Monday, May 29, 2023

Review of The Gulag Archipelago [Volume 3]: An Experiment in Literary Investigation by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   



Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“Of course, no one is in need of freedom if he already has it.  We can agree with him that political freedom is not what matters in the end.  The goal of human evolution is not freedom for the sake of freedom.  Nor is it the building of an ideal polity.  What matter, of course, are the moral foundations of society.  But that is in the long run: what about the beginning?  What about the first step?” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Part V: Katorga: Chapter 4: Why Did We Stand For It?, Page 105

“Freedom has something else in store for former convicts – reunion with family and friends.  Reunion of fathers with sons.  Of husbands with wives.  And it is not often that good comes out of these reunions.  In the ten or fifteen years lived apart from us, how could our sons grow in harmony with us: sometimes they are simply strangers, sometimes they are enemies.  Nor are women who wait faithfully for their husbands often rewarded: they have lived so long apart, long enough for a person to change completely, so that only his name is the same.  His experience and hers are too different – and it is no longer possible for them to come together again.” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Part VI: Exile: Chapter 7: Zeks at Liberty, Page 493

“Then again, Soviet Law has forgotten all about the sin of bearing false witness – and simply does not regard it as a crime!  A legion of false witnesses thrives in our midst, they go sedately on their way to an honorable old age, bask in a golden sunset at the end of their days.  Ours is the only country in the world and in history to pamper perjurers!” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Part VII: Stalin Is No More: Chapter 3: The Law Today, Page 555


Review

Overview:

The death of Stalin did not end the Gulag.  The political regime was no longer able to survive without the Gulag.  Absolute power over people was not enough, the system required slander and propaganda as well.  Perjurers, those who bear false witness, were supported.  A culture was developed to serve oppression. 

Gulag officials did not mind when guards killed prisoners.  Instead, the guards were rewarded.  This was a security system that needed death to operate.  Without death, the guards would have been seen as not vigilant enough.  Or, there would have been claims that those who they portrayed as savages were docile prisoners.  Guards would have been embarrassed to show leniency to those they considered savages.  The guards showing leniency would have been informed on.

Escapes from Corrective Labor Camps were seen as an unavoidable aspect of an overextended economic system.  While escape from Special Camps were not possible, as these escapes would have been politically damaging.  Should the prisoners survive and serve out their long sentence, they would be released.  But after that many years, the individual would have been changed.  They would have become unrecognizable to those who knew them before.  Only their name remained the same.  This made reunions not a necessarily welcoming event.  Those who they would reunite with, have become strangers or even enemies.

 

Caveats?

This book is very difficult to read.  Contains poor organizational structure.  Most of the book is composed of examples, without much systematic analysis.  


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•How did Stalin’s death effect the Gulag system?
•What kind of culture was developed?
•How were witnesses used?
•What happened to the guards who killed a prisoner?
•Could guards show leniency to prisoners?
•Was escape possible?
•For those released, how were their reunions with relatives? 

Book Details
Ancillary Author: Anne Applebaum
Translator:            Thomas P. Whitney
Edition:                 Digital Edition
Publisher:             HarperPerennial [HarperCollins Publishers]
Edition ISBN:      9780062941695
Pages to read:       673
Publication:          2020
1st Edition:           1973
Format:                 eBook 

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    2
Content          2
Overall          2






Thursday, May 25, 2023

Review of Corruptible: Who Gets Power and How It Changes Us by Brian Klaas

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes

Book can be found in: 
Genre = Decision Making
Book Club Event = Book List (09/16/2023)
Intriguing Connections = 1) When Intelligence Goes Wrong, 2) The Persecuted and The Persecutors


Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“A corrupt system attracted corrupt students, and an honest system attracted honest students.  Perhaps it’s not about power changing people, but rather about the setting.  A good system can create a virtuous circle of ethical power seekers.  A bad system can create a vicious cycle of people willing to lie, cheat, and steal until they reach the top.  If that’s the case, then our focus shouldn’t be on powerful individuals – it should be on repairing our broken systems.” – Brian Klaas, Chapter I: Introduction, Page 22-23

“We also – let’s face it – end up with a lot of cruel, incompetent people in positions of authority.  At first glance, that’s a bit perplexing, because power is relational.  In other words, individuals can’t be powerful alone.  To become powerful, you need people to control.  Power is therefore given, not taken.” – Brian Klaas, Chapter IV: The Power Delusion, Page 74

“If you want to be healthy, increase how much control you have over your life whenever possible – particularly if you’re low on the social ladder, or you’re near the top of it.  But since most people can’t just wave a magic wand and find themselves more in control, the easier path is, if you’re going for that promotion, make sure it doesn’t come at the expense of those you care about and love.” – Brian Klaas, Chapter IX: How Power Changes Your Body, Page 191


Review

Is This An Overview?

Power depends on having others to control.  Hierarchies can facilitate coordination and incentivize competition.  But people are constantly disappointed by those in power.  Understanding power is needed to redress the influence of power.  There are incorruptible people in power, those that are kind and honest.  It is the corruptible people who do a lot of damage.  Focus tends to go to those who sought power, got power, and retained power.  This a selection bias, called a survivorship bias as those that did not seek, get, and retain power are not considered.  Power needs to deter corruptible people in all three dimensions.  Not only are methods needed to be developed to prevent corruptible people from taking power, but also to develop methods for promoting incorruptible people to get into power.

Some people do become corrupted by power.  Initially helping others, but changing into someone who uses power to support only themselves.  Corruptible people do tend to seek out positions of power.  Should they get power, they will misuse power to keep hold of power.  Corruptible people are not the only ones who make bad decisions.  Bad decisions can come from honest and good people who are in a corrupt system.  It is an attribution error to blame an individual when it is the system that corrupts.  Those in positions of power do not necessarily have alternative options like everyone else.  Sometimes they need to make difficult choices in which there are no acceptable options.  People in power need to be held accountable, but their available choices need to be considered when judging them.

 

Who Are The Corruptible?

Perceived monsters behave like normal people rather than the expected monsters in media.  Alternatively, leaders are often selected based on how they look.  They get elected if they look like they deserve to be in power.

Corruptible people exhibit Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy.  These three traits form a dark triad.  Machiavellianism refers to claims that ends justify the means.  The individual has moral indifference, and uses interpersonal manipulation and scheming to get their way.  Narcissism refers to arrogance, self-absorption, grandiosity, and a need for recognition.  Psychopathy refers to a lack of empathy, reckless, and impulsive.  Each of the traits is on a continuum, as everyone potentially has even very mild strains of them.   

The way available positions are framed, the way they are described, influences who applies.  Power tends to be sought by those who are corruptible.

Conspicuous consumption is a signal of status, because it means that the individual has money.  The more frivolous the use of money, the more effect it is at signaling status.  

 

What Is The Effect Of A Culture?

Culture influences whether people are more likely to be cooperative or individualistic.  Corrupt systems can corrupt people.  Corruptible people are attracted to corruptible occupations, and vice versa as honest people are attracted to honest occupations.  The same occupations can corrupt or make people honest depending on the context.  A virtuous cycle of ethical power seekers or a vicious cycle of unethical power seekers. 

People who work closely with each over for long periods of time are more likely to develop corrupt behavior.  To counter this, people should be rotated.  Collusion becomes risky when outsiders are present.  But, if a system is systemically corrupt, rotations will not reduce the corruption.

 

How Does Power Influence The Mind And Body?

People in power tend to lose their inhibition, as they care less for what others think. 

More stress does not necessarily lead to health problems.  There is a difference between stress, and what stresses the body in harmful ways.  Difference between stress and biological stress.  The flight-or-fight response has become chronic and routine rather than acute and transient, which has negative health ramifications.

Those who are under immense pressure are fine as long as they have a high degree of control.  Health outcomes are bad for those under immense pressure without control.  Need at least some control of decisions being made.  Social relations can blunt the negative effects of lack of control.

 

How To Resolve Corruption?

The focus should be process rather than results.  Results can be based on random chance which the individual had nothing to do with, while corruptible individuals are able to give more weight to their pretended skills or even make their failures appear as successes.  Even good leaders can appear to be bad within a sample of experiences. 

Getting too psychologically close to people can hamper decisions making, but too psychologically far and any concerns are not even considered.  Need to have the right amount of emotional proximity. 

People change their behavior when they are being observed.  To be more honest if lies will be exposed.  But a surveillance society is dystopian.  Open plan offices make it easier to see what colleagues are doing.  This has detrimental effects on the employees.  Surveillance is watching the wrong people.  There are many situations in which it was not low ranked officers who were responsible for corrupt behavior, but those who held a high ranking office.  It does not take constant surveillance, but the risk of being surveilled to change behavior. 

 

Caveats?

The book is composed of various examples of people who had power and research done on the effects of power.  The examples and research have mixed qualities.  The author acknowledged that many had limitations, and that their interpretations have changed.  The information provides an account of the different ways that power effects individuals, but the information needs to be adjusted to any given situation to become practical.  


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•Who are the corruptible people?
•Who are the incorruptible people? 
•Does power corrupt?
•How does power shape an individual?
•What is the attribution error in corruption?
•What is the survivorship bias in corruption?
•How does culture influence people?
•What choice sets do leaders have?  Can leaders keep their hands clean of ethical problems? 
•What is the dark triad?
•How to resolve corruption? 
•What is the Stanford Prison Experiment? 
•Does stress lead to health problems?
•How did ranged weapons change the structure of hierarchy?  
•How did agriculture change society? 
•What is rice theory?
•What is the attribution error? 
•Who was King Leopold? 
•What does it mean to deepen and broaden the pool of applicants? 
•What is a shadow board?
•Do genes influence decisions?
•How does someone judge other people’s behavior in a situation?  And how does the individual judge their own behavior in the same situation?
•Which outcomes should be investigated? 

Book Details
Publisher:             Scribner [Simon & Schuster]
Edition ISBN:      9781982154110
Pages to read:       252
Publication:          2021
1st Edition:           2021
Format:                 eBook 

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    5
Content          5
Overall          5






Sunday, May 21, 2023

Review of Indonesia, Etc.: Exploring the Improbable Nation by Elizabeth Pisani

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   

Book can be found in: 


Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“I can count on one hand the number of times I was treated with anything but kindness.  I can also count on one hand the number of days that I did not have a conversation about corruption, incompetence, injustice and the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.” – Elizabeth Pisani, Prologue, Page 8

“The Europeans changed the rules of the trading game, it’s true, and they made plantations and extractive industries more efficient.  But the islands’ many kings and sultans had been squeezing the peasantry for taxes and labour to finance their endless wars with one another long before the Europeans arrived.” – Elizabeth Pisani, Chapter 1: Improbable Nation, Page 19

“This made for what World Bank economists called ‘high transaction costs’ and everyone else called corruption.  And yet from the early 1980s foreigners did want to invest in Indonesia, precisely because of the stability that this web of compromise delivered.  Many people saw the pay-offs to generals and cronies as a reasonable price for that stability.” – Elizabeth Pisani, Chapter 2: The Ties that Bind, Page 41


Review

Overview:

Indonesia is composed of various islands.  An archipelago.  Collectively they are a very diverse community.  Diverse ethnicities, religions, and languages.  The archipelago has very little common culture.  Attempts at creating a national identity, yielded little.  Even decades after Indonesia became a sovereign state, some regions refer to their local region as the political entity rather than the state.  Even with the diverse people, they are considered very kind, but also corrupt. 

The region was a trading hub for various empires, and colonized for their resources such as spices.  The colonizers did not invent exploitation in the islands as the various local leaders had been exploiting their populations before they were colonized.  The colonizers just tapped into the corrupt systems, and made them more efficient.  But in the 1940s, Indonesia declared their independence.  Forming a sovereign state, through violent means. 

Violence that continued after gaining sovereignty, to keep the people together.  Violence had become routine, along with corruption.  Seeking unity through finding a common enemy.  Corruption was very problematic, but provided for more stable investments.  Even with the violence, corruption, and political repression, people’s lives seemed to improve.  Mob violence and justice was a common occurrence, but the law matured over time.  As well as the culture becoming market oriented.

 

Caveats?

This book is part history, part memoire.  Showcasing the diverse cultural experiences.  This organizational structure had mixed results.  Sometimes getting lost in the local and personal experiences without explaining how everything fits together.  The memoire details can distract from the historic understanding.  Other times the local experiences facilitate an understanding of the improbable nation.  


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•How diverse is Indonesia?
•How did Indonesia gain sovereignty?
•Who controlled Indonesia before sovereignty?
•Why do people think that Indonesia is corrupt?
•Why was their violence used after gaining sovereignty?
•How has Indonesia changed?
•Who is Sukarno?

Book Details
Publisher:             W. W. Norton & Company
Edition ISBN:      9780393088588
Pages to read:       380
Publication:          2014
1st Edition:           2014
Format:                 Hardcover

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    4
Content          3
Overall          2






Wednesday, May 17, 2023

Review of From Third World to First: The Singapore Story: 1965-2000 by Lee Kuan Yew

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   

Book can be found in: 
Book Club Event = Book List (07/15/2023)
Intriguing Connections = 1) How Is Sovereignty Is Gained And Lost?


Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“We believed in socialism, in fair shares for all.  Later we learned that personal motivation and personal rewards were essential for a productive economy.  However, because people are unequal in their abilities, if performance and rewards are determined by the marketplace, there will be a few big winners, many medium winners, and a considerable number of losers.  That would make for social tensions because a society’s sense of fairness is offended.” – Lee Kuan Yew, Chapter 7: A Fair, Not Welfare, Society, Page 95

“When the PAP government took office in 1959, we set out to have a clean administration.  We were sickened by the greed, corruption, and decadence of many Asian leaders.  Fighters for freedom for their oppressed peoples had become plunderers of their wealth.  Their societies slid backward.  We were swept up by the wave of revolution in Asia, determined to get rid of colonial rule, but angry at and ashamed of the Asian nationalist leaders whose failure to live up to their ideals had disillusioned us.” – Lee Kuan Yew, Chapter 12: Keeping the Government Clean, Page 157

“No other project had brought richer rewards to the region.  Our neighbors have tried to out-green and out-bloom each other.  Greening was positive competition that benefitted everyone – it was good for morale, for tourism, and for investors.  It was immensely better that we competed to be the greenest and cleanest in Asia.  I can think of many areas where competition could be harmful, even deadly.” – Lee Kuan Yew, Chapter 13: Greening Singapore, Page 177


Review

Is This An Overview?

Singapore gained sovereignty in 1965, during a wave of anticolonialism.  Within the following decades, Singapore went from being an underdeveloped state, into a prosperous and politically stable state.  Taking immense effort to build an effective government that provided for social inclusivity, political trust, a productive economic system, and a defense network.  To survive, Singapore needed to manage ethnic tension, find trading partners for resources, and defend itself against threats to their sovereignty. 

Singapore wanted capitalism, but with socialist ties.  A competitive system that had more equitable rewards.  A system designed to give people ownership over the outcomes of production, which had motivated people to take responsibility for their lives and contribute to the building prosperity.  To prevent a welfare dependent system.  Singapore had sought international advice and trained their work force. 

Singapore also developed a trustworthy government.  To build an effective government, they made policies to stop corruption cycles, and punished corruption severely.  Politicians were expected to publicly respond to allegations, and legally defend themselves against defamation.  This is a system where news agencies are punished should they make false claims.  Singapore learned from the international community, and then the international community began to learn from Singapore.  Singapore was effective at managing foreign affairs.  They build cooperation and prevented meaninglessly escalating frustration. 

 

How Was Sovereignty Gained?

It was the British that established Singapore as a trading post during the early 19th century.  During 1950s, there was a wave of anticolonialism.  Lee Kuan Yew was elected as prime minister of a self-governing Singapore in 1959, after working with trade unions and political parties.  Lee Kuan Yew party went against the communists, which meant making enemies.  Their victorious outcome came about after difficult conflict.  Singapore leadership wanted to rejoin Malaya, and did merge into Malaysia in 1963.  The cooperation was very fragile, for there were Malay-Chinese race riots in Singapore.  Malay wanted dominance, and left no choice for Singapore but to leave.  Singapore became independent in 1965.  Community experiences with hardships made them determined to develop a multiracial and inclusive society.

 

Relying On The British And Americans?

Singapore was a small country, surrounded by larger more powerful nations which favored domestic policies.  Singapore relied on the British for military defense, but the British were set to leave Singapore, taking their military might with them.  Without them, Singapore’s security would have been threatened. Threatening their survivability.  Security needed for trade and investments.  Without which there would be unemployment. 

There were many Asian states gaining sovereignty, and did not want European powers controlling them.  Asian states wanted an Asian solution to their problems.  But, the smaller states did want to cooperate with other European states to balance the power with the larger Asian states.

Singapore did not yield to pressure to override their legal system, even when Singapore was weak and smaller that the state pressuring them.  By not yielding to pressure, Singapore proved that the rule of law was meaningful and could be overridden with impunity.  They were not afraid to enforce the law, especially with British forces still standing guard.    

Singapore did not want to be intimidated, therefore needed to build a military defense force.  National service was a rite of passage for Singapore.  Unifying the diverse people.  Respecting the diverse people’s restrictions based on faith.

As British influence was declining, the American influence was expanding.  Changing to a different political structure was difficult.  The British and Americans handled power differently.  The British had civility, while the Americans want to prove their power.  Americans needed to be handled without a British buffer.  Singapore relied on US potential support to counter Soviet power.  Singapore was able to enforce various naval claims due to US power.

 

How Did Singapore Handle Racial Tension?

Singapore was composed of a diverse group of people, who did not always get along.  To handle the racial tension, the government hired security who were a more neutral people with a disciplined and loyal reputation to protect.  Racial tensions raised more urgency for a national security force to protect the fragile independence.

Racial tension made choosing a language a sensitive topic.  They wanted English because it was a neutral language, and was needed for international trade.  Rather than impose English, they accepted different official languages.  Singapore was a diverse community, with diverse people who wanted to keep their language and culture.  The government wanted a quality education, but English seemed to deculturize students and make them apathetic. 

The government made sure that different races were intermingled, and were neighbors.  Even created laws to have inclusive elections.  Enabling the government to be representative of the people.

 

What Economic System Did Singapore Develop?

Singapore did not have natural resources. For Singapore to survive, they had to be competitive.  To produce products cheaper and better than alternatives.  Singapore had a diverse set of adaptable people.  Singapore wanted to become the trading post for the region.  They did have a strategically located harbor. 

Although Singapore was willing to have a common market with Malaysia, the Malaysian government did not want the common market even when Singapore was part of Malaysia.  As Singapore did not have close ties with neighboring states, they sought for ties with more distant states. 

To develop Singapore as a competitive manufacturing state, they sought for foreign expertise to improve their workforce.  Singapore asked international companies to send their instructors to train technicians.  They had set up training institutions.  That gave the people skills with understandings from diverse cultures.  Making Singaporeans desirable employees.  Singapore learned from foreign experiences to develop effective labor practices.   

Singapore protected its manufacturing industry, for various electronic and other technical products.  Encouraged the business industries to manufacture other products as well.  Primary industries were meant to be ship breaking and repair, metal engineering, chemicals, and electical devices.  There were manufacturing ventures that failed, some due to lack of experience.  And also retrofitted some manufacturing for more profitable ventures.  The protective tariffs were meant to be phased out, and they did not work with international companies that wanted them maintained.  By 1975, international industries were still more efficient than Singaporean.

Singapore did not want an aid-dependent mentality.  They wanted the people to succeed on themselves.  Industries were meant to help employ Singaporeans, and not become dependent on perpetual injections of aid.

Singapore wanted to avoid a welfare state.  Took note of the experiences that foreign state with welfare.  Singapore had seen how welfarism had demotivated other societies, to prevent them from being productive.  Self-reliance was undermined by welfare.  With welfare, people became depended upon the state, and reduced productivity.  Singapore tried to make people as independent as possible, but not everyone can be independent.  Lee Kuan Yew was able to resist criticism until the welfare state was acknowledge as a failure.

To become efficient, the Economic Development Board was meant to take on responsibility for all investor needs rather than having multiple departments.  Investors wanted to make sure that politics, economic, finance , and labor were stable.  They wanted to make sure no disruptions to their customers around the world.  Even during a resource crisis, like during the oil crisis of 1973, Singapore did not claim special privileges over their stock.  They did not block the other countries from removing their stock.  This meant that the government proved that it was dependable.  That Singapore would share on the supply restrictions as every other customer. 

Many development economists saw multinational corporations as exploiters of land, labor, and raw materials.  That they perpetuated a colonial pattern.  Singapore was not supportive of these views, and had problems to resolve which the MNC could be part of the solution.  The Singapore people did not have the technical expertise or entrepreneurs, therefore had to rely on MNC’s.  Singapore also had no resources to exploit.  What Singapore did have was hard working people, infrastructure, and an honest and competent government. 

By the 1990s, Singapore had become a world financial leader.  With jurisprudence, effective governance, and balanced budgets.  Singapore wanted makes sure to not spend more than revenue collected, except in recession.  Financial malfeasances were punished, but it was hard to make a case against international financial manipulators. 

Singapore’s financial regulations were strict.  They were needed initially because Singapore did not have a reputation.  There were requests for more leniency, but were rejected.  As Singapore did not compromise standards, Singapore was not as affected by international financial crises.  As Singapore financial system grew, it needed to change to become more global thinking, while relying less on protection from competition. 

Lee Kuan Yew began a political career by supporting unions, but during 1950s, unions became more communist.  No matter the political ideology, the unions had become more combative. What was needed was to have the unions focus on jobs creation.  It was the British who taught the Singaporeans trade union practices, which had focused on taking away from firms as much as possible no matter the consequences to the firm.  The consequences of such practices included unemployment.  The practices created economic inefficiency.  The practices needed to be updated. 

The union system at that time contained few privileged unionized workers with high pay, and many people underpaid and underemployed.  Policies needed to change to pay based on performance, not time.  Lee Kuan Yew did drastically change policies governing unions during the political uncertainty of the British withdrawal.  Policies meant to bring more power to businesses to control their business.  They changed the incentive structure of work.  Restoring employee changes to businesses.  Unions needed to have a public ballot to take major action. 

The government was socialist, but also capitalistic.  They wanted appropriate division of income, but also needed personal motivation and rewards for a productive economy.  There would have been social tension without social fairness.  Extreme results of competition would have been socially disapproved of, therefore the government needed to find appropriate income distribution practices to get elected.  Social harmony was found in everyone sharing in economic prosperity.  Pragmatic solutions were found for economic and social while limiting potential abuse and waste.

Economic success, brought with it problems.  While people were waiting for their residences to be built, apartment prices kept rising.  The people wanted the apartments built quickly.  The government was pressured, and therefore increased the number of units built.  But the increased units caused property defects which need to be expensively ameliorated.  The government learned not to abide by popular pressure, when the government could deliver. 

The government made policies for individuals to take responsibility for their health care, and retirement.  To not rely completely on government.  An appropriate division of economic resources gave people ownership over the outcomes, which motivated many to support the economic methods.  Rioters acted differently about property they owned rather than rented.  By giving people ownership, they would be more invested in protecting their property.  With shares of ownership, they chose to increase their assets with more financial prudence. 

When replying to why Singapore and not other states developed, Singapore replied that they had a stable social system, a culture of productivity and investing in the future, and supported an educated society.

 

How Did Singapore Government Function?

The government had trust and confidence of the people, that the government would defend the people.  Even with various groups criticizing the government, they did not want to ruin the trust with misgovernment and corruption.

Singapore wanted to avoid corruption as much as possible, therefore politicians were required to defend themselves against allegations of misconduct or malfeasance.  There was a public expectation that charges of impropriety or dishonesty, were to be challenged in the courts.  Opponents of Lee Kuan Yew made slanderous claims, before elections to cause maximum damage.  Lee Kuan Yew responded with legal means.  The claims would have been legitimated if they were not defended against using legal means. 

During 1959, the government wanted a clean administration.  They were severely disappointed with the corruption of other Asian leaders.  The Asian leaders started by fighting for freedom, but had become oppressors who plundered their people’s wealth.  The way the leaders behaved, had terrible consequences for their societies.  The Singapore leaders wanted to remove colonial rule, without the associated sigma of Asian leaders who did not deliver on their ideals.

Initially, in Singapore, there was a lot of corruption on all levels.  Low ranked officials induced bribes to increase their income, while higher ranked officers did not set a good example.  Officials did not have a good income to live on, therefore abused their power.  Illegal activities were removed quicker when there was alterative employment available, and when the government was able to enforce their polices.

The government made sure that that money use was held responsibility, and amounts could easily be verified.  Corruption in Lower ranked officials would be controlled by simplifying procedures and less discretionary decisions.  The priority was to remove corruption from higher ranked official.  Fines for corruption were increased, as well as for providing misleading information to the anti-corruption agency.  Assets were confiscated from those who were found to be corrupt. 

Corruption could begin with how the candidate were to be elected.  With high monetary costs to elections that needed to be recovered.  Singapore wanted to prevent the corruption cycle, by making sure that money was not used to win elections.  With smaller expenses to elections, there was less costs to be recouped.  Getting votes by providing public works. 

During the crisis of 1997, many Asian countries were devastated due to corruption.  Singapore was not as affected during the crisis, because they did had much less corruption.  The Asian crisis in the 1990s was due to institutional and structural weaknesses within those states.  That investments were made in flawed projects.

Asia contains various value system.  In Confucian values dominate Singapore.  Corruption is a disgrace to Confucian values.  Those who have Confucian values, prioritize community over the individual.  To not use political official resources for personal use.  Favors for relatives undermine the integrity of the government.  In Singapore, there were not many abuses of public resources.  Without the corruption, there was less distortion of the allocation of resources, therefore did not suffer as much during the crisis.  When officials use public resources for private gain, they exacerbate the situation for the people. 

When the PAP government was gaining power, if Lee Kuan Yew or associates were imprisoned, they had wives who would be able to support the family without them.  Lee Kuan Yew kept their record clean, which the critics were not even able to find fault, other than personal issues related to Lee Kuan Yew lifestyle. 

The original members of government wanted to change society rather than power.  The following officials did not face their threats, and had alternative sources of employment.  To attract officials, they needed to be paid in comparable amounts to the private sector.  Other Asian governments had corrupt officers because they were underpaid. 

Singapore government was able to have an effective team.  A team in which decisions could be delegated to individuals, who would effectively resolve the tasks they were charged with.  Lee Kuan Yew would set the policy, but the other individuals were able to work on them.  They learned to discuss policies, and then have public discussions as well.  The government created a Feedback Unit, for the public to have a forum to provide their feedback.  Feedback was influenced and improves policies.

The legal system based on juries, acquittals were very likely, even with people who had committed terrible deeds. The jury system failed, and was abolished.  The government even allowed caning, for it was more effective than long prison sentences.  The law made crime a low cost to society.  A society in which people and property were protected.  Freedom exists in orderly societies.  The relatively severe punishments caused Singapore to get criticism, but it was due to their legal structure that they kept social stability and with much less criminal behavior. 

Tolerance and accommodation are needed to make democracy work.  For the minority views to accept the majority’s claims, until a peaceful transition of power after they have persuaded people.  Not all states had working democracies. 

 

Why Did Singapore Decide To Green Themselves?

Singapore had decided to become more environmentally friendly, by cleaning up the environment.  To make Singapore a business and tourist destination.  Although buildings could be improved, it took more to change the bad habits of the people.  The government wanted less litter, noise pollution, and for people to be more courteous.

By planting various vegetation, they gave the people pride in their surroundings.  Public spaces were kept clean, as well as various public utilities.  By cleaning up Singapore, it allowed the collection of more rainwater.  Cleaning up the pollution removed the stench.  The clean streams also provided fish.  Improving the quality of life in various ways, such as providing recreational areas. 

There were other Asian states that followed Singapore’s leadership and cleaned up their environments.  Making them greener.  They competed to out green each other.  A very helpful competition.  For Singapore, it promoted morale, tourism, and investments.

 

How Did Singapore Handle News?

Newspapers have the power to shape the politics of a state.  In Singapore, newspapers cannot print just anything.  The news agencies where not allowed to publish falsehoods.  Journalists are not elected, unlike the government.  The government incentivized news agency to be politically neutral.  This is unlike the West, in which wealthy people can control voter behavior through what people read.  Singapore government needed to support their cultural attitude, rather than undermine it.

The East and West have different cultural attitudes, such as their news approach.  The West tends to criticize government, while the East tends to support their government, with measured criticism.  Chinese readers favor the group over the individual, while the Western news favored their interests. 

When the news agencies misbehaved, such as not publishing government replies or general misreporting, they were punished by limiting the number of papers they were allowed to sell.  This meant that the news agency was able to publish articles, but would not get advertising income.

There were news agencies that had ulterior motives, as they were being funded by foreign powers under false flag operations.  The false flag operations were uncovered, and shut down. 

 

How Did Singapore Engage The International Community?

Singapore, along with Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand cooperated under Asean.  The intent was economic, and social development and stability, but the underlying theme was for needed security to face Vietnamese aggression.  Vietnam had skillful propaganda, and contempt for Singapore.  As Vietnam changed, Vietnam wanted to make allies.  They even looked to Singapore for policy advice. 

The Soviet Union and China had acknowledged the damaged by isolation, and wanted to integrate them into an international economic system.

Japan had occupied Singapore during WW2 using brutal means, but had changed.  When Japan had lost the war, they became diligent in trying to change themselves, they were a hardworking people.  Singapore wanted compensation for wartime atrocities.  Trying to get an apology.  But, Singapore still forged political and economic ties with Japan. 

 

Caveats?

The values presented are complex, and are based on cultural values.  Values that can be readily misunderstood by perceiving them through different cultural values.  The policies described in the book, can sometimes appear too harsh, that there could have been alternatives ways to handle situations.  The reasons for the policies are explained, and they did foster the prosperous Singapore.  Singapore did provide an effective and successful governance system, which other states began to learn from.

This book contains a lot of political complexities, such as trying to coordinate with different sides.  A book that favors Western ideas.  It is possible that the support given to those ideas is a political maneuver, rather than genuine.  The support could be an attempt to build more ties with the West.  Although there were segments of the book that which criticized the West.  


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•How did Singapore gain sovereignty? 
•What economic system did Singapore develop?
•Is Singapore capitalist of socialist? 
•How did Singapore handle ethnic/racial diversity?
•How did Singapore manage the international community?
•How competitive is Singapore?
•How were industries developed? 
•How did Singapore deal with corruption?
•Why did Singapore need military power?
•What legal system did Singapore develop? 
•How did Singapore motivate their people?
•How did Singapore regulate finance? 
•What belief systems were in Singapore?
•How did politicians respond to accusations of malfeasance?
•How did the government consider which policies to enact? 
•Why make Singapore Greener? 
•What were the news allowed to and not allowed to do?
•How did Singapore think of its British legacy? 
•How did Singapore handle care pollution?

Book Details
Forward Author: Henry A. Kissinger
Edition:                 First Edition
Publisher:             HarperCollinsPublishers
Edition ISBN:      0060197765
Pages to read:       696
Publication:          2000
1st Edition:           2000
Format:                 Hardcover

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    5
Content          5
Overall          5






Saturday, May 13, 2023

Review of The Gulag Archipelago [Volume 2]: An Experiment in Literary Investigation by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   

Book can be found in: 
Genre = History
Collection = The Gulag Archipelago
Book Club Event = Book List (10/07/2023)
Intriguing Connections = 1) The Persecuted and The Persecutors


Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“In regard to penal policy, it was admitted that it was inadequate.  And it was decreed that harsh measures of repression should be applied to class enemies and hostile-class elements, that the camp regimen should be made severe (and that socially unstable elements should not be given terms at all).  And in addition: forced labor should be set up in such a way that the prisoner should not earn anything from his work but that the state should derive economic profit from it.” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Chapter 3: The Archipelago Metastasizes, Page 71

“And it goes without saying that our contemporary politicals need incomparably greater steadfastness and heroism than the earlier revolutionaries.  In those days the punishments given for far more serious actions were quite light and revolutionaries didn’t have to be so very bold: in case of failure they risked only themselves (not their families!), and not even their heads – but a short term only.” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Chapter 10: In Place of Politicals, Page 307

“The labor of the zeks was needed for degrading and particularly heavy work, which no one, under socialism, would wish to perform.  For work in remote and primitive localities where it would not be possible to construct housing, schools, hospitals, and stores for many years to come.  For work with pick and spade – in the flowering of the twentieth century.  For the erection of the great construction projects of socialism, when the economic means for them did not yet exist.” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Chapter 22: We Are Building, Page 567


Review

Overview:

The Gulag, as a concentration camp, began shortly after the rise of Soviet Russian power.  Initially for POW’s and undesirable foreigners, that quickly expanded for citizens.  The Gulag was used to develop the nation.  A system designed to obtain free labor.  The prisoners would not earn anything, while the state profited from their labor.  This was a reintroduction of slavery in Russia.  The work was degrading, carried out under harsh conditions, and without appropriate tools.  Under socialism, no one else but slaves would have performed the work.  The prisoners were barely fed, with the little food they did receive being of a very poor quality.  The guards stole a lot of food.  Guards even made the prisoners compete and fight to get the food.

To get labor for the Gulag, there was a low tolerance for deviating thoughts.  Anyone who was overheard to speak anything against the socialist system, no matter the significance of what was said or even the privacy of the claim, were heavily punished with major charges against them with long sentences.  The Soviet system was much harsher against dissenters than previous regimes.  Under the Soviet system, it was not just the dissenters who were punished, but their entire family.  Even children were given the full measure of punishment, without exception if their crimes were unintentional.  The children were trained to hate. 

The way the authorities themselves complied with the laws, was to use a language that prevented them from thinking about the consequences of their actions.  Defending oneself against this system was impossible, and going on a strike was useless.  What was left was to change fate, to break out.  Some tried to invent something useful for the state, which would have given them a release.

 

Caveats?

This book is very difficult to read.  Contains poor organizational structure, as related content can be found sporadically in the book.  Most of the book is composed of examples, without much systematic analysis. 


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•When did the Gulag system form?
•Why did the Soviet’s want to use Gulag prisoners for labor?
•Why is Gulag work considered slavery?
•How were the Gulag working conditions?
•How were the prisoners fed? 
•Who was punishable? 
•What was punishable and what were the sentences? 
•How did the authorities think about what they were doing?
•What options were there for the prisoners to get released? 
•What is the role of women in the Gulag? 
•How were the animals treated? 
•How were people reeducated? 

Book Details
Ancillary Author: Anne Applebaum
Translator:            Thomas P. Whitney
Edition:                 Digital Edition
Publisher:             HarperPerennial [HarperCollins Publishers]
Edition ISBN:      9780062941664
Pages to read:       673
Publication:          2020
1st Edition:           1973
Format:                 eBook 

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    2
Content          2
Overall          2






Tuesday, May 9, 2023

Review of Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science by Peter Godfrey-Smith

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   

Book can be found in: 
Book Club Event = Book List (09/09/2023)


Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“Both during these classical discussions and more recently, a problem for empiricism has been a tendency to lapse into skepticism, the idea that we cannot know anything, or can only know much less than is usually supposed, about the world and its workings.  There are many kinds of skepticism, but two are especially important here.  One is external world skepticism, which questions whether we can even know anything about a physical world that might lie behind the flow of sensations we receive.  The second form, made vivid by Hume, is inductive skepticism: why do we have reason to think that the patterns found in past experience will also hold in the future?” – Peter Godfrey-Smith, Chapter 2 Empiricism, Page 35

“”Falsificationism” was the name Popper gave to his solution.  Falsificationism claims that a hypothesis is scientific if and only if it has the potential to be refuted by some possible observation.  To be scientific, a hypothesis has to take a risk, has to “stick its neck out.”  If a theory takes no risks at all, because it is compatible with every possible observation, then it is not scientific.” – Peter Godfrey-Smith, Chapter 4 Popper: Conjecture and Refutation, Page 79

“With a social structure of this kind, the “dialogue between imaginative and critical voices” can become a genuine to-and-fro.  We have social mechanisms in place that reliably bring about the checking and scrutinizing of ideas.  Some rather dogmatic individuals can work within the system and perhaps play a useful role, provided that flexibility and open-mindedness is found in the community as a whole” – Peter Godfrey-Smith, Chapter 14 The Future, Page 300


Review

Overview:

What defines science, is still in conflict.  How science functions has changed over time, and continues to change.  This is a history to the philosophy of science, the foundational ideas to science.  Questioning how science searches for truths, for patterns.  Empiricism has a skeptical edge, questioning how much can actually be known about how reality functions.  External skepticism questions the patterns that frame the sensations of the world.  Inductive skepticism questions how much the past experience predicts the future. 

Generalizations have limited value because of the problem of induction, for generalizations do not contain all observations.  The not yet observed can provide contradictions to the generalized, with a single contradiction changing the entire value of an idea.  Confirmation of theory, does not mean a theory has been proven.  Confirmation provides partial rather than decisive support for theories.  Theories need to prove themselves by putting themselves to tests that can potentially falsify them.  Theories need to take risks.  Ideas can be logically consistent, but that does not mean empirically valid.

There are those who think that objective facts can be separated from value judgements, are part of descriptive theory.  Others who think that facts and values cannot be separated, are part of normative theory which also raises claims about what should be.  Some ideas might be more objective, but usually there are values attached.  Scientists do not passively receive information.  They actively select information.  Science is about the choices that the scientists make. 

 

Caveats?

This book was meant for students, with a broader audience in mind.  The results are mixed.  The book can act as a reference book, and be a used as an introduction to the various ideas which are part of science.  But, there are sections that would be better understood under the guidance of an instructor.  Written in a manner that requires someone who already has knowledge about the ideas to understand the ideas further, or be explained in lecture form.  


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•What makes science a science? 
•What is the problem with induction?
•What is the difference between normative and descriptive theories?
•What is epistemology?
•What is empiricism?
•How does falsification function?
•Can a theory be proven? 
•Feminism in science? 
•How much to simplify?
•What is Bayesian analysis? 
•What is truth?
•Was there a scientific revolution?
•How did the scientist think about religion? 
•How can facts be manufactures? 
•How to simplify? 
•What is unification theory? 
•Are scientists open-minded? 
•What is the role of math in science? 

Book Details
Edition:                 Second Edition
Publisher:             The University of Chicago Press
Edition ISBN:      9780226771137
Pages to read:       308
Publication:          2021
1st Edition:           2003
Format:                 eBook 

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    3
Content          3
Overall          2






Friday, May 5, 2023

Review of The New Farm: Our Ten Years on the Front Lines of the Good Food Revolution by Brent Preston

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   

Book can be found in: 


Watch Short Review

Excerpts

“Our farm is proof that small-scale, sustainable farming is a viable alternative.  It’s a place of community, where chefs, activists and foodies gather to plot the overthrow of all things evil: industrial agriculture, the rate race, high-fructose corn syrup.  Our farm is the centre of gravity around which we have build a happy, meaningful and productive life for ourselves.  And most importantly, our farm is testament to the power of the good food movement to radically change our food system from the ground up.” – Brent Preston, Dead Reader, Page 15

“We decided at the very outset that the farm would have to support both of us.  We didn’t know that the average Canadian farm loses money, that the large majority of farms are kept afloat only by income earned off-farm by one or both spouses.  It didn’t seem like a lofty goal at the time, but aspiring to create a farm that was profitable enough to support our family was aiming very high.  So, with ignorance again on our side, we set out with the clear idea that our farm would be a business, and a profitable one at that.” – Brent Preston, Baby Steps, Page 55

“We spent a long time going through our application and discussing our growing plans, and it slowly dawned on me that for years I had been thinking about organic in the wrong way.  I had always assumed that the primary objective of organic farming was to protect consumers from exposure to chemicals.  We bought organic vegetables when we lived in the city so our kids wouldn’t be eating pesticides.  That’s a big part of organic, but it’s far from the whole story.  Talking to Tom that day, I realized that the goal of organic regulations is much broader: to create a sustainable system of agriculture that is separate from and independent of the chemical-industrial farming that dominates the landscape.” – Brent Preston, The Groundhog Wars, Page 105


Review

Overview:

The New Farm is proof of concept that small-scale, organic, and sustainable farming is a viable method for food production.  An organic alternative to what has become conventional to agricultural industry.  The organic alternative does not use a complex mix of chemical pesticides and fertilizer.  Spraying chemicals is the modus operandi for conventional farmers.  The pesticides make food toxic, causing people to have health problems.  As organic farmers do not use chemicals, their food is of a higher quality with superior flavor.  Small farms do use a powerful natural fertilizer that comes from livestock.  Livestock also provide high-value products and turns waste into food.

A farm is a business, that needs money to function no matter their features.  Brent and Gillian wanted to make the farm profitable to support the whole family.  But in Canada, the agricultural industry generally loses money.  The New Farm, kept losing money in the early years, but they kept planting due to pride, appreciation of the community, and wanting to apply lessons learned from past years. 

Many conventional farmers tend to subsidize their farm with alternative income sources, which allows them to keep prices low but also hard to make farming sustainably profitable.  While The New Farm, became profitable without alternative income sources.  To make the farm sustainably profitable, Brent and Gillian broke from some small farm practices by specializing in growing profitable food rather than diverse food, and to sell to restaurants rather than just directly to consumers. 

 

Are There Notes From A Farmer?

Brent and Gillian joined the farming community without knowledge or experience.  This meant that they came into agriculture without preconceived biases, nor with foundational knowledge.  Gillian did have early experiences with farming, and relatives who were farmers.  What they did do was join various farming related associations, from which they were able to learn and obtain clients from. 

Farming is always hard work, no matter how knowledgeable or experienced the farmers are.  Nature always has surprises, and complexity that is hard to manage.  Some tips and tricks that The New Farm found was that hoop houses greatly improved the growth rate of the plants.  Plants tend to only grow when the soil is warm.  The New Farm also cycled land use.  Alternating between regions that grew food and then were fallow, while other regions did the opposite.  Crop cover added nutrients into the soil, which increased the productivity of the soil. 

Gillian and Brent wanted different things.  Gillian wanted to expand to become profitable, while Brent did not think it was possible to work harder.  They were both right.  Farming and financial difficulties strained their bodies, emotions, and their marriage.

Workers matter for a human powered farm.  The New Farm initially used interns for help.  Unpaid interns, who needed to be taught, and worked with them.  That limited the time that could be spend making sales.  They later hired Mexican workers, who were very helpful due to their skills.  They treated them appropriately.

Many food products need to be sold quickly to be edible, but often becomes waste.  The need for fast sales allows others to squeeze the farmer financially.

Most people do not really care for how organic farming works, and just want to make sure it is organic.  There are vendors who claim organic but are actually conventional.  Many expect farmers to be uneducated, while Brent and Gillian were educated and used technology to improve their agriculture organization.

 

Caveats?

This is a wonderful guide to the difficult life of a farmer.  Providing valuable lessons.  But not all values were appropriate.  Even though they obtained information when needed, there was praise for starting farming without information.  Brent recognized that Brent’s attitude sometimes made their situation difficult. 


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•What is The New Farm?
•What is the difference between conventional farming and organic farming?
•Are farms profitable?
•What do chemical fertilizer and pesticide do to the food?
•What is the impact of organic farming on the food?
•How can livestock be used?
•How to learn about farming?
•What are some agricultural communities? 
•How work intensive is agriculture? 
•How to grow food?
•How did Brent’s and Gillian’s situation impact their lives?
•What does it mean to be organic to most people?
•What are the expectations that people have about farmers?
•What can chickens survive?
•How do organic and conventional farmers think about the soil?

Book Details
Publisher:             Random House Canada [Penguin Random House]
Edition ISBN:      9780345811851
Pages to read:       322
Publication:          2017
1st Edition:           2017
Format:                 Hardcover 

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    5
Content          5
Overall          5