-four-year old graduate student of public policy and economics at Harvard Kennedy School, has as its stated goal that, no matter where you show up on the spectrum of blackness, that the United States owes you something. The contributors are a broad phalanx of scholars and administrators from a multiplicity of fields wrung from public policy, computer science, medical engineering, economics, epidemiology, the Department of Agriculture and environmentalism and climate justice. The book is not a work in scholarship but, rather, short three-to-four-page opinion pieces on a swath of issues that deal with the absence of equity in health between the races, the need to abolish the carceral system and, in the writers’ views, the necessity of examining the disproportionate number of murders of black citizens committed by white police officers  versus those against white citizens.

The book is predicated on the notion that the United States has violated its social contract with black Americans and kept their expertise outside the framing narratives that influence public opinion and shape public policy. The book is also a formal accusation against those blacks who are experts and are part of the infrastructure of public discourse. For such individuals who are not affirmatively putting black expertise as one of the valences of their institutions or organization, then they are de facto part of the white counter-response to blackness. Part of the black agenda is a call for black experts to align their economic behaviors with their social and cultural values.