|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
10
| 
| 4.51
| 33,848
| 1983
| Jul 25, 2017
|
really liked it
|
The Unwomanly Face of War. Svetlana Alexievich. 1985 in Russian; new English translation 2017 is faithful to the Russian original. 331pp. (The old tra
The Unwomanly Face of War. Svetlana Alexievich. 1985 in Russian; new English translation 2017 is faithful to the Russian original. 331pp. (The old translation, published as "War's Unwomanly Face," was heavily censored to remove any criticism of the USSR.) USSR suffered far more loss of life than any other country in WWII. There was widespread destruction. It affected everyone. More than a million women served in the war. This is the story of many of them, collected 1978–1985. Alexievich interviews snipers, soldiers, pilots, medics, cooks, drivers, laundresses. (Wikipedia gives a conservative estimate of 27 million Soviet citizens dead as a result of WWII, many more badly wounded.) (Postwar, USSR was no possible threat to USA—when the U.S. government sold Americans permanent war “to protect us from the red menace.” But that’s another story.) YOUTH The girls went to war so young. I hope it hasn’t broken them. Otherwise they’ll be at war all their lives. (p. 155) We were 16. The last day of peace, we had a dance. Two days later our dance partners came back crippled. (p. 24) I was 15, my sister 14. Papa said, “all I can offer . . . my girls.” (p. 21) When they gave us rifles I thought, “When will I grow big enough for this rifle?” (p. 37) I was 5 feet tall, shoe size 5. They gave me size 10 boots. My feet were bloody blisters. I had never left our town, never slept in anyone else’s house. I was 5’ tall. The trousers came to my shoulders. (p. 119) We were all skinny. Men’s shirts hung loose. (p. 104) I was 14.5. I said 16. they let me stay. (pp. 142–143) I grew 4 inches during the war. We were so young. (p. 17) WAR There weren’t enough men. They had all been killed. (p. 28) I gave birth in a swamp. I’d go on missions with my baby. Germans burned villages with people inside. I gathered the charred remains of my friend’s family. “It’s mama’s jacket.” (p. 43) We couldn’t bury the dead, there were so many. They burned my sister’s house with her 3 boys in it. (p. 44) A machine gun is heavy. You drag it. Feel like a horse. Half man, half beast. If you’re human—you won’t stay whole! (p. 46) I could stand it with my mind and heart. Physically it was too much. We carried shells, guns, through mud like dough. To dig a common grave and bury our comrades after 3 days without sleep. We hadn’t the strength to weep. (p. 41) I carried 481 wounded soldiers from under fire. You carry 180 lbs. You weigh 100. (p. 64) We were so overworked we stopped having periods. (p. 199) After the battle there was no one to bandage. They had all been killed. (p. 67) Sometimes after a battle there was no one left to eat. I’d cook a whole pot of soup, there’d be no one to give it to. (p. 72) Our horses were exhausted. We got to Berlin on foot. (p. 164) What is happiness? To suddenly find a living man among the dead. (p. 60) We had no children. Our house burned. No photographs are left. If I bring him home, there will at least be a grave. (p. 229) After the war ended, we spent 1 more year demining. (p. 223) We won but at what cost! What terrible cost! (p. 37) RAPE I went to the battalion commander’s dugout. What else could I do? There were only men around. After the battle each of them lies in wait for you. Better to live with one than be afraid of them all. (pp. 235–236) CHANGE In 2 hours my hair turned gray. (p. 64) I came back from the war at 21, my hair white. (p. 10) AFTERMATH We moved through Belorussia, saw no men. Only women were left. (p. 206) I was left with 3 little sons. We were left without men, without horses. I pulled the plow myself. (p. 269) Now I wake at night in fear, I dream I’m in the war. (p. 45) Men stabbing each other. Sticking a bayonet in the mouth, in the eye, in the heart, in the stomach. After the war, I’d wake up screaming. (p. 66) The ones I killed come to me in my sleep. (p. 62) It’s like a terrible dream. It took me so long to forget. I’ve been at war all my life. (p. 113) In war your soul ages. After the war I was never young. (p. 139) Men without arms, legs. All the while I lived in Moscow I couldn’t go to the market. I was afraid a cripple would recognize me, shout, “Why did you pull me out of the fire?” (p. 155) To this day I can’t cut up a chicken. (p. 123) Here the war hasn’t ended. (p. 77) I have children, grandchildren. But I live in the war. I’m there all the time. (p. 87) I’d like to live just one day without memory of war. (p. 98) I have to prepare myself to talk to you about it. I don’t want to be in that hell again. (p. 99) (Goodreads policy mavens unfortunately refuse to distinguish between the two completely-different books, /War's Unwomanly Face/ and /The Unwomanly Face of War/ -- shelving them together as if they were one book. https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... Nor, bizarrely, is goodreads willing to give the user a way to see an author's titles in a language intelligible to that user. https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... ) ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Nov 15, 2017
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
13
| 
| 0007504217
| 9780007504213
| 0007504217
| 4.43
| 21,915
| Oct 06, 2016
| Oct 06, 2016
|
it was amazing
|
Bernard Cornwell The Saxon Stories: eleven books (11th, War of the Wolf, will be published in the UK on 20 September 2018 and the US on 2 October 2018. Bernard Cornwell The Saxon Stories: eleven books (11th, War of the Wolf, will be published in the UK on 20 September 2018 and the US on 2 October 2018.): goodreads.com/series/43581 bernardcornwell.net/series/the-last-k... Online map: google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?hl=en_US... Great historical novels. The story of the making of England, behind the human story of individual people (fictional and historical). King Alfred "The Great,” 866 CE and later. Many times it seems that England should have been Daneland—Saxons eke out one unlikely victory after another. Cornwell writes as though he’s stood in a shield wall and gutted his enemy; as though he’s raced a viking longboat through a rocky channel on a flooding tide. Cornwell puts you there—much better than either a dry recitation of facts or a worshipful biography. Each book ends with an exciting battle. Protagonist Uhtred of Bebbanburg was born 857 CE. The Flame Bearer (The Saxon Stories, #10) 917 CE, Northumbria, East Anglia. Uhtred hopes to retake the almost-unassailable fortress of Bebbanburg. Against him are the warriors of his usurping cousin, of the West Saxons, of the Scots, of the Norse, and of a treacherous mad bishop. Warriors of the Storm (The Saxon Stories, #9) 914 CE. Mercia, Ireland, Northumbria. Irish expel Norse. Norse ravage Merica. The Empty Throne (The Saxon Stories, #8) 911 CE. Mercia and Wales. Saxons try to retake Mercia from Danes, while Norsemen invade from Ireland. The Pagan Lord (The Saxon Stories, #7) 910 CE. Danes lure Saxon defenders away; Danes invade Saxon Mercia with a massive army. Death of Kings (The Saxon Stories, #6) 898–902 CE. Alfred dies. Son Edward tries to hold Wessex against Danish, and traitorous Saxon, attack. The Burning Land (The Saxon Stories, #5) 892–898 CE. Danes attack Mercia. Fates toy with Uhtred—attack or defend? Sword Song (The Saxon Stories, #4) London and environs, 885 CE. Danes are a gathering threat to Saxon rule on the lower Thames. Lords of the North (The Saxon Stories, #3) England and surrounding seas, 878–880 CE. Danes, Saxons, Scots and churchmen contend for control of Northumbria. Exciting finish. Slavery and sea trade. The Pale Horseman (The Saxon Stories, #2) Southern England, 877–878 CE, Alfred's West Saxons try to keep Guthrum's Danes from completing the conquest of England. Bernard Cromwell writes with "you are there" immediacy. Wonderful stories. The Last Kingdom (The Saxon Stories, #1) Great historical novel, England 866–877 CE, Danes take northern England, Alfred's West Saxons fight to save the south. Our protagonist is the son of an English earl, captured and raised by the Danes who kill his father, age 9–20. Well-drawn characters, a page-turner. Cornwell’s approach is to put his heroes in a difficult situation, then see how they get out of it. Works a treat! Uhtred is delightfully irreverent: “small group of priests I admired and liked, hugely outnumbered by the corrupt, venal, ambitious clerics who governed the church.” (book 9 p. 132 of 481) “Good decent men rarely achieve power in the church. Sly and ambitious ones gain preferment.” (book 8 p. 141 of 296) “I wouldn’t trust your god to save a worm.” (book 9 p. 271 of 481) “The Christian god was just as capable of losing his temper and slaughtering children as any god in Asgard. If the purpose of life was to be an unpredictable, murderous tyrant, then it would be easy to be godlike.” (book 9 p. 308 of 481) The books are fiction but mostly consistent with what’s known to have really happened. Cornwell will take a terse note in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles and write a story around it. Uhtred is fictional—but people like him existed. There’s a Historical Note at the end of each book where Cornwell “confesses his sins”—admits some of his main departures from history. The chronology is pretty close to true, with departures for the sake of the story. In Cornwell’s books, Alfred’s grandson Æthelstan (actually born 895) is about 9 or 10 in 911 CE (book 8, pp. 4, 48, 56 of 296), 14 or 15 in 914 CE (book 9, pp. 10, 56 of 481), and 22 or 23 in 917 CE (book 10, pp. 138, 281 of 284). Cornwell says he started writing because he was refused a green card by the Carter administration: writing novels was a job you don’t need a government permit to do. Cornwell says it takes him about 6 months to write a 125,000-word book. Amazingly prolific: and his stuff is good. There's a TV series, The Last Kingdom, but it bears little similarity to the books. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Oct 30, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
125
| 
| 1565843436
| 9781565843431
| 1565843436
| 4.29
| 4,586
| 1984
| Nov 01, 2004
|
really liked it
|
The Good War: An Oral History of World War II, Studs Terkel (1912-2008), 1984, 591 pages, ISBN 0345325680 Forty-year-old memories of Americans' WWII. M The Good War: An Oral History of World War II, Studs Terkel (1912-2008), 1984, 591 pages, ISBN 0345325680 Forty-year-old memories of Americans' WWII. Must a society experience horror to understand horror? p. 12. If we answer hate with hate, it will never end. --Jacques Raboud, p. 422. We are ordinary people, who can also be weapons for evil Hitlers. --Jacques Raboud, p. 422. As long as some men want power, we're gonna have wars. --Joseph Levine, p. 443. ATOMIC VETERANS July 1, 1946, the U.S. military tested a nuclear weapon at Bikini Atoll. 42,000 soldiers and sailors observed nuclear tests. 27,000 of them are dead. We were all used as guinea pigs. Within ten hours after the blast, we were at ground zero. I fought fire on a target ship. We drank lagoon water. Nothing was said to us about radiation or danger. Our ship was sprayed by the mushroom cloud. My legs have been amputated. They want to amputate the left arm. I have terminal cancer of the colon and liver. Diagnosed at a private hospital after two emergency surgeries. The VA hospital wouldn't admit me because I didn't have a scheduled appointment. The VA has six times refused my claim of military-service-connected illness. I draw what they call a non-service-connected disability of five dollars a month. Three doctors on my behalf say I was exposed to 1,000 to 1,800 rads. Their doctor from Stanford University said the swelling I have now isn't the same as I had in the military. I went to Japan and got the treatment that bomb survivors get. They told me I had to continue it here. The Government wouldn't allow it because that would admit their liability. The VA hospital treats you like you're either an alcoholic or a drug addict. VA doctors are overworked, underpaid, and bitter against the government. pp. 546-555. --John Smitherman (1928-1983), president, The National Association of Atomic Veterans. He died six weeks after this interview. The president said it'd be a hundred years before anybody could go in the city. A few weeks later, we were ordered to occupy Nagasaki. About 20,000 troops occupied the town. An off-the-charts number of them got cancer. A marine mentioned in Newsweek, November 1979, spent his life savings, $30,000, on his cancer treatment. The U.S. Government refused him. When I die and I'm cremated and my ashes are scattered over some forest, that radiation is still alive. Thousands of years from now, somebody exposed to those ashes may get sick. pp. 542-546. --Victor Tolley. I was in Hiroshima just after the bomb, for the occupation. My liver, heart, and lungs are ballooning. A Japanese I met, when I told him I was at Hiroshima, said my only chance is to stay in the water. I soak 5, 6 hours a day. It's all that keeps me going. pp. 556-559. --Joseph Staziak My skin peeled off and was hanging from my body. p. 538. The remains were so burned we couldn't tell which might have been my mother. p. 540. By the next day, August 7, thousands of wounded people were covered head to toe by maggots on their wounds. Shortly after, they died. p. 541. You are in shock. I needed a very long time to return to some sort of normal state. Mr. Kito instituted a signature campaign to abolish nuclear weapons. He has gathered, thus far, thirty million signatures. p. 542. The atom bomb was dropped on working people. It wasn't anywhere near the big shots of Japan who started the war in the first place. [After FDR forced Japan to fight us, by using the U.S. Navy to keep fuel from reaching Japan.--TRW.] We didn't drop it on them. Hirohito and his white horse, it never touched him. It was dropped on women and children who had nothing to say about whether their country went to war or not. pp. 109, 546. --Peggy Terry Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a warning to the USSR: We're stronger than you. p. 525. We bombed Nagasaki to speed up Japan's surrender,so the Russians wouldn't get into Japan for the occupation. p. 535. --Father George Zabelka. Our friend at Oak Ridge, enriching uranium and plutonium, died of leukemia. p. 519. Most of the fellows who watched the test at Bikini Atoll have cancer or died of cancer. We have four children. Two have birth defects. Most of the couples who worked at Oak Ridge couldn't have children. p. 520. Most of the young women that did get pregnant miscarried. --Marnie Seymour. I had become sterile. p. 543. Warren Zink. People in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania die of cancer. There's a radium-processing plant there. They put the tailings in the creek. p. 579. --Nora Watson. I thought after the war they'd close down all the plants at Oak Ridge. I never thought it'd go on and on. You ought to go down there now and see it. p. 520. --Marnie Seymour. Oak Ridge, Tennessee, was a hellhole. Swarming with rats. pp. 518-519. Marnie Seymour. "We're in Dogpatch." p. 523. John H. Grove. It was physicists who demanded to make the atom bomb, to win the war. p. 507. Leo Szilard came to the U.S. to look up Enrico Fermi. Szilard and Wigner persuaded Einstein to write that letter to Roosevelt. p. 508. Fermi's group made the first chain reaction December 2, 1942, in Chicago. p. 509. The Germans were far behind. Fermi, Bethe, Neumann, Kistiakowsky, Teller were all at Los Alamos, under Oppenheimer. p. 511. July 16, 1945, the first atomic bomb went off in New Mexico. From exactly ten miles away, wearing welder's glasses, it was blinding heat. The sound came a minute later, a great thunder. p. 513. Hiroshima, August 6, 1945. p. 524. We killed a hundred thousand people. Fire bombs and high explosives did the job on Dresden and Hamburg and Leipzig. pp. 514, 534. By 1951, the U.S. could do all of World War I in one day. By 1958, we could do--not a kiloton, as in WWI, not a megaton, as in WWII--a gigaton. A billion tons. A thousand million tons. --Philip Morrison. When we beat the Nazis, we emulated them. The rocket, the cruise missile, and the ballistic missile are German inventions. It wasn't justified, but I would do it again. We follow our leaders. p. 516. --Philip Morrison. Nothing happened in 1945 except that we changed the scale of our indifference to man. p. 506. --Jacob Bronowski, Science and Human Values. [Herodotus says of the new weapons technology of around 1300 BCE, "Iron has been discovered for the evil of mankind:"] THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE Americans have never known what war really is. Because there is one feature they never appreciated: the smell. It's intolerable. The smell of death. Maybe if Americans had known that, they'd be more concerned about peace. p. 284. --Dr. Alex Shulman The U.S. was far less damaged by WWII than any other combattant. Americans have never had the experience of being bombed out. I don't wish it on them. But I wish they wouldn't be so keen to get into wars, because one day it will come back on your territory and God help you. p. 218. --Jean Wood. THE SOVIET EXPERIENCE The USSR was devastated. See Svetlana Alexeivich's oral history, /The Unwomanly Face of War/: quotes from it here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... War is not a worthy occupation for a human being. Of my generation, out of a hundred who went to fight, three came back. One should not ask those of us who remained alive what war means to them. I was the only one from our class of all the boys who went to the front who remained alive after that war. --Grigori Baklanov, p. 458. EFFECTS OF COMBAT Plastic surgery would go on for years on these burned veterans. In Pasadena in '46, nicely-dressed women standing there staring. Letters to the editor of the Pasadena paper: Why can't they be kept off the streets? What awful things for us to have to look at. p. 130. --Betty Basye Hutchinson. Until the war my husband never drank. He never even smoked. When he came back he was an absolute drunkard. And he used to have the most awful nightmares. He'd get up in the middle of the night and start screaming. I'd just sit for hours and hold him while he just shook. We'd go to the movies, and if the film had a lot of shooting, he'd start to shake and have to leave. He started slapping me around and slapped the kids around. He became a brute. p. 108. --Peggy Terry My brother was wounded in the Battle of the Bulge. He still has nightmares. Gave up hunting. He used to be a big duck, quail hunter. He never talks about it. p. 519. --Marnie Seymour. PROSPERITY, OPPORTUNITY: "Not for the poor souls who lost sons and daughters. But for the rest of us, the war was a hell of a good time." pp. 8, 313, 575. --Paul Edwards. America conquered the world. We could do what we wanted. p. 586. --Steve McConnell. With the G.I. Bill and postwar prosperity, many more Americans were middle-class. Suburbs and automobiles were everywhere. pp. 9, 134. The postwar boom lasted until 1969. If you were a nice white middle-class family, life was pretty good. p. 65. --Robert Lekachman. Veterans bought homes in the suburbs on G.I.-Bill loans. The old neighborhood got older and never really recovered. p. 134. --Mike Royko. These damn Republicans win elections now because the New Deal picked up the working man and gave him a chance. He's now conservative. --James Rowe, p. 319. The war gave a lot of people jobs. It led them to expect more than they had before. pp. 109, 112. --Peggy Terry, Sarah Killingsworth. Women after WWII were not content to be just housewives. p. 8. The women's movement had its seeds in WWII. p. 119. --Dellie Hahne. Examinations: "Are you pregnant?" I said I wasn't when I came in. They hired me. We replaced the clerical men for combat overseas. That was the whole idea. We rejected lots of women who had syphilis and didn't know it. pp. 123-124. --Evelyn Fraser. Student nurses were running Fresno hospital. p. 127. --Betty Basye Hutchinson. Blacks too had demanded and received war-materials-manufacturing jobs. pp. 8-9, 113. --Sarah Killingsworth. FDR signed executive order 8802, June 25, 1941, forbidding discrimination in war contract work, at A. Philip Randolph's insistence: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-do... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Ph... --Joseph L. Rauh, Jr. p. 335, 337, 366. Lockheed hired 20,000 people. No Negroes. Roosevelt wanted to go slow. I had been aggressive, trying to get companies to comply. I was removed. --Earl B. Dickerson, pp. 337-340. "I was promoted to shop pipefitter and went from $32 a week to $125. Then I went in the military and went down to $21." --John Garcia At Oak Ridge, enriching uranium and plutonium, GIs were paid $50 a month. Civilians doing the same work beside them got $450 plus overtime. p. 519. --Marnie Seymour. If not for price control, prices would've doubled or tripled during the war. --John Kenneth Galbraith. p. 321. I advanced from second lieutenant to lieutenant colonel during the war. At age 25, I was commanding a battalion in combat. p. 190. --General William Buster. The war obliterated our culture and made us Americans. p. 140. --Paul Pisicano. "You get rather fond of the people who pay you." --James Rowe, in 1980 a corporate lawyer, formerly a government official in several of FDR's New Deal agencies. p. 319. POSTWAR After Japan surrendered they sent us to China to protect Chiang Kai-Shek's corrupt government. p. 174. --Roger Tuttrup. Within a very short time after the war, the same people who had been Nazi officers terrorizing the neighborhoods were in charge again, in the Allied sectors of Germany. --Hans Massaquoi, pp. 504-505. When we started to arm Germany, I was shocked. I began distrusting my government. p. 115. --Dellie Hahne. In the war I was mad at the Japanese and supposed to love the Chinese. Now I gotta love the Japanese and hate the Chinese. That's when I decided something's wrong. p. 135. --Mike Royko. How quickly our former enemies became our friends and how quickly our former friends became our enemies. What was it all about? p. 562. --Nancy Arnot Harjan. We won the war but we lost the peace. Japan and Germany today, their technology and economy surpasses us. Even to this day, I'm bitter about Japanese and German goods. pp. 80, 353. --Peter Bezich. I don't drive a Toyota or own a Sony. p. 93. --Anton Bilek Now, to Japanese people, America is a place of crime, violence, and unemployment. p. 227. --Yasuko Kurachi Dower Young people who grew up ducking under desks in atomic-bomb drills don't think there'll be a future. p. 522. --Marnie Seymour. CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS We won the rights for all ex-felons to vote. p. 170. --John H. Abbott, convicted of the felony of being a conscientious objector (refusing to murder), and plaintiff in successful Supreme Court cases restoring rights of ex-felons. My father, a farmer and an influential man in our Canadian community during WWI, had himself put on the draft board so he could exempt anyone who didn't want to go. In spring 1918 he was disabled with a broken kneecap. Teams of horses with seeding and cultivating equipment appeared from all around. They were in the hands of people my father had exempted from service. All of our crops were planted within 48 hours. p. 206. --John Kenneth Galbraith. MILITARISM: Roosevelt wanted to use the navy to get the Japanese out of Indonesia. The country wouldn't have allowed it. Then along came Pearl Harbor. --James Rowe, p. 319. Since WWII, the military-industrial complex has set U.S. foreign and industrial policy. pp. 8, 187, 189, 327. We've institutionalized militarism. You can't find the term, "national security" before 1947. Now it's "defense" and "national "security," so there's no limit to the money you must give to it. pp. 187, 189. --Admiral Gene LaRocque Americans, postwar, were eager to use military force anywhere in the world. pp. 11, 189. The destruction of Dresden was unforgivable. It was done very late in the war, as part of a military dynamic which was out of control and had no relationship to any military needs. Japan was defeated before the atom bombs were dropped. pp. 205, 206, 353. --John Kenneth Galbraith. The church hierarchy didn't speak against indiscriminate bombing of civilians. p. 534. I must say that there was a little difference in my feelings when I found out that Nagasaki was a Catholic city. --Father George Zabelka. When you first come in you're a hero, but enough sailors come through these ports, and social disease, alcoholism, rape, mayhem, and they're not popular any more. p. 35. --Frank Keegan Through the 1920s and 1930s, the army was less than 100,000. --Telford Taylor, p. 460. In 1939, the U.S. standing army was 186,000 officers and men. p. 190. --General William Buster. After Pearl Harbor, we built an eleven-million-man army. --Joe Marcus, p. 323. When it started, it was the greatest thing since the Crusades. p. 117. --Dellie Hahne. A "GOOD" WAR: Most Americans believe WWII was not imperialistic. p. 13. [In fact, FDR took us into the war to win from Japan the resources of the crumbling European empires in the South Pacific and Southeast Asia, for U.S. corporations. The U.S. Government refused European Jewish refugees entry into the U.S. (so they'd have to go to Palestine, as Zionists demanded).] However just, it was war. Never a solution to anything. --Herman Kogan, p. 365. HYSTERIA: All we had in San Francisco were Hearst newspapers. The headlines said, "Japanese Invade West Coast." We reacted like a bunch of nuts. p. 24. --Dennis Keegan FEAR OF "THOSE" PEOPLE: The Cold War resurrected the Red scare. p. 10. I was caught helping people escape Czechoslovakia after the Communist takeover. In the McCarthy era, it came to haunt my professional life. I was marked unreliable. Russians are very fearful of us. Russia has dysfunctioning machinery, shortage of skills, inefficiency, 20 million killed in WWII. --Paul Edwards, p. 571. In graduate school, I had signed petitions in favor of the Spanish Loyalists. I did not get a commission. I was classified a "premature anti-fascist." pp. 194, 350, 481, 488. --John Ciardi. Those of us who had fought in Spain were stigmatized as premature anti-fascists. We were harassed by the FBI, Dies committee, McCarthy committee. The Subversive Activities Control Board took a year out of my life, defending the Lincoln Battalion before those characters. --Milton Wolff, pp. 486, 491, 493, 497. If the OSS [which became the CIA] had not intervened in 1945 with lots of U.S. money, Italy would be a socialist country. --Milton Wolff, p. 486. 1941.12 Pearl Harbor: If they had arrested all the ordinary Japanese, there'd be no work force at Pearl Harbor. There were 130,000 Japanese on the islands. p. 19 --John Garcia Anyone who had a German background was almost a pariah. p. 25. --Ron Veenker Even before Pearl Harbor we were scared of Orientals. p. 34. --Frank Keegan Why'd they bomb Hirosima? 100,000 people! Why not the big naval base? "What the hell. They're just Japs." p. 524. In the occupation, you became acquainted with the Japanese. You start seeing they're not such horrible people. p. 536. --Father George Zabelka. I realized that these people didn't want to fight us. What the military did and what the civilians did were two different things. p. 545. --Victor Tolley. Most blacks believe Hiroshima wouldn't've been bombed had it been a /white/ city. pp. 13, 370. If a young black fellow, 18 years old, would get together with a British girl, 16, that girl would be encouraged to say she was raped. We had a number of young black soldiers who were hanged. p. 276. --Timuel Black American suburbs are bound by their antiblack sentiments. p. 139. --Paul Pisicano. "Where I come from"--I detected a Southern accent--"we shoot niggers like we shoot rabbits." p. 150. --Dempsey Travis. It took 33 years to get our Negro tank batallion its Presidential Unit Citation. p. 265. -- Charles A. Gates July 17, 1944, two transport ships in California loading ammunition exploded, killing 320 people--200 of whom were black ammunition loaders. All of the munition handlers were black. They were not given the equipment nor training to load it safely. Officers ordered them to roll 500-pound bombs down ramps off rail cars until they hit the side of the ship, saying, they have no detonators, they won't explode. Everybody above petty officer was white. If my division loaded 3,000 tons of ammunition in 8 hours, the officers pushed the next shift to beat it. Officers were betting whose crew would load fastest. If you complained, you got extra duty. After the explosion, those of us who survived and refused to work were sentenced to 15 years hard labor and dishonorable discharge. I have no veterans' benefits.--Joseph Small, pp. 392-393. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Oct 19, 2017
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
119
| 
| 0300182910
| 9780300182910
| 0300182910
| 4.12
| 3,975
| Aug 22, 2017
| Aug 22, 2017
|
it was ok
|
Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States, James C. Scott (1936- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James... https://politicalscience.yale Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States, James C. Scott (1936- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James... https://politicalscience.yale.edu/peo... ) 2017, 312pp., ISBN 9780300182910, Dewey 900. Not to be confused with Against the Grain: How Agriculture Has Hijacked Civilization by Richard Manning, 2004, 240pp., ISBN 9780865477131. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5... James C. Scott cites Richard Manning's book, in Scott's preface. (p. xv) Short version: "King, eh? Very nice. How'd you get that, then? By exploiting the workers!" --Monty Python and the Holy Grail Focuses on Sumer, in the river-watered area "south of what's now Basrah, Iraq," 6500 BCE-1600 BCE. States formed 4000-2000 BCE. (pp. xiii-xiv, but see the maps on pages 25, 45, and 48: Eridu, Ur, Uruk, and Umma are at least 50 miles upriver from Basrah. The mouths of the Euphrates and Tigris have silted in the thousands of years since these places were settled: there are miles of newly-dry land, formed by 10 vertical meters of silt (p. 48), around the lower Euphrates and Tigris, where, at the time of settlement, there was Persian Gulf. The maps on pages 45 and 48 show Basrah underwater, 4000 BCE, with the shore near Ur and Uruk. These settlements were in a marsh in the Euphrates delta. Marsh map p. 51.): https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bas... 6500-3800 BCE Ubaid 4000-3100 BCE Uruk: world's largest city 3200 BCE, 25,000-50,000 population, pp. 100, 119; walls enclosed about a square mile, p. 120 (Athens, 300 BCE, was half that size.) 3100-2900 BCE Jemdet Nasr 2900-2335 BCE Early Dynastic 2334-2193 BCE Akkadian 2112-2004 BCE Ur III 2004-1595 BCE Old Babylonian (p. xiv) 1800-700 BCE Ruralization after the fall of Ur III: pastoralist incursions. p. 188 The earliest states appear around 3300 BCE, "nearly 2000 years after" towns of 1000 inhabitants. p. 117. (Isaac Asimov, in his Chronology of the World, goes farther, saying Jericho had 2500 population in 7000 BCE. https://www.goodreads.com/trivia/deta... ) Pre-state marsh towns had up to 5,000 population. Early states 20,000-50,000 (p. 191). Homo erectus domesticated fire. p. 17. Roughly half a million years ago. p. 19. We have adapted ourselves so massively to fire that our species would have no future without it. p. 42. Raw-foodists who insist on cooking nothing invariably lose weight. p. 43. What modern humans had that Neanderthals didn't have, that let us outcompete, was the dog. p. 259 see Pat Shipman, The Invaders: How Humans and Their Dogs Drove Neanderthals to Extinction. https://www.goodreads.com/trivia/show... There are, even today (2017), large stands of wild wheat in Anatolia from which, as Jack Harlan famously showed, one could gather enough grain with a flint sickle in three weeks to feed a family for a year. p. 11. Between 8000 and 6000 BCE, cereals, lentils, peas, chickpeas, and flax are being planted; goats, sheep, pigs, and cattle are domesticated. pp. 42-43. Until about 1600 CE, 1/3 of the globe was still occupied by hunter-gatherers, shifting cultivators, pastoralists, and independent horticulturalists; states, being essentially agrarian, were largely confined to that small portion of the globe suitable for cultivation. p. 14. In much of the world, even a strong state could project power only seasonally, such as, not during monsoon. p. 15. States did not have hegemony until at least 1600 CE. p. 253. States used nonstate peoples as slaves and mercenary soldiers. Nonstate people raided and traded with states. From 3500 BCE to 2500 BCE, Sea level and Euphrates flow both fell substantially. p. 121. This concentrated population. Required labor-intensive irrigation. Umma & Lagash fought over water rights and arable land. Recommends Robert Adams, /Heartland of Cities/, 1981, online at https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchi... Recommends (p. 62): Anne Porter, /Mobile Pastoralism/, pp. 351-393: Shows in early versions of the Epic of Gilgamesh, circa 2100 BCE (p. 141), Enkidu was an ordinary herder. 1000 years later he was uncivilized, barbarian, subhuman. One of /those people/, who knows not grain, nor houses, nor cities, or how to "bend the knee." Now, it's only subjects of the state are who are "us." Outsiders are "them." /Reliance/ on farming and herding was a last resort. A lot of work. Resorted to when the abundant prey was gone. p. 96. World human population estimates (log10 of population vs. year BCE/CE, p. 6): https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i... Shows slow growth to 5000 BCE; rapid growth since. (Graph stops at 1800 CE at 1 billion people. Population reached 4 billion around 1980, and has increased about 1 billion per 12 years since.) See also Wolfram's estimates, https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i... which shows much-faster growth since 1800. Recommends (p. 99) Karen Rhea Nemet-Nejat, /Daily Life in Ancient Mesopotamia/, p. 80: reads tuberculosis, typhus, bubonic plague, smallpox in ancient texts. 6th century CE Plague of Justinian killed 30,000,000-50,000,000 people. Disease pools of the Mediterranean, India, China merged around 1 BCE. p. 192. Deforestation causes erosion, silting, formation of malarial wetlands. Irrigation causes salinization: By 6300 BCE, there were no trees in walking distance of the town of Ain Ghazal (p. 197). The community dispersed. Salinization caused decline of Sumer after 2400 BCE. pp. 200-201. Writing appears just before early states appear. pp. 140, 269. The earliest administrative tablets of Uruk, 3300-3100 BCE, are lists of barley, war captives, slaves, and taxes. p. 142 It would be almost impossible to exaggerate the centrality of slavery in the development of the state. pp. 155, 173, 180. There were no free men in the ancient Near Eastern states (much less free women). p. 157. As late as 1800 CE, 3/4 of the world's population was in bondage. Rome's Gallic wars netted 1,000,000 new slaves. p. 157. Most wars in the ancient Near East were fought to gain captive laborers. p. 158. 9,000 slave women worked in Uruk state textile workshops. Marsh-state elites traded the cloth for metals from the hills. p. 159. Uruk total population was 40,000-45,000 then, 3000 BCE. Elites considered workers as domestic animals. p. 160. [The book doesn't say so, and it may not be called slavery, but the world economy /still/ rests on destitution-level work.] "Writing appears to be necessary for the centralized, stratified state to reproduce itself. … Writing is a strange thing. … The one phenomenon which has invariably accompanied it is the formation of cities and empires: the integration into a political system, that is to say, of a considerable number of individuals … into a hierarchy of castes and classes. … It seems to favor rather the exploitation than the enlightenment of mankind." --Claude Lévi-Strauss (p. vi) The code of Hammurabi bristles with punishments for helping slaves escape. p. 162. Writing wasn't initially a means of representing speech. p. 145. "Raiding is our agriculture." --Berber saying, pp. 34, 237. Wheat, barley, rice and maize make up, even today, more than half of humans' calorie consumption. p. 23. (An overestimate? No source citation.) Some data: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i... https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=... https://www.google.com/search?q=world... The price of a wagon-load of wheat doubled after 50 miles (in the Roman Empire under Diocletian). p. 54. James C. Scott edited Yale University Press's Agrarian Studies book series. Doesn't show well on a phone. Use a computer to see them: https://yalebooks.yale.edu/series/yal... p. xviii Successive attempts to get Wolfram Alpha to plot the population estimates on page 6: Plot[{-35000, 3000000}, {-5000, 5000000}, {-2000, 25000000}, {-1000, 50000000}, {0, 170000000}, {1000, 275000000}, {1400, 375000000}, {1800, 1000000000}] Plot[{-35000, Log 3000000}, {-5000, Log 5000000}, {-2000, Log 25000000}, {-1000, Log 50000000}, {0, Log 170000000}, {1000, Log 275000000}, {1400, Log 375000000}, {1800, Log 1000000000}] Plot[{-35000, 6.477}, {-5000, 6.699}, {-2000, 7.398}, {-1000, 7.699}, {0, 8.23}, {1000, 8.439}, {1370, 8.568}, {1400, 8.574}, {1800, 9}] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Sep 25, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
24
| 
| 0728852500
| 9780809411641
| B0006C4VTI
| 4.06
| 17
| unknown
| Jan 01, 1972
|
really liked it
|
1972. Details the route and lives of the voyageurs, from Montreal to Lake Athabasca in northern Alberta, 1500s-1800s. Also habits of beavers, and deta
1972. Details the route and lives of the voyageurs, from Montreal to Lake Athabasca in northern Alberta, 1500s-1800s. Also habits of beavers, and details of how snow in its various guises affects the plants and animals of the north. Good 1-page bibliography. Good photos, and a map. Voyageurs: Made one trip per year, in a 2-stage relay: Starting respectively in Lachine near Montreal, and as far northwest as Lake Athabasca, from ice-out in (hopefully) early May, paddling 2 months to meet at Grand Portage on the north shore of L. Superior. Montreal men had hauled trade goods, exchanging for beaver pelts hauled south--or, if ice-out was late in the north, the exchange would be at Rainy Lake. Then back to respective winter homes with each others' cargo before ice-up. Montreal canoes: 36-foot, 600-lb. birch bark on cedar frame, sewn with spruce roots, caulked with pitch. 6000 lb. of goods in (about 67) 90-lb. bales, plus 8-10 men. 1000 mi. Lachine-Grand Portage, in 6-8 weeks (125-167 mi./wk). Rivers from Lachine to L. Huron. 450 mi. of the trip is along north shore of L. Superior. Every man has to carry about 8 90-lb. bales every portage: normal load was 180 lb. per trip. Plus the boat. Many voyageurs died of hernias. Portages over .5 mile were done in stages. North canoes: 25-foot, 300-lb. same construction as larger Montreal canoes. 3000 lb. of goods in (about 33) 90-lb. bales, 5-6 men. Up to 2000 miles, L. Athabasca-Grand Portage, and 2000 miles back, between ice-out and ice-up. There is a 700-foot vertical cliff to negotiate, men, boats, and goods, across the 12-mile Methye portage in western Saskatchewan. Food: thick pea soup. The men were wage laborers. Hudson Bay Company owners reaped the profit. By 1870 the life was waning: decimation of beavers, motor boats, beginning of railroads, logging, mining. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Sep 04, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
11
| 
| 1583225269
| 9781583225264
| 1583225269
| 4.19
| 254
| 2004
| Feb 03, 2004
|
it was amazing
|
The Fluoride Deception, Christopher Bryson, 2004 Fluoride is a neurotoxin, carcinogen, causes skeletal deformities, organ damage, and brittle teeth. Fl The Fluoride Deception, Christopher Bryson, 2004 Fluoride is a neurotoxin, carcinogen, causes skeletal deformities, organ damage, and brittle teeth. Fluoridated drinking water has never been shown to be either safe or effective in fighting cavities. Fluoride in the brain, organs, bones can have no benefit for teeth. Fluoride is a major industrial pollutant, emitted by the aluminum, fertilizer, gasoline, steel, plastics, and nuclear weapons industries. Fluoride pollution of the air, water, and land, has caused vast damage to livestock, crops, land, and loss of human life. Industry faced far more dollar liability from lawsuits due to fluoride pollution than from any other industrial pollutant. Lawyers representing the polluting industries paid researchers to deny that fluoride is harmful. Fluoridating drinking water was a stunt to defuse fluoride-pollution lawsuits. Researchers who have published the truth, that fluoride is highly toxic, have been fired and had their careers ruined. One of them may have been murdered. U.S. government agencies have been co-opted by the lawyers representing the polluting industries. Much of the fluoride added to U.S. drinking water is not even pure fluoride, but is simply smokestack-scrubber liquor from fertilizer-processing plants. It contains lead and arsenic. Christopher Bryson is an award-winning journalist. He discovered proof of all this, digging into decades of evidence industry had buried. Fluoridealert.org: https://fluoridealert.org/ U.S. communities are starting to get with the program most of the rest of the world has long realized, and stop fluoridating drinking water. Portland, Oregon voted to stop fluoridating water in 2013. http://fluoridealert.org/articles/por... . Others: https://fluoridealert.org/content/com... . Environmental Working Group on fluoride: https://www.ewg.org/search?fullsearch... Other books on fluoride and similar pollutants: https://www.goodreads.com/review/list... ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Jul 15, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
1
| 
| 0713418605
| 9780713418606
| 0713418605
| 4.20
| 20
| Jan 01, 1978
| Jan 01, 1978
|
it was amazing
|
Elo’s scheme can be used to rate any kind of contest. There’s nothing chess-specific in the arithmetic. Read my review here (best format): worldcat.org/ Elo’s scheme can be used to rate any kind of contest. There’s nothing chess-specific in the arithmetic. Read my review here (best format): worldcat.org/profiles/Tom2718/reviews... Comment here: goodreads.com/review/show/2060648624 Old, shorter: librarything.com/work/19622187/review... Apad Elo (1903–1992) set up the rating system that shows players by how much one excels another. Elo describes ways of evaluating competitors, history of chess ratings, and his system. Elo assesses relative ratings of masters back to 1850s. Elo DOESN’T (explicitly) say (implicit in his math): THE ELO PRESUMPTION Elo presumes: If player A beats player B, say, 3 games to 1, and B beats C, say, 3 games to 1, then A should beat C, 3/1 times 3/1, 9 games to 1. (A beats B x to 1, B beats C y to 1, Elo presumes A to beat C x×y to 1.) Logarithms of the win-loss ratios are the rating differences. Here, if we use base-3 logs, player A is 1 point above player B, B is 1 point above C, A is 2 points above C. Predicted win-loss ratio for any two players is the base of the log scale to the power of the rating difference. (For chess, a draw counts as half a win, and half a loss.) Simple and elegant. If the presumption is true, so is the predictive value of the relative ratings. There is neither theory nor observation to justify the presumption. There’s nothing contest-specific in the arithmetic. It’s easy to imagine contests where a different presumption holds. BUT—even if the underlying idea isn’t accurate, STILL it MAY give useful and reasonable ratings under certain conditions. For example, suppose at golf Al always scores in the 70s, Charlie always scores in the 80s, and Beth scores in the 70s half the time, and in the 80s half the time. Suppose when Beth scores in the 70s, she’s equally likely to win or lose a match with Al; when she scores in the 80s, she’s equally likely to win or lose a match with Charlie. Here A beats B 3 to 1; B beats C 3 to 1; A beats C every match (infinity to 1). And, consider a lumberjack race across a pond, running on floating logs strung end-to-end. Winner is first across, or, last to fall in, whichever happens first. Suppose Al runs fast, but, 1 time in 4, falls in near the start. Suppose Beth runs at medium speed, but, 1 time in 4, falls in near the finish. Suppose Charlie runs slowly, but never falls in. Al beats Beth 3 times to 1; Beth beats Charlie 3 times to 1; Al beats Charlie 3 times to 1. So Elo’s presumption, A over B 3 to 1, B over C 3 to 1, gives A over C 9 to 1, doesn’t hold here: A over C could be 3 to 1, or infinity to 1, or anything in between. (A over B x to 1, B over C y to 1, could give A over C min(x, y) to 1, or infinity to 1, or anything in between. Yes, min, not max: Even if Beth never falls in, beats Charlie infinity to 1, Al still beats both Beth and Charlie 3 to 1. Very little can truly be inferred about what A over C should be, given A over B and B over C.) And that’s without considering “rock-paper-scissors” results—A beats B, B beats C, C beats A—which can happen in a multi-dimensional contest. Still, if ratings are based mostly on tournament results (one game each against many opponents) rather than match results (many games with one opponent), and everyone plays a mix of opponents, everyone has some results that over-rate, and other results that under-rate them. Likewise, as everyone plays white half the time and black half the time, the slight over- and under-ratings due to white and black balance out for everybody. (See the “arithmetic” section below for one measure of the rating-point value of white over black.) The above hypothetical contests are just examples of, “A at her worst always beats C at his best, though B sometimes wins, sometimes loses to either,” and, “He’s great usually, but occasionally he stumbles to where a weak contestant can beat him.” Either or both of these may apply, whatever the contest. Elo’s scheme gives only a general magnitude of relative playing strengths, never precision. See the “self-correcting” section below, for a kind of average validity, despite the invalid presumption. My sense is, chess is more nearly like the golf example above, in that any substantially-stronger player is virtually guaranteed to win, but there is an element of the lumberjack example with chess too, in that, if the stronger player does lose, it’s likely due to a self-inflicted wound, which an opponent of even low skill could capitalize on. For example, once, our one master came to the club exhausted after a long day at work. He left his queen en prise in a rated game, which even the 1600-rated opponent was able to convert to a win. U.S. Chess Federation designates “rating classes”: 100 ≤ class E < 1200 ≤ class D < 1400 ≤ class C < 1600 ≤ class B < 1800 ≤ class A < 2000 ≤ expert < 2200 ≤ master < 2400 ≤ senior master (There’s no reason ratings can’t be negative, but USCF’s minimum is 100. Most tournament players are rated at least 1000. For estimating winning chances, only rating difference matters.) ELO ARITHMETIC First the Elo arithmetic, then how it’s used to arrive at ratings: Elo chose 400 times the base-10 log of the win-loss ratio to define the rating difference: Where: L is your losses, W is your wins, Delta R is your opponent’s rating minus your rating: Nominal L/W Delta R = 400×log(L/W)/log(10) 1/1 0 6/5 32 5/4 39 4/3 50 3/2 70 5/3 89 2/1 120 5/2 159 3/1 191 4/1 241 5/1 280 6/1 311 e²/1 347 Notes: Reciprocals of L/W ratios give negatives of rating differences. It’s tempting to say, “10/1 is 400 points: so 100/1 is 800 points, 1000/1 is 1200 points, . . .” But such exactitude is an illusion. What’s accurate is, for any substantial rating difference, the lower-rated player expects a negligible chance of winning. Likewise, “3/2 is 70 points, 4/3 is 50 points, so 70 − 50 = 20 points is (3/2)/(4/3) = 9/8.” Again, exactitude is illusion. Even in a 100-game contest where each competitor has an exactly 50/50 chance of winning or losing a game, the result will likely be anywhere between about 45/55 and about 55/45, that is, about −35 rating points to +35 rating points. Also, you may do better against Boris than most players of your rating, or worse against Bobby than most players of your rating, due to differences of playing style. The above rating differences have been rounded to whole numbers. None are exact except 0 and 400. Elo’s scheme gives only general magnitudes of relative strengths—never precision. Given rating differences for L/W of, say, 10/1, 4/3, 3/1 (400, 50, 190.8), the rest of the table above follows from log(x×y) = log(x) + log(y) log(x/y) = log(x) − log(y) The table is just a log table: it expresses relations between numbers. Whether the numbers relate to winning chances in a given contest is a separate, unexamined question. I call the L/W column, “Nominal,” as the relation between L/W and rating difference is merely presumed: any similarity to what actually happens is accidental. But see the “self-correcting” section below for how a player’s total wins matches Elo’s presumption, even if the individual cases don’t. It would be a miracle if all the nominal L/W ratios really represent your chances vs. players of all those rating differences to you. But, Elo does more than presume the above scale. He imposes it, on average: your rating goes up or down as your results are better or worse than Elo presumes. Your rating will tend toward that rating at which your expected wins match the number of wins you actually achieved. On the last line of the table above, e is the base of the natural logarithm, about 2.718. e² is about 7.39. I include it because its rating-point value, 347, is the maximum rating-point value of a single rated event, for a well-functioning rating system using pre-event ratings. See the “Instability” section below. WHITE versus BLACK The white-over-black advantage can be approximated by looking at, for example, the 48-game Karpov-Kasparov match: 40 draws, 5 wins by white, 3 wins by black: In this match, white outplayed black by 400×log(25/23)/log(10) = 14 Elo points. If one player wins or loses all games, the rating difference is infinite. (In practice, U.S. Chess Federation avoids infinities by starting each player with a “performance rating,” 400 points below the rating of each opponent the new player loses to, 400 points above the rating of each opponent the new player beats, averaged over the first 25 games.) Only rating differences are meaningful. There’s no reason ratings can’t be negative. “SELF-CORRECTING” RATINGS Given these presumed L/W probabilities, Elo calculates each player’s expected score (total number of games won, each draw counting as half a win) for the tournament. Then, if the player actually scored more, points are added to the player’s rating, and conversely. So ratings change, tournament by tournament, until they reflect the player’s actual strength relative to his opponents. Players refer to this process as “self-correcting” ratings: if you underperform your rating, your rating falls, and conversely. Numerically, from the above presumed logarithmic relation, L/W = 10^(Delta R/400) Presumed win probability, wins/games = W/(W + L) = 1/[1 + 10^(Delta R/400)] Presumed win probability, summed over the games in an event, is called the player’s “wins expected.” Then New rating = old rating + (constant)×(actual wins − wins expected) (counting a draw as half a win). So, relative ratings come to signify players’ total expected wins, presuming the Elo L/W-to-rating-difference relation to be true. Individual winning chances can’t be expected to match the Elo relation—but their sum over the player’s contests is forced to match Elo’s rule, by changing players’ ratings, tournament by tournament, until it does. PAST MASTERS One of the most interesting things Elo does with this process in his book is to establish relative ratings of chess masters over more than a century, from Paul Morphy in the mid-1800s, up to the date of publication. This was possible because these masters played others of previous and later generations, and none of them won or lost all their games. So using the masters’ match results, Elo by iteration found the relative ratings for each master that predicted their actual results. That is, he started by assuming the same rating for each master; he then added points to the assumed ratings of those whose actual results were better than predicted, and conversely. Repeating until actual results matched predicted ones, he got an internally self-consistent set of relative ratings. Notice that only relative ratings can be inferred from competition. The method tells only how players fare relative to each other—not whether as a group they are strong or weak players. The chess federations do not use the above iterative method over the players’ whole careers to establish ratings. Instead they add points to players’ ratings after each event who outperformed their ratings’ predictions, and conversely. NATURAL RATING DEFLATION One of Elo’s most significant contributions to the practice of rating chessplayers is his recognition of the natural process by which ratings decrease with time—and his elegant solution, bonus points. A new, inexperienced player joins the league and establishes a rating. During his playing career he gains skill and his rating increases. He retires from competition with greater skill, and a higher rating, than he started at. The problem is that, although his increase in skill is real, his increase in rating points all comes at the expense of his opponents’ ratings. As our new player gains rating points for exceeding his number of wins expected, his opponents lose the same number of rating points, for falling short of their expected wins. This process removes rating points from the pool. To put them back, Elo awards bonus points to players who gain more rating points in a single tournament than random chance would suggest is likely. This adds rating points to the total, to compensate for the natural loss. How many bonus points should be added? Depends how fast players are improving. FIDE, players already at peak form, may need few if any. And, low ratings don’t imply improvement! If using either iteration or non-constant k, rating changes are not zero-sum: bonus points may be unnecessary. INSTABILITY Ratings change tournament by tournament, based on “wins expected” from pre-tournament rating differences. Rnew = Rold + k×(W − We) where W is your actual wins achieved in the event (draws count .5 win each); We is the number of wins you expected, based on your pre-event rating relative to your opponents’ pre-event ratings. The rating-point value of a single tournament is k×N where k is the rating-point value of one game, and N is the number of rounds in the event. If the rating-point value of a tournament is too high, strange and undesirable things happen: For example, with k = 32 N = 20 Invitational tournament: all 20 home-club players, each R=1662, play all 20 visitors, each R=1948. Underdogs win every game. Post-event ratings are: home players all 2199; visitors all 1411. These absurdly excessive rating changes due to one event are an artifact of using pre-event ratings to compute wins expected—together with excessively high k×N. With the iterative approach Elo used to rate past masters, this instability wouldn’t happen: everyone’s “wins expected” reflects opponents’ new, more accurate, post-event ratings. Here, using the “Self-consistent” method below, old ratings based on 50 games, new ratings are: winners 1807, losers 1803. Or if 1662s based on 19 games, 1948s based on 27 games, winners rise to 1925, losers fall to 1780. If using pre-event ratings: To avoid lower-rated players who win, achieving higher post-event ratings than the higher-rated players would achieve if they win, and to avoid higher-rated players becoming lower-rated players, and vice-versa, as a result of all games drawn, we need k ≤ 347/N where k is the rating-point value of one game, and N is the number of rounds in the event. USCF now uses a variable k based on players’ ratings, which becomes so large for low ratings that to avoid surreal rating changes for all ratings, an event must be 5 rounds or fewer!—or, everyone’s rating must be high—the more rounds in the tournament, the higher the ratings have to be. USCF’s formula for k is complex enough you need numerical methods to even find out how many rounds you can have with sane rating changes, based on your players’ ratings. For example, if you want a 19-round round-robin, Wolfram Alpha calculates that your players must all be rated at least 1891: wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+347%2... Otherwise, rating changes due to the event are so large that, for example, with all games drawn, the higher-rated and lower-rated players switch places! and, lower-rated players are rated higher for winning, than the higher-rated players would’ve risen to had they won. USCF rating rules: glicko.net/ratings/rating.system.pdf UNRATEDS When rating a tournament, previously-unrated players are rated first, based on their opponents’ ratings. Once each previously-unrated player has a rating, then their games with each other, if any, can be rated. A tournament where no one has a rating must wait to be rated, until one or more of its players earns a rating in another tournament. In or about the early 1980s, USCF abandoned the above, instead awarding performance ratings of 1400 for beating unrateds, no matter how weak; and of 1000 for losing to unrateds, no matter how weak. This made the lower end of the rating scale largely meaningless—especially as it coincided with a big expansion of rated elementary-school chess. Before the change, roughly half of rated players were under 1400. SELF-CONSISTENT Elo’s iterative method would give relative ratings that exactly predict the actual results. Use, say, a moving two-month period, not whole careers. Assume old ratings to be based on “50 drawn games” (or actual number, if fewer), “against a hypothetical player of the player’s old rating.” (Better: many hypothetical players, of unchanging ratings same as actual opponents were rated: 50 games times player’s actual win fraction. De-value old results so total stays 50.) Adjust all ratings until each new rating exactly predicts the player’s 2 months’ score vs. real opponents plus win-fraction of 50 assumed previous games vs. hypothetical opponents). Keep hypothetical opponents’ ratings the same every iteration. Final ratings predict actual 2 months’ results and pre-event ratings. Previously-unrated players have zero hypothetical games: their new ratings exactly predict their actual scores. (Any assumed starting rating for an unrated has no effect on any final, post-iteration rating—because the fixed hypothetical-opponent ratings of rated players nail the set of ratings to their level.) At least one player—preferably many—must have pre-event rating, to rate the event(s). The only players who have to be treated differently are previously-unrateds who win or lose all their games with previously-rated players in their first month. These unrateds would get infinitely high or infinitely low ratings. For them only, rate them based on all their actual games, plus, for those who won all their games, one hypothetical draw vs. a hypothetical player rated the same as the highest post-event rating of anyone the new player beat. This limits the rating, but ensures it’s higher than it would’ve been had the player indeed drawn one game. (Which a simple ceiling, “x points above highest player beaten” would not guarantee!) If new player loses all games first month, rate based on actual games, plus one draw vs. a hypothetical player rated the lower of: 1200, or the lowest post-event rating of anyone the new player lost to. This sets this player’s rating in class E. In a full round-robin, ladder, or Swiss-system tournament, at most one player can win all games, and at most one player can lose all games. Yet there can be subgroups who win or lose all games versus the rest of the field. For example in a 5-round round robin: If the six scores are, say, 433311, there is no subgroup that won or lost all games versus the rest of the field: if anyone had a pre-event rating, all unrateds get ratings based on actual results. But 444111, say, means each 4-scorer beat every 1-scorer: the unrateds of same score as any rated player all get ratings based on actual results—but if all 3 players of either score are unrated, they’d be put infinitely far from the other 3—hypothetical draw needed. Likewise 543210: If both the 5-scorer and the 0-scorer are previously rated, all the unrateds get ratings based on actual results: but any unrated without rated players both above and below in the standings, must be rated using the modification. 1200 ceiling for zero score only. BETTER PRESUMPTION? If established players’ rating-difference–vs.–log(L/W) data aren’t a straight-line plot (as Elo presumes, with no reason to expect), a truer curve for chess might be fit (by iteration—rating differences are based on the old presumption). POLITICS Assumed, awarded, and floor ratings, excessive bonus points, absurd k×N, variable k: federation officials do what they think’s popular. Then they’re shocked, shocked, that their scheme to keep ratings high, is inflationary and randomizing. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
Jan 1984
|
Jul 14, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
77
| 
| 1633881482
| 9781633881488
| 1633881482
| 2.68
| 34
| Mar 08, 2016
| Mar 29, 2016
|
liked it
|
Call of the Primes, Owen O'Shea, 2016, 330pp., Dewey 510. Myriad fun facts. How to make magic squares, p. 23. Conjectures and theorems about primes, pp. Call of the Primes, Owen O'Shea, 2016, 330pp., Dewey 510. Myriad fun facts. How to make magic squares, p. 23. Conjectures and theorems about primes, pp. 37-40, 43-45. Geometric proof of Pythagorean theorem, p. 57. Pythagorean triples where hypotenuse is 1 longer than one side, p. 60. Integer-radius circles inscribed in such triangles, p. 62. Fibonacci sequence, chap. 5. Fast pace. Few explanations of "why?" Little sense of, "this is significant, and why" as distinct from, "here's a weird fact, but knowing it never helped anybody." Oddly explains the most trivial: "recall that a triangle's area is 1/2 the base times the height." Even odder musings on beauty. Mathematicians are strange. Some outright errors, as in his statements about E = mc^2, pp. 71-73. Some deep numerical weeds. But wow: there's good stuff here! Particularly, Pythagorean triples and e. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Jul 13, 2017
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
65
| 
| 1594202346
| 9781594202346
| 1594202346
| 4.26
| 7,393
| 2009
| Aug 20, 2009
|
it was amazing
|
The Healing of America, T.R. Reid, 2009, 277pp., ISBN 9781594202346, Dewey 362.10973, Library-of-Congress RA395.A3R435 More than 85% of Americans say m The Healing of America, T.R. Reid, 2009, 277pp., ISBN 9781594202346, Dewey 362.10973, Library-of-Congress RA395.A3R435 More than 85% of Americans say medical care is a basic human right. Americans /wrongly/ think anyone who needs care gets it. Each year, 22,000 Americans die of treatable ailments. pp. 217-218 (Also American Journal of Public Health, Dec. 2009, p. 2294 http://pnhp.org/excessdeaths/health-i... ) Prof. Uwe Reinhart wrote a /Journal of the American Medical Association/ article in 1997, asking, if a rich and poor child have the same illness, should they have the same chance of being cured. Physicians and lawyers responded savagely. "effete!" "class warfare!" "socialist propaganda!" "No!" "forced redistribution!" "costly political battles!" "the rich defend their wealth; the poor try to take it away!" ("Letters," /JAMA/, Mar. 11, 1998.) pp. 220, 267. The U.S. market transfers far more of our wealth to the insurance, pharmaceutical, and medical industries than any other country for two reasons: (1) The U.S. is the only place that relies on for-profit medical insurance--which spends vast sums denying coverage. (2) The U.S. hasn't used the clout of a large payer to demand limits to charges for treatment or drugs. pp. 35-36, 232-234. (Obama's Labor Day 2009 speech: "insurers should be free to make a profit." https://worleydervish.blogspot.com/20... ) In the late 1980s, the Taiwanese president's office called Professor Hsiao, "asked me to lead a task force to give Taiwan a 21st-century health system. We had a conference. I required cabinet ministers to chair the various sessions. When you chair a meeting, you have to sit through the whole thing and listen. That's how you educate decision makers." pp. 169-170. Hsiao, /Getting Health Reform Right/. U.S. is #1 in deaths due to surgical or medical mishaps. p. 32. See also Sick: The Untold Story of America's Health Care Crisis---and the People Who Pay the Price, Jonathan Cohn: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... And, Mary's 2009 blog, https://worleydervish.blogspot.com/se... ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
May 31, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
76
| 
| 1409965260
| 9781409965268
| 1409965260
| 3.59
| 144
| Nov 1906
| May 08, 2009
|
it was amazing
|
More important than Shakespeare's identity is his work. Tolstoy points out that Shakespeare lacks the ability to give his characters each a distinct v
More important than Shakespeare's identity is his work. Tolstoy points out that Shakespeare lacks the ability to give his characters each a distinct voice, nor a voice appropriate to who they are supposed to be. Every Shakespearean character speaks in the same pretentious, Shakespearean voice. Moreover Shakespeare oozes contempt for the common person, fawning for whoever occupies a position of authority. Shakespeare’s plays are tedious, his politics vile. Shakespeare is good at one thing: playing with words. Nor was Shakespeare widely acclaimed until some 200 years later when Goethe began the fandom—there being no German playwrights of note, and disliking the French. /Tolstoy on Shakespeare/ online at: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27726 J. Thomas Looney in /Shakespeare Identified in Edward de Vere, the Seventeenth Earl of Oxford/, 1920, identifies many characteristics the author of Shakespeare's works must have had. Looney tells us that only Edward deVere, earl of Oxford, possessed all of them. A taste of it here: https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.o... and https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.o... Mark Twain came away from Stratford (where he learned that the man named Shakespeare didn’t leave a single book in his will) saying he didn’t know who wrote the plays, but it wasn’t the man from Stratford. More: https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.o... Games Magazine did a wonderful summary of Looney's book, maybe 1998. Doesn’t seem to exist anywhere anymore. “I remember the astonishment I felt when I first read Shakespeare. I expected to receive a powerful esthetic pleasure, but having read, one after the other, works regarded as his best: "King Lear," "Romeo and Juliet," "Hamlet" and "Macbeth," not only did I feel no delight, but I felt an irresistible repulsion and tedium . . . . Shakespeare can not be recognized either as a great genius, or even as an average author. . . . far from being the height of perfection, [King Lear] is a very bad, carelessly composed production, . . . can not evoke among us anything but aversion and weariness. . . . All his characters speak, not their own, but always one and the same Shakespearian, pretentious, and unnatural language . . . .” ― Leo Tolstoy, “Tolstoy on Shakespeare: A Critical Essay on Shakespeare” Permalink: https://www.worldcat.org/profiles/Tom... https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... https://www.worldcat.org/profiles/Tom... https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
May 17, 2017
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
53
| 
| 0143037757
| 9780143037750
| 0143037757
| 4.37
| 12,534
| Oct 06, 2005
| Sep 05, 2006
|
really liked it
|
Postwar, Tony Judt (1948-2010), 2005, 878pp., ISBN 1594200653, Dewey 940.55, Library-of-Congress D1051. No source notes; no bibliography: Judt intende
Postwar, Tony Judt (1948-2010), 2005, 878pp., ISBN 1594200653, Dewey 940.55, Library-of-Congress D1051. No source notes; no bibliography: Judt intended to maintain them online, but died in 2010 at age 62; his successors haven't maintained them. But at this moment there's a Columbia professor who has the 31-page bibliography online as a pdf: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/history/d... Judt names a few of his favorite modern histories, including Eric Hobsbwam's /The Age of Extremes/ (post-WWI to fall of USSR), and those of Alan S. Milward. p. xiv. Periods of happiness are the blank pages in history. --Hegel. p. 1. Dec. 1989, Communist control of Eastern Europe was evaporating. p. 1. Europe's future /and past/ would look different. pp. 2-3. WWI bloodbath resolved nothing. p. 4. Germany was /not/ crushed by either WWI or by reparations. Germany didn't pay its WWI debts. Stalin's & Hitler's mass murders lent a stabilizing homogeneity to postwar European countries. pp. 27-28, 172, 434-436. (But it had /not/ happened in Yugoslavia. p. 672.) It's sometimes prudent to forget. pp. 10, 271. Postwar, locals replace the removed minority. p. 36. PART 1 POST-WAR: 1945-1953 CHAPTER 1: LEGACY OF WAR 36.5M Europeans died 1939-1945 of war-related causes. p. 17. Excludes U.S., Japanese, other nonEuropeans. Includes 19M noncombatant civilians. Over 16M Soviet civilians died in WWII. 5M in Poland. Judt must be excluding Russia from Europe pp. 18, xiii. Postwar, 20M more Soviet women than men. p. 19. Almost no horses in USSR. (No tractors either. See Svetlana Alexeivich, /The Unwomanly Face of War/, https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... ) 1801-1825 Czar Alexander I regretted letting Russians see how Westerners lived. p. 20. Red Army rapists fathered 200,000 Germans 1945. No state wanted Jews--until Israel was created. 1948-1951, 332,000 European Jews left for Israel. p. 32. Poland, 10% Jewish prewar (see Antony Beevor, the Second World War), had only 30,000 by 1965, only 7,500 in synagogues. p. 434. Of those, 20,000 left 1968-1969 after attacks by authorities. p. 435. Nazi & Soviet occupiers precipitated all-vs.-all war. Discouraged civility or bond between individuals. (According to Thomas Hobbes, in the absence of awe of some power, every man is in war against every man, and life is nasty, brutish, and short. From his book /Leviathan/.) The occupying powers were /not/ in much control of the populace. People /had/ to steal and use the black market to survive. The occupiers were there to plunder and terrorize the people. People in huge numbers denounced each other to gain favor with the occupiers. (Herding Jews to death camps was possible only with the help of local Jewish leaders.) Without a legitimate government, violence equals authority. Those in power were the most lawless. 1939-1945, Europeans had no rights. Wartime squatters in Jewish dwellings refused to leave when survivors returned. State governments in Western Europe quickly signed on to do Nazis' bidding. Yugoslav partisans by contrast fought. pp. 35-39 Postwar, Germans were expelled from eastern & central Europe & their property taken by the state. pp. 38-39 WWII /completely/ destroyed Germany (but see p. 83, most industry intact!) & eastern & central Europe. Much moreso even than western Europe. The West had the wealth to rebuild. Not so the East. p. 39. CHAPTER 2: RETRIBUTION Tens of thousands of suspected collaborators with the Nazis were killed by vigilantes after Nazis lost control, before postwar regimes asserted control. pp. 41-44. Women were tarred & feathered for bedding the enemy. New governments unfairly singled out & punished many individuals. But remember in 1945 it's remarkable that rule of law was reestablished at all. pp. 44-45. In France, the state itself was the chief collaborator. p. 46. Little retribution. Italy was in civil war, Left v. Right, after war. Communist minister of justice committed to national unity & parliamentary democracy. p. 48. Britain imposed a pro-corporate regime in Greece. Leftist anti-Nazi fighters were executed; their children & grandchildren denied jobs into the 1970s. Nazi collaborators OK. pp. 48-49. Retribution in West was political. Losers were punished for war crimes winners also committed. As in the East: Stalin & Tito extirpated political opponents. pp. 49-50. Businessmen & high officials in Western Europe who profited from the occupation suffered little. p. 51. Most people blamed the Germans, not their countrymen, for the Nazi occupation. pp. 52. Austria was defined as Hitler's 1st victim, & got off lightly--though Austrians were Nazi at least as much as Germans were. p. 52. 1945-1947, Allies prosecuted German Nazis for war crimes. p. 53. This was victors' justice, but also trials of real criminals. Set precedent for international justice. p. 54. Following orders no defense. Germans believed selves innocent victims of Hitler. pp. 54, 57-58. [Judt doesn't say this, but how many /Americans/ consider ourselves complicit in the destruction of millions of people around the globe: Indochina, Latin America, the Middle East, … -- even if we supported the officials who ordered the atrocities? Who among us blame ourselves for the USA maintaining over 800 US military bases in other countries, propping up brutal dictatorships who agree to enrich Wall Street by pauperizing & subjugating their own people. How often do we even seek out noncorporate news to find out what's happening?] Map p. 55: US, UK, Fr, USSR sectors of occupied Germany & Austria. Berlin divided 1945-1989; Vienna 1945-1955. Occupiers tried to deNazify Germany. But the only competent administrators had been Nazis, and not just nominally. pp. 56-58. 8 million German Nazis at war end. USSR used anti-Nazi purge to gut the bourgeoisie. And to grab wealth to buy support. p. 59. As in West, only ex-Nazis had skill to run postwar East Germany: they made good Communist officials. pp. 59-60. Gestapo becomes Stasi. The West quickly embraced ex-Nazis for being reliable anti-Communists. p. 61. And to identify ex-Nazi Soviet agants. Only collective amnesia enabled Europe's postwar recovery. p. 61. CHAPTER 3: REHABILITATION Postwar politicians: need to /plan/ to avoid injustices of capitalism, indifference of arrogant ruling elite, incompetence of politicians. p. 67. To the UK Labor party, this meant, nationalize mines, rail, transport, utilities, medicine. p. 69. Italy: state-owned industry persists. Germany: private industry but publicly-approved management & labor relations. Holland state regulation of private enterprise. France: nationalize airlines, banks, insurance, utilities, mines, munitions, aircraft manufacture, Renault (payback for aiding German war). Modernize industry, grow economy. Plan needed German raw materials & markets. p. 70. USSR: arbitrary rigid production quotas. Czechoslovakia: state control of industry, /before/ Communist coup Feb. 1948. Eastern Europe state planning, scarce resources were spent on infrastructure & industry. Little for food, housing, less for medicine, schools, nil for frills. Enforced by police state. Western Europe also funded industry over consumption, housing, services. p. 71. Strikes, unionism, more support for Communist Party. Plan must secure employment. p. 72. Germany had public pensions & insurance since 1880s. p. 72. Other European countries had followed 1900-1938. WWII spawned much-larger welfare state. p. 73. Transferred money from the rich to the rest. p. 74. UK: William Beveridge report, 1942: need: national health service, pension, family allowances, near-full employment. p. 75. Tony Judt grew up in postwar UK & is grateful for the welfare state. p. 75. Welfare state did /not soak/ the rich. p. 76. Professional class, w/free education & insurance, better off than before. p. 462. Most rural Europeans poor. Most Europeans rural. p. 77 After WWI, some land was redistributed to peasants, but ag prices fell; they were hurting. p. 78. Post-WWII, Eastern European land was taken from gentry & given to peasants (later re-taken by Communists for collectives). p. 78 W. Europe farm price supports & loans help small farmers. pp. 78-79. Postwar housing crisis: London, 3.5M homes had been destroyed. p.82. 90% of Warsaw gone. only 27% of Budapest habitable. 40% of German homes gone. 30% of UK. 20% of French. 1.2M Italian homes gone. p. 82 Transport loss: ships, rail, bridges, roads, canals. No Seine bridge below Paris. Only 1 Rhine bridge. Mines working, but Vienna coalless. pp. 82-83. US unassailable commercial & tech lead: thanks, war!! p. 83. (Also military & financial hegemon. Will now siphon wealth from the world.) 80% of German industrial plant intact. p. 83. (contrast p. 39) Neutral Sweden Spain Portugal Switzerland provided Nazi Germany's iron, manganese, tungsten, banking. p. 83. Swiss made Nazi munitions, optics, machinery. p. 84. Swiss asked that German passports say if holder is Jewish. Sweden & Switzerland became & stayed prosperous: Thanks, war!! p. 84. Central Europe, transport rebuilt by 1947. pp. 84-85 Norway lost half of fishing & merchant fleet, near half of industry, to war. Thanks, Sweden, you egg-sucking collaborators. p. 85. Germany had 10% of its rail left. By June 1946, 93%; 800 rebuilt bridges. p. 85. Factories began reopening within weeks of war's end. p. 85. 91% of Volkswagen plant had survived. Ford undamaged. 1/3 of industrial equipment is new, built during war. Ready for postwar boom. p. 86. 1947 food still scarce except Sweden, Switzerland. p. 86. East European grain no longer feeds West Europe. East Europe near famine after poor harvests. Winter 1946-1947 worst since 1880. 1947 snowmelt: floods. p. 86. 1947 summer dry, hot. p. 87. Germany, heart of European economy, can't trade until its political future is decided. p. 87. Europe was importing from US, but had nothing to sell, and no dollars. p. 87. Total dollar value of all Hungarian currency = $0.001 Aug. 1946: worst inflation anywhere, ever. Germany no currency. Cigarettes medium of exchange. Teachers earn 5 packs/wk. US troops in Berlin alone sent home $11M more than their wages, selling their allotted cigarettes. pp. 87-88. .9M joined Communist Party in France by 1947: current government isn't getting us bread. 2.5M in Italy. Spectre of war & revolution hovering. p. 88. Too little of everything. p. 89. Chaos worse 1947 than 1918. At best, decades of poverty & struggle coming. No, will collapse: war, totalitarianism. p. 90. But US Secretary of State George C. Marshall has a plan. p. 90. Announced June 5, 1947. Already US had given & loaned $billions to UK & France, & others. With strings attached. Truman imprudently cancelled Lend-Lease agreements: squeeze UK. UK dollar reserves disappear. US had demanded France open its markets to any flood of US goods. p. 90. 1947 Europe $5 billion trade deficit to US. p. 91. Marshall: Europeans decide whether to take US aid & how to use it. US aid for years: recovery. Not just disaster fund. LOTS of money. Would total $13 billion by its end, 1952. (In 2004 dollars, worth about $200 billion.) Cost US only 0.5% of GDP, 1948-1951. No future Communist country received a dollar of aid. p. 91. 16 countries benefited: UK, France, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Greece, Turkey, Ireland, Iceland, Austria, Portugal. p. 91. US Congress saw aid to West Europe as barrier to USSR expansion. p. 92. Stalin's decision to refuse Marshall aid was a mistake. Eastern Europe stayed poor. pp. 92-93. Marshall gave /not/ money, but US goods! p. 93. Judt doesn't mention it, but this aspect of US foreign aid makes it a gift to the US producer, as well as to the foreign recipient. This is an enduringly popular way to spend US government money--especially on arms. When the US government sends aid to Colombia, say, in the form of attack helicopters to use to murder the Colombian government's political opponents, the /only/ debate in Congress is, how many will be made by Sikorsky in Connecticut, and how many by Bell in Texas. https://m.imdb.com/review/rw3212797/ Thousands of Europeans came to US to see US way of business. Marshall funded. US cheered for free trade. p. 94. (During Depression, each country protected own producers by excluding foreign goods, to net loss all around.) US wanted world markets open to its goods. Marshall would restore US's major trade partner. Chaotic Europe would fall to USSR. p. 95. "Keep mines, industry, armies in US sphere of influence."--US Govt, April 1947. p. 95. Greece 1950, half of GNP was thanks to Marshall aid. p. 96. Post-WWI, US gave Europe only bank loans--not government grants. p. 98. "Pay it back now" at Depression onset: disastrous. Marshall Plan saved Western Europe. But real recovery would have to reintegrate Germany into European trade. pp. 98-99. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Apr 06, 2017
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
33
| 
| 0316391220
| 9780316391221
| 0316391220
| 4.34
| 323
| Oct 17, 2017
| Oct 17, 2017
|
liked it
|
Theodore Gray's chemistry books: Elements: A Visual Exploration of Every Known Atom in the Universe Photos of Gray's collection of objects made of pure Theodore Gray's chemistry books: Elements: A Visual Exploration of Every Known Atom in the Universe Photos of Gray's collection of objects made of pure or nearly-pure chemical elements. Comparing this book to Molecules: The Elements and the Architecture of Everything drives home the fact that it's only in combining with other elements that the chemical elements become interesting. Molecules: The Elements and the Architecture of Everything Takes some of the mystery out of organic chemistry by showing the simple ways carbon combines with hydrogen and other atoms. Shows the "dictionary" of amino-acid codons genes are written in. This is much the most interesting of Gray's chemistry books (unless you intend to actually blow stuff up). In this book Gray chose his subjects for their chemically interesting properties he wanted to share. He laments that he ended up with a book of pictures of white powders. Reactions: An Illustrated Exploration of Elements, Molecules, and Change in the Universe Here Gray gives us colorful pictures and words. I didn't find the chemistry as interesting as in Molecules: The Elements and the Architecture of Everything. Theodore Gray's Completely Mad Science: Experiments You Can Do At Home, But Probably Shouldn't , The Complete and Updated Edition Crazy dangerous demonstrations, up to and including salting popcorn by reacting pure chlorine with pure sodium. Some of them are less life-threatening than that. Combines Theo Gray's Mad Science: Experiments You Can Do at Home - But Probably Shouldn't and Mad Science 2: Experiments You Can Do At Home, But STILL Probably Shouldn't. Some insights Gray shares: https://www.goodreads.com/trivia/auth... Gray's Mathematica books: This is his day job. His boss, Stephen Wolfram, has praised Gray's ability to find simple ways to do the seemingly computationally impossible. https://www.wolfram.com/books/search.... Exploring Mathematics with Mathematica: Dialogs Concerning Computers and Mathematics The Beginner's Guide to Mathematica (R) Version 3 By the way, there's a version of Mathematica free online, Wolfram Alpha: http://www.wolframalpha.com/ It can solve and plot. Astounding what it can do. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Apr 05, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
78
| 
| 1579126898
| 9781579126896
| 1579126898
| 4.12
| 266,796
| Nov 01, 1937
| Mar 30, 2007
|
really liked it
|
"most great love stories are tragedies." [p. 379 of 380] La vie est vaine."most great love stories are tragedies." [p. 379 of 380] La vie est vaine....more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Mar 03, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
3
| 
| 1565847032
| 9781565847033
| 1565847032
| 4.42
| 8,980
| Jun 01, 2002
| Feb 01, 2002
|
it was amazing
|
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky, 2002, based on talks he gave 1989–1999. 401 pages. isbn 1565847032. 449 pages of footnot
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky, 2002, based on talks he gave 1989–1999. 401 pages. isbn 1565847032. 449 pages of footnotes at understandingpower.com Real power is not in the political system. It’s in the private economy: that’s where the decisions are made about what’s produced, how much is produced, what’s consumed, where investment takes place, who has jobs. Political changes can make only a minor difference. So long as power remains privately concentrated, everybody has to make sure the rich are happy. If they’re happy, they’ll invest, the economy will work, things will function, maybe something will trickle down to you. If they’re not happy, everything grinds to a halt. Suppose Massachusetts were to increase business taxes. Most of the population is in favor of it. Business would run a public relations campaign, saying, truthfully, “Raise taxes on us, capital will flow elsewhere, you’ll have no jobs, you’ll have nothing. You make us happy or you’ll have nothing. You live here, but we own the place.” [p. 63] For me, this is the indispensable insight Chomsky clearly states and illustrates in this book. Understanding it, we lose our unrealistic expectations of politicians. Until there’s popular control of industry—workers’ control, community control, extending democracy to economic power—unless that happens, political power will be feeble. [p. 64] Real democracy will require that corporate capitalism be dismantled. You have to build up alternative popular institutions, which could allow control over society’s investment decisions to be moved to working people and communities. A participatory economy. [p. 140] [The U.S. Federation of Worker Cooperatives, usworker.coop is a few people making a start. Very few. As of 2016, the Democracy at Work Institute counts just 7,000 co-op workers in the entire U.S., in 350 worker co-ops, working for an average of $25,000/year per worker. goodreads.com/review/show/2000479083] Build community. Organize. When people get together, all sorts of things are possible. If you’re isolated, you’re going to break. [pp. 121, 185] If you could get to the point where a reformist candidate had a chance, you’d already have won; you’d already have done the main thing—build mass support. [p. 139] Power was never in popular hands. [p. 267] But there’s progress. Keep fighting. [p. 268] And yet—a century ago, governments were revoking corporate charters when corporations didn’t live up to the public interest. [p. 347] Every form of authority and domination and hierarchy, has to prove that it’s justified. [p. 201] States are not moral agents. They’re vehicles of power, working in the interests of particular internal power structures in their societies. [p. 163] The product of the media is audiences! Their market is advertisers! [p. 14] “I asked an editor why coverage of Palestine is so awful. He laughed, ‘How many Arab advertisers do you think we have?’” [p. 22] Mainstream press portrays a uniformly pro-corporate world. A New York Times columnist says angrily, “Nobody tells me what to write!” True. He already knew what to write. That’s why he’s a New York Times columnist. [p. 112] Warner Communications closed a publisher to keep a Chomsky book from being distributed. [p. 209] Universities, corporate-funded, select for obedience and conformity, punish independence. [pp. 236, 265] Chomsky can teach in any department except political science. [p. 244] In communities with listener-supported community radio and other alternative media, the mood is strikingly different. [p. 180] In economically weak countries around the world, the U.S. prevents the rise of independent governments—to keep siphoning wealth from the global poor to the global rich—through corporate control of land and resources, low wages, industry-friendly policies. [p. 64] The United States arms foreign militaries, so they can and do overthrow their own governments that don’t pursue the welfare of multinational corporations. [p. 7] Noriega was our thug in 1985. In 1989 he was getting independent. [p. 152] Around the world, the countries that developed economically are those that weren’t colonized by the West. [p. 65] The U.S. government spends some $10 billion a year to maintain U.S. domination of Central America—probably exceeds the profits banks and corporations plunder there. [p. 67] Free-market capitalism led to the Great Depression. Every economically successful country is near-fascist—massive government intervention in the economy. Every industrial economy has a massive state sector. In the U.S. it’s mainly through the military. The government funds corporate research and development; if something profitable comes out of it, the corporations take the profit. The parts of the American economy that are competitive internationally get massive government subsidies: agriculture, high-tech, pharmaceuticals. The U.S. prevents third-world countries from doing as we’ve done. [pp. 72–73] Military spending goes to the rich. Social spending goes to the poor. The rich have the power, so that’s where we spend it. Violence or its threat empowers authoritarianism. [pp. 11, 70, 90] Cuba’s “crime” is successfully caring for its people: a virus that could spread, and interfere with corporate plunder. [p. 149] Vietnam was fought to prevent Vietnam from becoming a successful model of economic and social development for the third world. So far we’ve won. [p. 91] Chomsky is, I think, wrong about some things: Chomsky is right that mostly, the boot of wealth is on everyone’s neck. Mostly. “Pursuit of self-interest helps everybody” is mostly a lie. But since owners haven’t yet vacuumed up all wealth and power, they sometimes have to give some of the rest of us something for their gains in wealth. So it’s not enough to simply destroy capitalism, have all business decisions made by worker co-ops. Permitting people to make a profit, when it also benefits the nonwealthy, can be a good thing. Chomsky’s right that wealth will always fight hard to eat our lunch. We have to win that fight, muzzle not kill the beast. With progressive taxation of corporate and individual wealth and income; regulation; and, public-interest research-and-lobbying groups on every issue that wealth lobbies on (in the Citizens’ Utility Board mold). Chomsky is right that, to curb wholesale environmental destruction, enserfment, and rampant authoritarianism, the power of the rich to get richer at everyone’s cost must be destroyed. It’s true that worker co-ops replace dictatorial owner power, serving wealth concentration—at any cost to workers and community—with workplace democracy, with goals of business survival, decent pay, and service to community. Yet majority rule doesn’t mean fairness. (Ask any minority!) Longtime co-op workers vote themselves higher pay for the same work as newcomers—far above any claimed greater productivity. A co-op can degenerate to rule by popular clique. Chomsky is a bit of a free speech fundamentalist. You can forgive him, in that, if public opinion had not shifted so fast and strongly to antiwar in 1968, Chomsky would have been sentenced to many years in prison for criticizing the government’s prosecution of the war. But there must be limits on speech. Not just “you don’t have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater,” but also: You have no right to say, “Do what I want or I will hurt you.” That’s felony assault or felony extortion. You have no right to say to a public official, “I bought you. I own you. You work for me.” That’s graft. You have no right to say, “Here, try this!” when “this” will harm you and take away your ability to choose not to do it. In my view, advertising is the only truly criminal act of the illegal drug trade. And neither should nicotine, alcohol, and gambling advertising be permitted. (John Warren Kindt, "College and Amateur Sports Gambling: Gambling away our Youth" online here (33 pages): paperity.org/p/81539170/college-and-a... Legal gambling's socioeconomic costs, including addictions, crime, corruption, and bankruptcies, exceed costs of illegal drugs.) You have no right to present lies as news. Chomsky feels we can’t trust the government to censor speech. He has good reason to feel that way. Yet we have to trust the government to evaluate safe foods and drugs, keep snake-oil salesmen from making false ads. “Too much competition” Chomsky sees as a very bad thing—and it is, for the profiteers. For the rest of us, “too much competition” is the Econ 101 world, “many buyers, many sellers, no one has control over price”—and if anyone who wants to produce and sell, can do so, then the best anyone can do is recover long-run marginal cost—and if they do, they can stay in business forever, all the employees, supervisors, managers, and suppliers getting paid, the customers getting a fair price. The only people who don’t get paid are the investors, and why should they? Why should they expect to keep getting more and more wealth, for doing nothing, merely because they started with more money than they needed to spend? But Chomsky is wrong that “excess competition” causes depressions. What causes depressions is insufficient aggregate demand—which happens when many people, who need lots of stuff, have too little money and can’t buy it—because a few people, who already have everything they could use and then some, have hoarded all the wealth. [pp. 72, 74] Chomsky thinks boycotts are not much use. [p. 337] To the contrary, as Howard Zinn said, to live, today, as we think people should live, is itself a great victory. As much as we can deny exploiters profit by our participation in their system, we should. Chomsky thinks there’s no evidence the CIA isn’t under White House control. [p. 349] To the contrary. The CIA does what the CIA wants. Sometimes that’s the same as what the white house wants. Sometimes not. Thoroughly documented in, for example, Legacy of Ashes by Tim Weiner, and JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters by James W. Douglass. Chomsky cites many worthwhile authors, including: Mishel, Lawrence Rothstein, Richard Carnoy, Martin Bivens, Josh McQuaig, Linda Sellers, Charles Grier Noble, David F. Ware, Norman Sklar, Holly Medoff, Peter Collins, Chuck Stockwell, John Hertsgaard, Mark Parenti, Michael Bagdikian, Ben H. Herman, Ed Postman, Neil Mishel, Lawrence Rothstein, Richard Carnoy, Martin Bivens, Josh McQuaig, Linda Sellers, Charles Grier Noble, David F. Ware, Norman Sklar, Holly Medoff, Peter Collins, Chuck Stockwell, John Hertsgaard, Mark Parenti, Michael Bagdikian, Ben H. Herman, Ed Postman, Neil Mishel, Lawrence Rothstein, Richard Carnoy, Martin Bivens, Josh McQuaig, Linda Sellers, Charles Grier Noble, David F. Ware, Norman Sklar, Holly Medoff, Peter Collins, Chuck Stockwell, John Hertsgaard, Mark Parenti, Michael Bagdikian, Ben H. Herman, Ed Postman, Neil And if you’ve ever seen a video of him speaking, you know it’s almost all without notes. Chomsky is mind-bogglingly well-informed about precisely the things the powers that be don’t want us to know. Thank you, Noam. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Mar 02, 2017
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
20
| 
| 1631491628
| 9781631491627
| 1631491628
| 4.16
| 1,293
| Jun 2016
| Jun 06, 2016
|
By Iowa law, districts are not drawn to favor or disadvantage any party, incumbent, candidate, or constituency. Iowa districting is done by nonpartisa
By Iowa law, districts are not drawn to favor or disadvantage any party, incumbent, candidate, or constituency. Iowa districting is done by nonpartisan agencies and commissions. That’s where fairness begins. And for Iowa, it can end there. But remember that Iowa is a state of four Congressional districts, its most populous county has 430,000 population; Iowa is 91% white, there is no possibility of creating a minority-majority legislative district anywhere in Iowa. For a state with larger, blacker cities, such as any of the battleground states whose results determine the U.S. presidency, the simple "let the computer draw for compactness" rule will guarantee that the majority of state residents--city dwellers who overwhelmingly vote Democratic--will choose a minority of the legislators. If fairness means that, if 60% of the state is Democratic, then 60% of the legislators should be Democrats--which is what fairness does mean--then maps have to be drawn to avoid corralling massive concentrations of Democrats in a couple districts, leaving all other districts with a Republican majority. Indeed, the Washington Post compactness districts and the current, Republican-drawn districts both concentrate Wisconsin Democrats in just that way. https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/Centr... https://www.census.gov/2010census/pop... https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/c... https://www.legis.iowa.gov/DOCS/Resou... ...more |
Notes are private!
|
0
|
not set
|
not set
|
Feb 28, 2017
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
120
| 
| 067401930X
| 9780674019300
| 067401930X
| 4.28
| 1,707
| 1982
| Dec 30, 2005
|
really liked it
|
Bitter Fruit: The American Coup in Guatemala, Stephen Schlesinger & Stephen Kinzer, 2005 (This is a 1982 book plus 36 pages of 2005 front matter and a
Bitter Fruit: The American Coup in Guatemala, Stephen Schlesinger & Stephen Kinzer, 2005 (This is a 1982 book plus 36 pages of 2005 front matter and a 10-page 2005 afterword), 330pp., ISBN 067401930X, Dewey 972.81052 Focused on 1954, with enough before & after to be a good overview of what happened and why. In short chapters, the authors take us through -the 1954 Eisenhower/Dulles attack on the Arbenz government -the FDR-inspired 1944 inauguration of Guatemala's first democratic, human-rights-oriented, government -the enemy: United Fruit company (UFCO, now Chiquita), treated Guatemala as its fiefdom, and Guatemalans as its serfs -United Fruit's successful propaganda war against Guatemala -Eisenhower and his anti-Communist administration and CIA -Guatemala's pre-1945 despot Ubico, democratic presidents Arévalo and Arbenz, and CIA- and United-Fruit-picked "liberator" Castillo Armas (192-193), and successive U.S.-approved despots ix This book is about events in 1954: how the Eisenhower-Dulles administration, in service of United Fruit Company (now Chiquita) overthrew the Arbenz government. x In 1982-1983, the Guatemalan army, aided and abetted by the Reagan administration, killed 50,000 to 75,000 mostly unarmed indigenous farmers and their families, destroyed 400 towns and villages, and violently displaced over a million people. 150,000 fled to Mexico. xiii, 106-107 Except for Eisenhower, every U.S. official involved in the 1954 decision to overthrow Guatemala's government, had a family or business connection to United Fruit. The Cold War was a pretext. xiv-xv The Guatemalan elite nearly unanimously opposed the Arbenz government. They enabled the U.S. coup to succeed, while U.S. coup attempts in Cuba and Nicaragua failed. xvi The Guatemalan-elite-backed 1954 U.S. coup condemned Guatemala to 40 years of unremitting brutality and violence. xvii Supported always by the CIA. xxviii The CIA murdered Guatemalans, hired Guatemalans to murder American citizens, and lied to the State Department, Congress, and the president to protect its secrets. When the truth came out, the Guatemalan generals the CIA had supported were fired; Guatemala's 42-year civil war ended in December 1996. xxxii, 265 200,000 deaths, the military responsible for 93% of them. 11-12, 54, 76 Arbenz had expropriated some of United Fruit's unused land. United Fruit monopolized the banana export, administered Guatemala's only important Atlantic harbor, owned almost all rail, and all telephone and telegraph in Guatemala. 15, 76, 269 United Fruit had paid $1.48/acre for the land. It demanded $15,854,849 = $75.56/acre for the unused land; Guatemala offered United Fruit's own declared value for tax purposes: $627,572 = $2.99/acre. [This disagreement led to 42 years of violence, with 200,000 dead and millions of people displaced.] 12 United Fruit's investments in Guatemala were valued at $60 million in 1954. 76 Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was a United Fruit investor. 75 The company had 550,000 acres of Guatemala farmland. In 1953, 209,842 acres of fallow land were expropriated. 164 Neither the company nor the U.S. Government were interested in negotiating: they overthrew Guatemala instead. 100-146 Eisenhower had called Truman, "soft on Communism." The Joseph-McCarthy-led right-wingers had helped elect Eisenhower. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was a "bull who carries his china shop with him."--Winston Churchill. Dulles hired a McCarthy associate to check the "loyalty" of all U.S. ambassadors. Eisenhower approved the CIA-directed overthrow of the Arbenz government. The CIA spent an estimated $20 million to overthrow Arbenz. [So United Fruit wouldn't lose a claimed $15 million on a land deal. And mark the sequel: read on.] Allen Dulles assured UFCO that Arbenz's replacement would not be allowed to nationalize or disrupt company operations (120). 194 The CIA paid Lloyd's of London $1.5 million for a British transport ship the CIA bombed, mistakenly thinking it carried fuel for the Guatemalan army. It carried only coffee and cotton. The enormity of this act convinced Guatemala to surrender. 232-233 The U.S. gave the Castillo Armas regime $45 million per year. U.S. aid to Guatemala in 1944-1954 had totaled $600,000 all together. 55 During the 18 months the land reform was in operation, the government rented fallow land to 100,000 families, an average of 15 acres each. The government bought, at declared tax value, 16% of Guatemala's privately-owned fallow land. Land reform could have eroded the political power of the landed oligarchs, and economically and politically uplifted the common people. But its extent never seriously affected the holdings of the landed aristocracy (198). 10-11, 19, 146-157 The U.S. refused to sell arms to Guatemala, then used Guatemala's purchase of arms from Czechoslovakia as a pretext to attack Guatemala. Most of the single shipment of Czech arms was useless. 26 Guatemalans thought FDR was being sincere in his 1941 "four freedoms" speech, saying all people everywhere were entitled to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from want, and freedom from fear. These were among the freedoms Americans largely did have, and Guatemalans did not. Guatemalans did not know that FDR was merely engaging in doublespeak, to try to justify taking his nation to war with Japan. What FDR did not say was that the real reason he wanted to fight Japan was to win control of the crumbling European empires in the Pacific for U.S. corporations. FDR's use of the Pacific fleet to keep fuel out of Japan, to force Japan to go to war against us, had nothing to do with freedom of speech or freedom of religion. As for fear and want, FDR's speech was an attempt to create fear in his own people, so they would tighten their belts and create enough fear and want in the Japanese that they would abandon their plans for empire and cede the prize to Wall Street. The United States would not have gone to war merely to win freedoms for downtrodden foreign people. FDR's "four freedoms" speech: https://www.fdrlibrary.org/documents/... But Guatemalans said, "Yes. We deserve those freedoms." They expelled their pro-landowner strongman government, and established their first democratic, human-rights-oriented government in 1944. It lasted until Eisenhower and Dulles overthrew it in 1954; 42 years of brutality ensued. 40, 54 Much of Guatemala's fertile land lay uncultivated. Plantations larger than 1,100 acres--0.3% of the farms--contained more than half of Guatemala's farmland. Despite abundant rich land, its inefficient use forced Guatemala to import basic foods. Large landowners feared that if indigenous people had land, cheap labor would no longer be available. 47 Three hundred families, heirs of the colonial elite (largely coffee barons), and United Fruit Company, controlled Guatemala. 47-49 "The world is moved by the ideas on which Hitler rose to power." --Juan José Arévalo, exit speech as Guatemala's president, 1951.03.15. Arévalo only barely managed to serve out his 6-year term, having survived 25+ plots. Arévalo was supported by groups bound together only by opposition to the oligarchy of large landowners, rightist officers, conservative clergymen and foreign companies. 47-54 But his successor Arbenz, still trying for democracy and rights for ordinary Guatemalans, would provoke the Nazilike forces (led by Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers, at United Fruit's request) to crush his country. 50 Under Arévalo, urban workers' wages were up 80% from the starvation level of his murderous predecessor. But rural Guatemalans owned no land; yearly per-capita income of agricultural workers was $87; 2.2% of landowners owned 70% of the arable land, in 1950. Less than one-fourth of large-plantation acreage was being farmed. United Fruit and other U.S. companies owned the largest part of the economy, $120 million. 60 Under Arbenz, press freedom thrived. Pro-American newspapers attacked the government without reprisal. 65-70 What became United Fruit began in 1870, selling Jamaican bananas in Jersey City and Boston. In 1885, it added Cuba and Santo Domingo, growing and shipping bananas. By 1898, the import was 16 million bunches a year. Demand exceeded supply. The fruit company partnered with the Central American rail baron, becoming United Fruit in 1899. Tropical lowland was nearly free: local rulers didn't use it. By 1930, United Fruit owned vast acreages in Guatemala and other Central American and Caribbean countries. Sam "the Banana Man" Zemurray bought a surplus navy ship, arms and ammunition, and sent adventurers to take over Honduras, which then granted Sam every concession. United Fruit bought out Zemurray in 1930. In 1932, Zemurray became managing director. Guatemalan despot Ubico granted United Fruit 99-year leases, tax-free, duty-free status, and guaranteed low wages: no more than 50¢/day. The company owned the only railroad, and the only town and port serving the Atlantic: United Fruit controlled Guatemala's international commerce. Only United Fruit freighters could access Guatemala's east coast. 71-73. In the 1920s the company forcibly put down a strike over a new 7-day workweek. United Fruit plundered Guatemala and Guatemalans. "At the time United Fruit entered Central America, Guatemala's government was the region's weakest, most corrupt and most pliable. So we made Guatemala our headquarters." --ThomasMcCann 75 United Fruit's railroad was charging the highest rates in the world. 77-97 United Fruit unleashed lobbyists and publicists, beginning in 1950 when he took office, to persuade the U.S. Government and the American people that Arbenz must be deposed. Zemurray hired Edward Bernays, propaganda master: "The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country … it is the intelligent minorities which need to make use of propaganda continuously and systematically" --/Propaganda/, 1928. 84-90 Bernays persuaded newspapers to run articles like, "Communism in the Caribbean," 1950, New York Herald Tribune. UFCO gave newsmen royal treatment and wrote its own articles for journalists to publish. Bernays lobbied Congress to overthrow Guatemala. Bernays outmaneuvered, outplanned and outspent Guatemala in his publicity war. Guatemala never organized an effort to present its side of the story in the U.S. press. 90-97 Zemurray hired Thomas Corcoran, one of FDR's original brain trusters, as a lobbyist. Corcoran recruited ex-senator Robert LaFollette to convince Washington liberals that Arbenz was a dangerous radical. UFCO appointed ex-CIA director and Undersecretary of State Walter Bedell Smith to its board of directors. The CIA began planning to overthrow Arbenz for United Fruit. Zemurray hired right-wing-connected lobbyist John Clements after Eisenhower was elected (they already had the liberals on board). Clements sent an anonymous 235-page "report" of "facts" about Guatemala to congressmen and "decision-makers." The Eisenhower administration and CIA ran with it. Clements boosted "liberator" Castillo Armas, who after the coup hired Clements as his U.S. public relations representative at $8,000/month. (When Clements died in 1975, Hearst Corporation executives seized and burned all his files, to protect themselves from lawsuits.) United Fruit with $500,000/year through top public relations operatives, bent the Eisenhower administration to its will. The CIA also persuaded editors to suppress the truth and spread lies (154, 163, 167-170, 184-193). The Catholic Church, including the papal nuncio, also preached anti-Communism and against Arbenz. (155, 192-193). 228 After the coup, Dulles reassigned Guatemalan embassy officials to posts across the globe: so nobody would be there to tell the story. 184 Argentinean physician Che Guevara was in Guatemala in 1954. The coup persuaded him to fight imperialism. He then met and joined Fidel Castro. 198 The relentless attacks by the U.S. and others such as the Catholic Church, finally lost Arbenz the support of all but the poor. But among the poor, the tradition of political passivity always dictated that they sit back and await events rather than try to influence them. 191-200 Arbenz stepped down 1954.06.27. He thought he was turning power over to his friend Colonel Carlos Enrique Díaz. Guatemalans didn't know that the Americans would make sure fascist butcher Castillo Armas had control. 207 CIA operatives accosted Díaz and told him he had to go. 202-203 U.S postwar governments propped up fascist dictatorships throughout the global South. 203 If Arbenz had survived his term in office, it would have strengthened democracy in the Americas, and isolated dictator Somoza in Nicaragua. Arbenz' downfall fortified despots and provoked more anti-American future movements. 214, 219-222, 233, 235 Ten years of reformist government were over. The armed forces, the landed aristocracy, the Catholic Church, and, especially, United Fruit Company, were back in control. The peasants were expelled from their new land; UFCo got all expropriated land back; low tax; eradication of labor unions; murder of union leaders; imprisonment of former officials of the Arbenz government and of suspected "Communists," or "sympathizers," few if any of whom knew anything about Communism; disenfranchising three-quarters of the population; outlawing political parties and peasant organizations; press censorship; banishment of critics; burning books; granting petroleum to foreign companies; kleptocracy. 220, 229 Far too late, the U.S. Justice Department concluded United Fruit's banana monopoly was a violation of American antitrust laws. In 1972, United Fruit sold its Guatemalan land to Del Monte. continued in comment 1 ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Feb 25, 2017
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
9
| 
| 0674061438
| 9780674061439
| 0674061438
| 3.97
| 416
| Sep 15, 2011
| Sep 15, 2011
|
it was amazing
|
A history of human civilization, and religion's place in it. Small hunter-gatherer tribes have powerful beings that people identify with, whose aspect
A history of human civilization, and religion's place in it. Small hunter-gatherer tribes have powerful beings that people identify with, whose aspects people take on during rituals. Only when human society evolves kings does religion evolve gods that are worshiped. Bellah is a sociologist. He sees religion's use to legitimate, and to criticize, authority. Bellah does not see religion's power to build spiritual strength in the faithful. This is a little odd, in someone who's spent his life studying religion: he doesn't see what it's about, what it's for. Indeed, for Bellah, the distinction between philosophy and religion is artificial. Sociologists speak of an "axial age," mid-first milennium BCE, on which history turns. They characterize it as a moment when "thinking about thinking" emerges--when people become "like us." Which seems to mean, the moment when sociologists appear. Bellah's four embodiments of axial thought are: Deuteronomy, Plato, Confucius, Buddha. For "Deuteronomy," Bellah would've written, "Moses"--but he can't find any evidence that the stories of Moses were ever anything but fiction. Bellah is a huge fan of Plato. Every known human society has gone through a period of human sacrifice. This is when the king has absolute power and is seen as divine. [For Bellah, this is history--but remember, every time a president uses the military, he is demanding human sacrifice of his own, and of the target people.] Bellah's project is massively ambitious: to give a history of human civilization. He does a pretty good job. Bellah died in 2013. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Jan 30, 2017
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||
40
| 
| B01ANZ7KUE
| 4.41
| 724
| 1948
| Jan 14, 2016
|
liked it
|
UN universal declaration of human rights, 8 pages, 1948. Online here as a web page (in English, Spanish, Arabic, French, Russian, or Mandarin): www.un UN universal declaration of human rights, 8 pages, 1948. Online here as a web page (in English, Spanish, Arabic, French, Russian, or Mandarin): www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-h... or as a pdf: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Document... or in other languages (500 languages!): https://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/S... Aspirational. Certainly not implemented in the U.S. A couple concerns: the planks about right to property and right to change nationality will certainly be cited by the plundering class to shield their wealth. (Yes, you should be free to change nationality—but when you do you should be subject to an estate tax—going and coming. Only for extreme wealth; progressive.) Actually, the "right to own property," Art. 17, goes far to nullify /all/ other rights. Either a foreign engineering company has a right to acquire the water of a country as its exclusive property, or people have the right to water. Either foreign owners of land have a right to take the agricultural produce of that land as their property, and ship it abroad while local people die of famine, or people have a right to life. Either a mining company has a right to make use of the minerals to which it has acquired property title, and permanently transform a pristine environment into a toxic waste dump, or people have a right to be free from pollution. Either company owners have a right to run their company as they see fit, or people have rights to a decent living, decent conditions, safety and health. Either fuel owners have a right to burn, or people have a right to breathe clean air in an unbroken climate. You can't have both. The extent that wealth has rights is the extent people lack rights. The unstated untruth behind the wording is that only governments deprive people of rights. The truth is, we need governments to protect us from the abuses of the owning class. Note that the “equal pay for equal work” plank is /not/ one unions and worker co-ops adopt. Instead unionists accept that workers outside the bargaining unit—and junior members—get less for the same work, senior members keep getting more. This is ultimately self-defeating, as it gives a powerful incentive to take work away from the bargaining unit, divide and conquer. Only by insisting on the value of the /work/, whoever does it, could workers preserve wages long term. See Divided World Divided Class: Global Political Economy and the Stratification of Labour Under Capitalism, Zak Cope. Art. 24, a right to paid time off work, presupposes that everyone is a wage slave to a large corporation. Not so, and not desirable. There should be sufficient anti-monopoly law and enforcement that a mom-and-pop business can thrive and survive. This is quite the Rosetta Stone, one document in 500 languages. _Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World,_ by Samuel Moyn, goodreads.com/book/show/36358131-not-... shows that "human rights" seeks only minimum survivability--abandons the socialist quest for equality--permitting the galloping toward a lords-and-serfs world we've seen since the mid-1970s. And in any event, no one took the calls for human rights seriously. U.S. blamed Communist countries for abuses, while U.S. funded death squads throughout the global South to enforce corporate power. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
not set
not set
|
not set
not set
|
Dec 10, 2016
|
Kindle Edition
| |||||||||||||||
29
| 
| 1594561869
| 9781594561863
| 1594561869
| 4.08
| 80,589
| 1846
| May 01, 2009
|
really liked it
|
**spoiler alert** Spoiler alert! Don't read this until you read the story. It really will spoil it. End of story summarized in this quiz question: http **spoiler alert** Spoiler alert! Don't read this until you read the story. It really will spoil it. End of story summarized in this quiz question: https://www.goodreads.com/trivia/deta... ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Nov 30, 2016
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||
16
| 
| 1595585192
| 9781595585196
| 1595585192
| 3.73
| 325
| Jan 01, 2009
| May 18, 2010
|
it was ok
|
Despite the ambitious title, this 136-page book suffers from two fatal flaws: 1. It reads as if it was written as the report of a commission of interna Despite the ambitious title, this 136-page book suffers from two fatal flaws: 1. It reads as if it was written as the report of a commission of international government economists. Which it was. 2. It falls far short of recommending a number to use instead of GDP. The only numerical change it plots is "GDP minus depreciation!" Far short of the "GDP minus wealth accumulation by billionaires"--or even the Muhammad Yunus suggestion of two decades ago, quite doable and a far better measure: average per-capita income of the poorest 50%, or the poorest 35%, of the population. Instead, the economists responsible for this book relate only in general terms some important items left out of GDP. Yet they never admit that what's most important simply can't be measured in money. Money measures only the kind of human effort that those with money pay for. An intact forest is priceless. A full-time mother, to her kids, is priceless. Yet commissioned government economists will insist on measuring something, anything, even if on some level they know that what they're measuring is actively harmful. Transform an intact forest, with clean water, clean air, clean land, into a toxic waste dump? Adds to GDP! Force a mother to neglect her kids to work for crumbs to make a fat cat richer? Adds to GDP! So GDP will continue to be measured by government economists. The Gross Domestic Plunder, Gross Domestic Pollution, Gross Domestic Plutocracy, Gross Domestic Peonage will all continue to be reported as if good. Because one of the kinds of human effort that people with money pay for is government economists measuring their monetary gains. Banker to the Poor by Muhammad Yunus Capital in the 21st Century by Thomas Piketty and other recent books by Joseph Stiglitz all come closer to shedding light on what should actually be measured, than this Mismeasuring book does. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Oct 26, 2016
|
Paperback
|
Thomas Ray
>
Books:
detailed-reviews
(132)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
10
|
| 4.51
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Nov 15, 2017
|
|||||
13
|
| 4.43
|
it was amazing
|
not set
|
Oct 30, 2017
|
|||||
125
|
| 4.29
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Oct 19, 2017
|
|||||
119
|
| 4.12
|
it was ok
|
not set
|
Sep 25, 2017
|
|||||
24
|
| 4.06
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Sep 04, 2017
|
|||||
11
|
| 4.19
|
it was amazing
|
not set
|
Jul 15, 2017
|
|||||
1
|
| 4.20
|
it was amazing
|
Jan 1984
|
Jul 14, 2017
|
|||||
77
|
| 2.68
|
liked it
|
not set
|
Jul 13, 2017
|
|||||
65
|
| 4.26
|
it was amazing
|
not set
|
May 31, 2017
|
|||||
76
|
| 3.59
|
it was amazing
|
not set
|
May 17, 2017
|
|||||
53
|
| 4.37
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Apr 06, 2017
|
|||||
33
|
| 4.34
|
liked it
|
not set
|
Apr 05, 2017
|
|||||
78
|
| 4.12
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Mar 03, 2017
|
|||||
3
|
| 4.42
|
it was amazing
|
not set
|
Mar 02, 2017
|
|||||
20
|
| 4.16
|
not set
|
Feb 28, 2017
|
||||||
120
|
| 4.28
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Feb 25, 2017
|
|||||
9
|
| 3.97
|
it was amazing
|
not set
|
Jan 30, 2017
|
|||||
40
|
| 4.41
|
liked it
|
not set
not set
|
Dec 10, 2016
|
|||||
29
|
| 4.08
|
really liked it
|
not set
|
Nov 30, 2016
|
|||||
16
|
| 3.73
|
it was ok
|
not set
|
Oct 26, 2016
|
Loading...
