Books I remember from 2019

I read a lot, some people would say too much, but I would say not enough.  The books listed were discovered by reading other people's lists, hearing about it on radio or tv. or reading in a newspaper or magazine, a personal recommendation or sometimes even just wandering around the library.  If any of my selections catch your fancy my efforts have been worth while.  If not, I hope you move onto some other more inspiring list.

Fiction

"Washington Black"  (2018) by Esi Edugyan tells the story of an 11 year old black boy in Barbados who is taken in hand by inventor and abolitionist.  He travels around America with many adventures and revelations.  A thought provoking book.  







"Hypnotist" (2011) by Lars Kepler which is really a pseudonym of a Swedish husband and wife team.  I have found Scandinavian mystery writers to tell the most compelling stories and this is no exception.


"One Brother Shy" (2017) by Terry Fallis  winner of two Stephen Leacock Medal for Humour + one Canada Reads  He often writes about things he is familiar. I had forgotten that he is an identical twin and he has concocted an amusing train of events starting in the ever familiar Canadian capital Ottawa, but moving onto London and Moscow with lots of local references.  As an engineer his characters tend to gravitate around modern technology.  A new concept for me was "social license" which refers to the fact that having legal permission to do something doesn't mean that society approves.  You will laugh and be drawn into the narrative.


"Albatross"(2019) also by Terry Fallis presents the dilemma of should one do what they want or do what they are good at.  As usual very humorous and thought provoking.

James A Michener  has long been a favored novelist and this year I uncovered two unread books. "Reccessional"  was about a seniors building with lots of information (and some philosophy) and an interesting story.  "The Novel" was a fictional account of the process of writing a book that included editor, publicist, critic.  Some interesting insights--also set where Michener grew up among the Amish. (where some of my ancestors lived).

I had vowed never to read David Langercrantz, but I weakened "The Girl in the Spider's Web" (2014)   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/08/guilty-pleasure-lisa-salander-and.html  

"The Children Act" (2014) by Ian McEwan.  Always has a deeper meaning forcing you to pay more attention.

"Mansfield Park" (1811) One wonders how she could understand psychology, but in all her books she delves into the mind of her characters.  Jane Austen

"Warlight" (2018) by Michael Ondaatje set in post war England.  Children are protected from those who might want revenge on their parents.  Recommended by reliable Facebook friend, Vijayakumar Mk Nair.

"The Deserter" (2019) by Nelson DeMille was the latest in a long line of enjoyable books, but this one was co-written with his son, Alex who is an experienced screen writer.  I find his books easy to read, although there is a lot of detail that lends credibility.  One interest to me was the setting of Venezuela.  A few years back my job put me in contact with some people from Venezuela including someone who worked engineering projects in Venezuela.  They were very critical of the government and I confess I thought they were being snobby and elitist.  Will also own up to my bias.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/05/tribute-to-nelson-demille-real-writer-i.html   In a conversation with a proud aunt, Nelson told her that she should not read certain sections (sexual) that he had to put in because they were expected.  His sense of humor comes through as much from unspoken thoughts as from dialogue.   The main character is always someone who breaks rules, is obssessed with sex and alcohol.  In this latest he presents criticisms of a secretive bureaucracy. Enjoyable reading that holds attention.

Non Fiction

"The Fifth Risk" (2018) by Michael Lewis was the first book completed in 2019  It is a book about Donald Trump (many were to follow) focusing on the transition and priorities.  They were unprepared for governing perhaps because it was unexpected.  As usual Lewis is apt at pinpointing causes of major problems. http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/01/the-fifth-risk-latest-from-michael-lewis.html

"Identity" (2018) by Francis Fukuyama helped clarify an issue prominent reading about politics.  Although I say clarify it also leads to questions.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/03/identity-new-force-in-modern-politics.html one of my more popular blogs.

"Educated" (2018) by Tara Westover highly recommended was not at all what I expected.  I imagined someone against all odds educating herself in fits and starts.  There is an element of that, but more so she lives though an unusual family dynamic that in some manner is the really crucial core of her education.  Breaking away from an unhealthy dysfunctional family to strive for rationality.







"Dark Sky Rising" (2019) by Henry Louis Gates Jr.  was written for young people, but is very useful to a better understanding of Reconstruction after the American Civil War.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/dark-sky-rising_18.html

"The Death of Truth" (2018) by Michiko Kakutani is one of many books on Donald Trump focusing on the importance of truth.  Good perspective.

"Farsighted" (2018) by Steven Johnson discusses the process of making complex decisions.  One example is the assassination of Osama bin Laden.  Also uses Charles Darwin with a couple of difficult decisions.  He thinks ahead to mankind's future decisions.

"The Attention Merchants" (2016 ) by Tim Wu is about the evolution of getting your attention mainly for the purposes of advertising.  From print to the inter-net.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/05/advertising-is-all-about-attention-have.html

"The 100 Year Marathon" (2015) by Michael Pillsbury is about Chinese intention to overcome humiliation.  They are portrayed as very duplicitous and determined.  One personal note was how the Chinese forced re-writing the script for "Gravity, " a movie I enjoyed.  The fictional explosion that precipitated the dilemma of the story was attributed to the Russians when in reality the Chinese are the only ones to have engineered an outer space explosion.  The rescue at the end was credited to the Chinese, when in fact only the Russians had the capability.  It seems Hollywood wanted the big audience in China.


"Becoming " (2019)  someone that caught my favorable attention during the initial presidential campaign.  Her life has been very interesting.  Supported by her family Michelle has overcome all sorts of barriers and has many worthy accomplishments on her own.  A very worthy First Lady and hopefully not finished her public service.

Dying of Whiteness (2019) by Jonathan M. Metzel  Heard about on a radio interview.  Hits at how the wealthy can subvert ordinary voters on social issues with racism a key factor.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/dying-of-whiteness.html

"House of Trump House of Putin" (2018) by Craig Unger provides interesting background about Trump's many links with Russian gangsters and Russian govt.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/house-of-trump-house-of-putin.htm

"Let Her Fly," (2018) by Ziauddin Yousafzai a book was promoted at the Hamilton Public Library with a visit from her father.  I ended up buying the book and consider it one of my most memorable experiences of the year.  Read more:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/let-her-fly.html


"The Future is Asian"  (2019) by Parag Khanna gives a worldview that is different, but possibly more accurate than what I am surrounded with.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/07/the-future-is-asia.html

"Don't Label Me" from Irshad Manji (2019) is an interesting book about identity. Irshad has overcome her fear of dogs.    http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/08/dont-label-me-is-for-everyone_11.html

Jared Diamond's, "Upheavel"  (2019) was one of the best of the year.  It was a case study set in six countries he has been connected to that illustrate changes and challenges in today;s world.    He uses a personal crisis with national crisis.  His insights are always worth considering.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/08/jared-diamond-examines-national-crises.html






"Supercooperators" (2011) by Martin A. Nowalk was a scientist demonstrating the role of co-operation plays with evolution.  the emphasis has usually been on the survival of the fittest meaning the most competitive individual or species.  We would not have achieved what we consider civilization if we did not develop the ability to co-operate.
http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/11/the-only-thing-that-will-redeem-mankind.html

"12 Rules for Life" (2018) by Jordan Peterson gave some guidance based on experience, psychology and philosophy.  As always there is good advice, some of which either reinforces some habits or even adopt.  For a history of my experiences with rules:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/12/an-antidote-to-chaos-series-of-rules.html

"Growing Pains" (2018) by Gwynne Dyer.  I am fortunate to read him in my local paper, but many of you may have easy access to him in one over hundred papers around the world. Gives the best insight into global politics as anyone.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/12/growing-pains-as-seen-by-gwynne-dyer.html

To see my best reads from 2018:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/12/my-favorite-books-of-2018.html

Jared Diamond examines national crises--worth reading

Personal crises offer a key to understanding national crises.  There are important similarities and critical differences.  I found "Upheavel" to be the most rewarding read so far this year.

Jared identifies six countries that he has spent time in and that offered an historical crisis that allowed for useful analysis. 

"Findlandization" has been something derogatory but the author feels that it has been taken out of context.  Although they made many concessions to the Russians, they were able to maintain a liberal democracy and industrialize themselves effectively. 

Chile suffered a bloody coup in 1979 with some support from the United States.   I remember a very interesting movie "No" that explained the advertising campaign.  The initial problem was that 17 groups all wanted access to limited tv airtime.  An advertising executive (played by Gael Garcia Bernal) was able to present a unified message that worked to avoid a constitutional amendment that would have extended Pinochet's dictatorship.  One victim of the coup made his way to a newspaper I worked for, the Oakville Journal Record.  In Chile Alan Lathrop had been a reporter who once interviewed Charles De Gaulle.  He became the advertising manager and a friend of my boss. 

Indonesia  was the newest nation in the study and as a group of widespread islands with many languages did not initially have a national feeling, but has developed one since.  Jared recounts an early dictatorship and some mass killings.  I am reminded of another movie  "The Look of Silence" (2014) was a multi national effort regarding the genocide in the 1960's. This film would not be possible without careful political manoeuvring, luck and courage.  Originally  the director Joshua Oppenheimer, set out to talk with victims of the genocide, but circumstances encouraged them to talk to perpetrators.  Surprisingly they boasted of their deeds in front of their own relatives.  Adi Rukan a brother of one of the victims actually confronted many of the perpetrators.  Horrifying tales of killing "Communists" mutilating and drinking of blood.  Told very matter of factly.  The protagonist was an optometrist and actually tested some of the perpetrators and provided glasses.  Many of the perpetrators and their families either justified what was done or avoided responsibility with some boasting on camera.

Australia was originally colonized by convicts, then British citizens were allowed in an effort to keep it for British only.  Next they allowed in northern Europeans.  World War II helped them to start realizing they could not depend on mother Britain to prosper.  When the United Kingdom joined Europe in the formation of the European Common Market they were forced to give up Commonwealth trade arrangements.  At this point they began to realize their future was going to be tied more to Asia and the United States.  The author had visited when restaurants were bland with a few exceptions, but years later after immigration opened up a wider variety of cuisine.  Immigration from Asia and trade has increased to raise the standard of living for all Australians.

Jared analyzes Japan in two parts.  The first was after western traders forced themselves on Japan and it was realized they were powerless to stop the cultural invasion.  They decided to strengthen themselves by learning more of modern western technology by visiting Europe and America and accepting visitors.  Eventually they acquired enough power to defeat European powers in the early twentieth century.

They then became arrogant and thought they could take on the American military.  This ended in an humiliating catastrophe.  They were industrious and within a few decades were the second strongest economy in the world.  They are at a crossroads now.  The government carries an enormous debt, although most of it is to their own citizens and corporations.  They still are resented by China and South Korea due mainly to war time atrocities.  Jared contrast the Japanese response to their wartime defeat with Germany.  Germany has been more open and accepting responsibility to their own citizens.  Furthermore Jared cites a sincere apology from Willy Brandt who fell on his knees in contrition at what Germany had done in the war.  Japan has not done anything comparable.

Another contrast between Germany and Japan deals with their attitudes towards immigration.  Germany has accepted immigrants over the years, partly to maintain a vibrant work force.  During the recent Syrian crisis they accepted more refugees than any other country.  They are sure to have problems, but on the whole it will be good for Germany both economically and culturally.  Japan has always tried to maintain their racial purity and even today are reluctant to open up the gates.  It has been pointed out to me that Japan has opted for more reliance on robots to replace retired workers--a key factor behind my investment in Honda  contrast with Germany

United States has benefited from many advantages.  It has an inland water network that allows for cheap transportation and two coasts (actually 3 like Canada) that had protected them from invasion.
Immigration has enriched them economically and culturally.  Democracy has worked well for them, although decisions are slower, they tend to make better ones over time.

The Americans are also at a crisis point and many factors that could undermine them.  Number one is a diminishing willingness to compromise.  Politically many developments have led to polarization.  The expense of campaigns have forced politicians to spend more time fund raising than discussing issues with opponents while modern air travel has meant that many of their families stay back home with less social interchange with other congressional families.  Polarization extends to the general population that can now watch tv channels that reinforce their views.  Residential pattern and even martial choices are heavily influence by political affiliations.

Another factor is low voter turnover.  United States unlike other countries requires voters to be registered and opened opportunities to suppress undesired voters.  A large turnout gives greater credibility to the government.
 
The American government has less investment in education and infrastructure than other industrialized countries where teachers have higher standards, but also more pay and prestige.   Immigration has been a key strength of U.S. and is needed more than ever to maintain population and economic growth.  Immigration is a positive for such things as childcare and scientific innovation.

America has become arrogant disdaining the idea that they could learn from other nations.   The author surprised me by stating that America could learn lots from Canada and then Europe and then the rest of the world.  Under Donald Trump America has been disengaging from multi lateral organizations that in truth need to be strengthened for current and future crises.

In short, "...fundamental problems are polarization, voter turnout and obstacles to voter registration, inequality and declining social mobility and declining government investment and public goods."
 
Crises for the whole world.  One that the author worries most about is the danger of a nuclear conflict.  Jared itemizes four ways it could happen and that even with the Cold War over the danger is greater than ever.  With Trump backing out of existing agreements the dangers have increased further since this book's 2019 publication.  

Climate change is real.  Jared points out that all energy sources have disadvantages, but that global powers need to start moving away from fossil fuels.  He does make a case for nuclear power by accepting risks.  The real force needed is conservation pointing to Europe's attitude towards gas guzzling vehicles.  Cars and gas are taxed to discourage wasted fuels.

Another global crisis is the inevitable depletion of natural resources.  Some are finite while others such as forestry and fish are renewable, but poorly managed.  Although overpopulation is a factor, a bigger factor is that the well off countries consume about 32 times as much resources as the poor nations.  To compound the situation third world people are increasingly aware of the inequities.  Westerners sometimes picture the poor as a big "problem" instead of admitting the rich are the ones who created the problem. 

Government is disparaged by many who think they are corrupt or incompetent and should not be able to dictate our lives.  Jared points out that governments have been in existence for over 5,000 and were formed for two purposes:  1). to monopolize force to maintain peace and 2) to redistribute wealth for greater aims which could be to enrich the rich or for the greater good o society.  We need to keep those purposes in mind on a global framework.

Jared took 6 years for this book, but realizes the case studies are selective and not random.  He would like to see his studies expanded as we all need to better understand how crises can be better handled.  The book contains lots of easy to understand analysis with interesting personal observations.

The Ordinary Virtues

Canada lost a superior statesman when it rejected Michael Ignatifieff. Conservative tactics to demean Ignatieff were despicable.  I am pleased to know his intellect is not being wasted

Michael was in a discussion with Joel Rosenthal regarding celebrating the centennial of the Church Peace Union, a group that had been founded by Andrew Carnegie.  From their discussion came the idea for the Carnegie Centennial Project which essentially is a global study of ethics in action.  This book is the culmination of that effort.

The world has changed drastically.  Diversity is showing up in more and more global cities.  Each group feels an affinity for its own kind, but are forced to work, study etc with others.  There is a lot of self segregation. 

This book is focused on human rights and the ongoing struggle to boost them.  There is a battle on one side of which are poor institutions and human vices.  Opposing that are ordinary virtues.

So what are "ordinary virtues'?  Ignatieff designates tolerance, forgiveness, trust and resilience.  May be ordinary, but necessary if we are to survive as a planet.  In many places different people live side by side, but the ideal would be to live together.

Corruption, a most serious problem--police corruption--many accept corruption if they feel they get something in return.  An earlier blog  explores a little more deeply:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2015/07/thieves-of-state.html

Michael and other members of the project travel to cities of interest around the world.  As they travel to different cities with their unique perspective Ignatieff ties their concerns to the ordinary virtues.

Jackson Heights in Queens, New York is one of the most diversified areas in the world- and close to the Carnegie Foundation.  side by side vs together  --policing is absolutely necessary for a moral economy of a global city--one concern is that NY police have infiltrated local mosques--on the other hand New York considers itself a sanctuary city along with Los Angeles and Portland that offers a municipal ID allowing all citizens to open bank accounts and make loans

Immigrants are often conned, but they need to learn to trust strangers.  The internet, tv and cell phones enable most newcomers to maintain ties with the old country.  Politicians court them but this often entails them becoming interwined with old world politics.

Los Angeles  was the scene of the Rodney King riot.  It uncovered tensions between whites and blacks,  but also Koreans felt discriminated against. They are slowly developing stronger ties between the races also including Mexicans and Central Americans.

Brazil was visited before the Olympics.  They spent time in the infamous favelas where poverty and corruption go hand in hand.  There were efforts to form consent based community police that were able to deal with drug dealers. Unfortunately Brazil seems enmeshed in corruption, but there are groups fighting the corruption.

Bosnia was part of the former Yugoslavia.  When the Iron Curtain broke down it opened a lot of hatreds.  Bosnians were mostly Muslim and surrounded by Serbians and Croatians.  neighbors turned on each other in ethnic conflict.  After peace declared and borders established there is a serious lack of trust.

Myanmar has been in the news regarding the Rohinga expulsion.  Igntieff spoke with some extremist Buddhists who wanted a pure country.  Aung Sun Suu Kyi, once admired around the world is now vilified for her lack of protest.  Ignatieff goes below the surface to point out that good ideas cannot be implemented with out institutional and individual support. She is inside a political situation that is unwilling to compromise.

Fundamentalists offer uncompromising answers to the existential question of national identify.  when democracy comes majority rule is integral and that often goes against the human rights of minority groups.

Fukushino had an unimaginable disaster, three catastrophic events compounding one another.--earthquake, nuclear plant meltdown and tsunami.  It tests people's trust  in institutions that failed to predict this possibility.  Ignatieff is encouraged by the resilience of the Japanese

South Africa-most blacks notice little change--blame white privilege and would like to see a redistribution of land--real problem is there are not enough jobs to go around.  Mandela knew Africa needed the whites to stay and help South Africa to grow and to gain their co-operation in a new South African constitution he needed to include their concerns.  The different black and Asian groups feel they have suffered enough.  In the news as I write this is a movement to redistribute land owned by whites to blacks.

There are many competing global perspectives, but Ignatieff feels we need to recognize those who want to dialogue.  We need to tolerate those who see things differently.  Judge people one at a time instead of as part of another group.

Ignatieff feels the ordinary virtues can thrive with support from institutions.  People have to be alert to the ever present danger of corruptions.  My feeling is he is advocating that a mutual support system is needed.  We, at all levels need to encourage the ordinary virtues which in turn will help maintain legitimate institutions that work for the benefit of everyone.  Ultimately for humans to survive we have to work together, not just side by side.

Jared Diamond wrote "The World Until Yesterday" that illustrates perspectives of primitive people that I believe demonstrate humans have always had similar problems.  You will find my take on it on the  bottom half of  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/06/jared-diamond-expanding-our.html

He is a man with a truly global view that needs to be shared.  An earlier blog about Michael Ignatieff:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/04/fire-and-ashes-by-michael-ignatieff.html 

TOLERANCE IS NEEDED FOR SURVIVAL

It seems every day there are examples of hate presented in the news.  Most recently we have the Orlando gay bar massacre.  Debates have picked up with emphasis on terrorism, gun control and also hate crimes. The real problem comes down to human nature and there are no easy ways of dealing with it.

It is human nature to identify with a group, starting with a small one (nuclear family) and then expanding.  We have not yet expanded to all humans in our group identity, but we have come a long way painfully.

Back in university when I was a little more idealistic I chose sociology as my major and was attracted to a course in Prejudice and Discrimination.  Professor Hadwen had a strong influence on my thinking, not only by the content of his presentations, but also the method.  The first time I encountered the idea of role playing where he would get students to act out a wide variety of views and then take reverse role as one way of understanding an opposing view.  One concept I learned was that prejudice starts with pride.  We take pride in belonging to our group which leads us to thinking those outside our group are inferior in some way and not totally trustworthy.

For a term project worth at least 50% of our mark he asked us to write about one of our own prejudices.  I thought I was prejudice free, but looking for something unique set on "older people."  At the time I had two Grandmothers who were very special to me as I had spent a big part of  my life living with them. Now, I can easily be described as an older person and have to examine my prejudice against younger people.  I could see a societal prejudice, but deep inside I could see I had it as well.  The research and study opened my eyes.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/12/two-grandmothers.html

In another of Dr Hadwen's classes a bureaucratic screwup had an effect on me.   I had written an essay I was very proud of and felt confident should get a good mark, but back home after exams my final grades were mailed and I saw a very bad mark.  I decided to switch majors, but next fall when I got the essay back the mark on it was very good.  Dr Hadwen apologized and gave me one of my favorite compliments, "You have a sociological mind."  Another semester I switched back.

But still found I was not as prejudice free as I liked to project.

My wife's best friend's parents owned a company that employed an openly gay person.  Even after many years of knowing this (and many other changes) I had never met him.  However my wife and her friend had developed a friendship that eventually resulted in an invitation to an open party and I was included.  I felt a bit uncomfortable, but agreed. I noticed that none of the other husbands in our group attended, but in the end I am glad I agreed.  First I was pleased that in most ways they were not that different.  I saw that gays could mix with non gays.  They came from a wide variety of backgrounds.  I wouldn't have known they were gay if I had met them in different circumstances.

Jared Diamond in his travels as an ornithologist spent a lot of time in Borneo working amongst a variety of what we would call primitive people.  At one point he acknowledged that their intelligence level is truly equal to ours, but he observed a few significant differences.  One was that they were distrustful of strangers and were very careful in their presence.  Jared contrasted this with how in big cities we walk by hundreds of strangers without very much concern.  Obviously this almost blind trust is one reason our civilization has advanced in so many ways.  He found that primitive people were superior at mediating differences with a preference to restoring relationships over property (or revenge).  Read more here;  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/06/jared-diamond-expanding-our.html

As a liberal minded person I looked down upon the simple minded conservatives.  "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt made me realize I still have prejudices.  He explained that evolution favored individuals who fit into groups.  Religion was important, not just for content, but also as a set of commonalities for all members.  The idea of fairness means different things:  to liberals it signifies an equal chance for everyone, but for conservatives it means rewards should go to those who do the most or best work.  He feels a balance is needed between liberals, conservatives and libertarians.  Read more:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/02/the-righteous-mind.html

At a Human Library encounter I met a well known author who reminded me of a previous racial prejudice.  Working with young children and their families as the main part of my newspaper circulation job I encountered a wide variety of ethnic backgrounds.  For the most part I looked at that aspect as a discovery of interesting details that had a positive impact on my life.   However I had a number of less positive experiences with one particular group of people and will admit that when encountering other members of that group I did pre-judge.  I was shocked later to learn a good friend from university was of that same group, as I had thought he came from a different background.  The author who had a similar background chastised me (gently).

Another prejudice I shared with others unconsciously was against what might be considered lazy people or pleasure seekers.  I saw work, or at least activity as the point of life.  I never actually read "In praise of Idleness" by Bertrand Russell but just the title and a few references deepened my appreciation that there is more to life than work and those who are able to enjoy life are closer to the ideal than those who indulge in activity that they don't necessarily enjoy.

How many of you have had a prejudice changed by getting to know another person?  How many of us can identify our prejudices?

Individuals around the globe are gradually becoming aware that we live among billions, of people most of whom speak different languages, have different beliefs and customs.  But we also have much in common:  fear, greed, love, hate.  Our deepest concerns are very similar:  getting a job, getting a mate, surviving, protecting our children.  The inter-net has opened up new pathways of understanding (as well as misunderstanding)

The earth is like one big island and we are gradually becoming aware of our inter connectedness.  Working as a global team we can solve problems that are exacerbated with our individual selfish efforts.

History is full of examples of minorities, despite discrimination making significant contributions that made life better for the rest of us.  Minorities are really just a sub group, an additional identity of the one big family we all belong to.

Just another example.  Saudi Arabia recently executed 47 "terrorists" and amongst them was a Shi'ite cleric who advocated peaceful protest.  My perception is that Saudi Arabia is one of the least tolerant nations in the world.   Perhaps my judgment based on decisions of an elite group has prejudiced me against all Saudi Arabians.

Democracy works as rule by the majority and if done fairly it is expected that those who did not vote that way would at least accept and respect the view of the majority.  We are actually often advanced by the views of the minority who saw or understood something the rest of us didn't.  So along with majority rule, democracy requires minority rights.

The law can really only stay a little ahead of customs.  You can make women, blacks, Muslims, homosexuals and transgenders equal in law, but it is much more difficult to find total acceptance.

Cultural exchanges are a great idea, but they are expensive for the large masses of population.  Education also seems expensive to some, but in reality is a great investment.  Content is very important, but subject to debate.  We should encourage more input from more groups.  Integrated classrooms have proved to make a difference.  Recently I read a comment regarding the television series "Roots" which in an" entertaining" way made whites better understand what blacks had to endure.

We need to be aware of our commonalities.  We share a planet that is facing a variety of crises.  We have not yet escaped the possibility of nuclear annihilation.  Pollution is poisoning life everywhere.   Automation could be an opportunity for everyone or an instrument for extreme inequality.  Climate change is happening despite obstructionist denials and will determine our survival.

If we could all agree that would be nice, but way too big a step and perhaps a bit boring.  Can we learn to tolerate the differences we have or do we prefer to fight over them?

TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CHARLIE HEBOU HORROR

Are we really free to express ourselves?

After the Charlie Hebou terrorism the talk has mostly been about religious fanatics and racial overtones are evident as well.  Fear has reared its ugly head again.  I think back to another posting about "Talking to the Enemy," by author Scott Atran, a Franco-American scholar.  You can read my thoughts on it at http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/11/talking-to-enemy-how-else-can-you.html

We are all fearful of "the other."  It might be a race or religion we do not understand.  The key thing is we do not understand them and our ignorance magnifies differences and minimizes similarities.  Scott has gone behind the stereotypes to question what drives terrorists and it is not what he originally thought.

Humans have evolved, a dirty word in some circles, but critical to understanding human behaviour) as groups.  An individual could not have survived the dangers inherent in our beginnings, but learned that teaming together helped us overcome many difficulties.  One of the difficulties proved to be other groups (perhaps separated by language, geography, race, culture).  Other groups would inevitably try to encroach on their territory and they would fight back.  The better organized groups prevailed.  Critically the strength of their group increased by their group identification.  Religion proved to be a key element in that identity.

Scott, an atheist would argue that religions have a lot of elements that might be considered" absurd" by outsiders.  But agreement on what absurdities are special or sacred to the group unites the group.  As a "Christian" nation some of us can identify with people in far lands of different races and even different customs as part of the same important group.  We should not be surprised that other religions such as Islam carry a wide identification including many nations and races.  When any of our religious affiliations feels threatened it can result in intolerant, even irrational behavior.

Scott also learned that many terrorists knew each other playing sports or going to the same schools.  These group activities reinforced other group identities, but he found usually these social activities were instrumental in their identity.  Twisted logic can provide an opportunity to demonstrate group loyalty.

In another post I noted Jared Diamond's observations dealing with "primitive" cultures in New Guinea where strangers were scary and coping mechanisms had to be developed;
(http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/06/jared-diamond-expanding-our.html Just as we needed to learn to tolerate strangers in small settings we need to better learn how to tolerate a much wider range of strangers for the world to survive with its new set of dangers.

We need to respect other people's beliefs (not necessarily agree with them).  We need to tolerate their ignorance and disrespect of our beliefs.  Provocative behaviour needs to be carefully guarded against.  Understanding needs to be a higher priority.  Yes, Charlie Hebou was provocative and no doubt profited by it, but they also made people think, not necessarily agree.  There are other avenues to address being offended than killing such as boycotts, education, self-examination and even ignoring.  Other Charlie Hebou targets included other religions and many politicians and celebrities.

Free speech suffered a terrible setback and many people all around the globe will be fearful of expressing anything considered controversial.  Muslims will pay a big price for the actions of a few--prejudice, hostility and possibly legislative decisions around the globe.  Ironically European legislatures have been voting on Palestinian efforts to gain more recognition.

When you better understand another person you are less likely to disrespect them.  Many things need to be questioned and sometimes the questions can be offensive to others.  At Charlie Hebou they performed a necessary function in the world by questioning things that are considered too "touchy."

None of us deserve to die for our beliefs or expressions that stop short of killing others.  They say words can kill, but really they only provoke.  For mankind to survive such things as climate change, possible nuclear war, resistant diseases, tribal warfare and other known and unknown potential forces we will need to overcome our prejudices and work with others.  Respect at least enough not to kill others or discriminate unfairly against "the others."  I recognize that we need each other and believe we can each contribute to the betterment of mankind.

Not sure if tolerance is needed for understanding or understanding is needed for tolerance.  If you start with the thought that other human beings have something in common with you, you may find that the differences are more interesting than threatening.  In my 60 plus years  it amazes me how my peers looked down on foreign food, but now many of them now seek it out.  Same goes for all sorts of things and as we soak up more knowledge our lives are enriched.

Each of us as individuals have responsibility to accept other cultures, but those with real power also have responsibility to protect the long term interests of everyone.  The more people standing up for reason and understanding, the more momentum will be developed. I am reminded of still another post regarding Globe and Mail reporter Doug Saunders working from Britain became concerned about the myths about his new Muslim neighbours http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/09/the-myth-of-muslim-tide-book-review.html  Really just demonstrates that misinformation is very influential.

When efforts were made to listen for messages from outside earth it was feared the reason we were not able to detect any was that civilizations that could reach the technical ability to send messages were also apt to self-destruct.  In simple forms it often seems that we reached our level of technical expertise in selfish competition and continue to compete when we need to co-operate.  There are many selfish groups (as well as individuals each wanting to take more than they give.

The big question is what can we do as individuals and as society to prevent future occurrences like the one at Charlie Hebou and still enjoy the freedom that prevailed beforehand.  The idea of tolerance and understanding might seem glib or naive to many, but there don't seem to be very many workable alternatives.  Are we up to it?

Jared Diamond, Expanding our understanding

Anyone who successfully writes about science to the non scientific public is subject to criticism, some no doubt valid.  However the average person without a scientific perspective, needs to understand that most of what we think we know is really superficial.  Jared Diamond cuts through a few layers of standard thinking without claiming to provide all the answers.  I have read four of Jared Diamond's books and to a significant degree they all have deepened my understanding of the world.

Carl Sagan suffered a lot of criticism for his popularizing efforts, but also was able to penetrate the public's disregard for science.  For some he opened the door to a more detailed study of science and how science impacts public issues.  There is room for detailed studies, but honestly they don't have the impact with the public if they cannot be explained.  It is a similar skill to putting an 800 page book into a two hour movie--something gets left out and something is subject to distortion.  More on Carl at: http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/10/carl-sagan-and-our-future.html

What surprises me is that is that at bottom Jared is an ornithologist.  That preoccupation prompted him to visit New Guinea where there are many interesting birds to study.  New Guinea is unique in other ways.  It has the densest concentration of languages found anywhere in the world.  It has many variations in environment.

Over a period of 50 years Jared has come to learn many unexpected things, appreciate different viewpoints and to analyze what this means to him personally and the world he comes from.

The one that had the most impact for me was "Guns, Germs and Steel."  I had seen a portion of the documentary on television.  The basic premise was to explain why "civilization" developed the way it did.  Modern people seem to feel that it was all decided by superior races of man.  It has always bothered me that in our egocentric world we all think whatever we are is the centre of the universe and everything else is a poor imitation at best.

Jared with a lot of research countered that there were geographical bands of edible food and domesticable animals that made it easier for these advantages to spread.  Germs played a role in that because civilization started when food could be produced and stored more efficiently it allowed cramped conditions which fostered diseases.  Urban dwellers developed immunities after a few generations, but spread these diseases when they explored other parts of the world.  Smallpox and measles killed off a large portion of resisting natives of other areas.

Steel developed along logical lines, but allowed those who mastered it to have harder, sharper weapons and more effective armour.

The bottom line was that civilization had much more to do with geographical circumstances than the superiority of any one race.

I blogged earlier about "Why Nations Fail" written by Darren Acemoglu and James A Robinson that explicitly  criticized Jared for his geographic theory about where civilizations formed.   In this new book the authors delved more deeply into social and political factors that played an important role in the ups and downs of civilization.  However I don't feel they contradicted the role of geographical factors, but uncovered other factors that were often critical.  You can read my blog at  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/11/why-nations-fail.html

"The Third Chimpanzee" was actually written a few years before and was an earlier version of many of the same themes.  Humans and chimpanzees have a closer genetic match than chimpanzees do with gorillas.

"Collapse" was written to help explain why different societies collapsed.    He pointed out ecological factors..  The one phenomenon that was most common was the loss of cheap energy, often the result of ignorance or short sighted thinking.  The most unifying example seemed to be wood from trees.  Wood was not only critical for building, but also when burning an important source of energy.

"The World Until Yesterday"  The contrast between New Guinea and America prompted him to make many observations that he extended to include other traditional societies and modern Westernized nations.  In many ways it would seem desirable to advance from simple traditional band of humans to our modern complex states, but Jared would argue that perhaps we could still learn from our "simpler" fellow humans.

By no means does he suggests that everything is superior in simpler societies.  One perspective that uncovers some basic problems is how we deal with strangers.  Primitive societies, for good reasons are fearful of strangers, but bigger more sophisticated societies must overcome this or we might be at each other's throats more commonly.  On the other hand Jared found that some primitive societies are very good at mediating.

Primitive societies have personal conflicts but their focus is different in many cases.  Their focus is on restoring relationships rather than just restoring property.  A key difference between primitive and modern societies is in entertainment.  Primitive people rely a lot more on talking to one another than on the many modern forms of entertainment.

While in Borneo, Jared learned many different dialects as did those he dealt with.  He noticed  this seemed to boost mental capacities and encouraged his children in this regard.

For some of my fellow readers Jared may seem superficial and they can move on to more scientific explanations.  A few of my readers might already come from that direction and I cannot quarrel with their observations, but I think for the majority of my readers people like Jared Diamond and the late Carl Sagan help us to realize that there is more to the world than previous mainstream assumptions. To help relieve the world of its ignorance we need more popular explainers of deep science concerns.  True scientific understanding is elusive, but the pursuit should be respected and encouraged.

Why The West Rules--For Now

Ian Morris, the author goes beyond the titillating title and makes numerous interesting points about our human cultural history. Readers are attracted to the idea in the title because of their own cultural bias and prejudices. We may be part of the dominant culture, or maybe we are about to become the dominant culture or maybe we should be concerned about who dominates or the dynamics.

One of his favorite methods is to use fictional analogies and he starts off with a story that caught me off guard. I thought I had missed some bits of history, but before too long I realized this was not only fiction, but really science fiction. The best science fiction is basically twisting a fact and see how it affects how people relate to one another. In this case the author speculates on how society would have evolved if just a few details were changed. He suggested that instead of the Chinese kow towing to the superior British, it could easily have been reversed if culture had evolved a little differently.

History doesn't begin with the written word, but goes back much further. For instance Neanderthals play a role in the Eastern Western dichotomy, but not in Africa.

The author devises a system for comparing cultures. He identifies four criteria: energy capture, urbanism, information processing and capacity to make war. The data is a little difficult to pin down, but he uses reasonable comparative information. I agree his system is very arbitrary, but useful to explain progress in any culture system.

For most of history both sides (East and West with some acknowledgement of Africa and America) evolve very similarly and very slowly by recent memory. Each side has some advantages, but at various points circumstances combined to give one side a chance to move ahead.  Edible plants, soil, tamable animals, river systems and other factors play key roles in developing a culture. Europe being closer to North America than Asia, by itself encouraged outward exploration. With the start of the Industrial Revolution western civilization surged ahead.

Ian feels that the three main motors of history are fear, sloth and greed. One contention is that developments are not just due to some individual genius that one side or the other has more of, but happen when the time is right.  For instance when the telephone was invented there were others on the verge and there was a contest to determine the winner.  Yes, individuals found themselves in position of making monumental decisions, however the author might say they were set up to be in those positions, but admits they could have decided differently, or have been replaced.

He has built upon other authors. Jared Diamond is one that I admired for his analysis that cultural development has a strong geographical component. Martin Jacques is another who is considered an expert on Chinese development.

For the future Mr Morris sees two likelihoods. One possibility is what he terms "singularity" which is sort of a blending of cultures with world political unity. East and West have been borrowing from each other for a millennium with important contributions from America and Africa for centuries. The other possibility he calls "nightfall" which is disaster which is what has fallen to individual civilizations from the beginning, but now could involve all mankind. The world is globalized and our concerns cross all borders demanding co-ordination. He quotes Albert Einstein, "If the idea of world government is not realistic, then there is only one realistic view of our future: wholesale destruction of man by man." Necessity has been the mother invention in the past and hopefully will be for the future.

I almost forgot, Ian Morris sees that the East should overcome the West in this century, but that is not as important as the race between singularity and nightfall.