American Resistance: the Deep State should be commended

 Trump was opinionated and used to getting his way or hurting those who objected.  In his campaign he made a lot of provocative statements that appealed to different voter segments that helped to elect him.  Russia may have thought they could control him or that America in chaos would benefit them, but they also used resources to help get him elected.

Perhaps because he was surprised to get elected he and his team were unprepared.  That enabled a resistance to slow him down, but unfortunately far from learning how to better serve America he has learned how better to serve his by now obsessed and somewhat demented self.  "American Resistance" was published in 2022 and depicts what Trump has revealed himself to be and how some government employees did what they could to alleviate the stubborn ineptitude.  The author predicted Trump's second term strategy.

Immigration was clearly a key motivating factor for voters.  Trump had suggested that Mexico was sending rapists and murderers.  At various times he instituted travel bans for a variety of countries most often black or brown revealing his motives were driven by bigotry more than security.  Rex Tillerson was declared State Secretary and after a while Tillerson describing Trump  "as a f-----g moron" and resigned.

Many dedicated government employees felt a dilemma:  they could stay on and try to mitigate the damage or they could make a statement and resign.  Some very good people did resign.  Others took advantage of the opportunity.  

Kirstjen Nielsen was chief of staff for the Department of Home Security developed strategies for dealing with the Trump team.  One was to offer alternatives in an effort to find out what he really wanted and explain options within legal rules.  Another was to explain consequences to a wider range of those affected.  She had a list of contacts to deal with specific issues.  She wasn't always successful, but in general did mitigate the overall disasters in her realm.

Trump was sensitive to the notion that Russia helped him, although he publicly asked for it.  The only adjustment made to the Republican platform was to hold back funds for Ukraine.  Before he made his infamous "perfect call" to Volodymyr Zelenskyy he had blocked more funds for Ukraine, but didn't mention that so he could tie it to a threat.  It became obvious that Trump thought he could get Zelenskyy to get damaging information on rival Joe Biden.  Some staff realized this was an impeachable act and before too long it was used for an impeachment proceeding.  He was forced to release the funds on this occasion.  Trump took revenge by forcing out an ambassador and a general who disappointed him.   

H.R. McMaster, a general replaced Mike Flynn as national security advisor, adopted the strategy of restricting who had access to Trump as he learned Trump was too easily distracted.  Knowing what he did, McMaster was quoted as saying "it was incontrovertible that Russia interfered in 2016" and shortly afterward he resigned before he could have been fired.  

Many earlier blog posts could have been selected, but perhaps these two explain Russian interference.:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/house-of-trump-house-of-putin.html  and http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/freezing-order.html

When the Covic Pandemic first got attention, Trump saw it as annoying.  His team had already discarded  the pandemic plan set up by Obama.  Dr. Anthony Fauci found himself very restricted, forbidden at one point talking directly to networks.  He would give a podcast to Harvard and let CNN pick it up.  He found Trump not paying as much attention to rational advice as to uninformed people.  Trump advocated using bleach to cure Covid without out much resistance, until Fauci challenged it.  There was more co-operation with the military who were concerned with personnel safety and used masks and distancing.

George Floyd's death at the hands of police created another crisis.   It had been witnessed and videotaped and quickly went viral.  For years Trump had berated Black Lives Matter as being disruptive.  He tried to get the military involved in putting down protests, but encountered a lot of resistance to that.

As the election approach there was concern over security, but they found Trump upset over any discussion related to what he called the "Russian Hoax."  It has been pointed out that the Russians did indeed try to influence the results.

After the election he refused to accept the results.  Some staff tried to restrain him, but were only partially successful.  The January 6th insurrection was witnessed by millions around the world.  Mike Pence has been credited with stopping Trump's desire to nullify the election and throw back the decision to the states, however he had to be coaxed and wavered at some of the early steps.  The police took the brunt of the attack suffering deaths and injuries to 150 officers.  Many staff tried to talk sense into Trump and finally he called off the rioters.

Afterwards Trump fired "unreliable" staff and replaced them with some he felt more loyal.

Rothkopf was concerned Trump was readying to make another run.  On one of his campaign speeches he threatened to legislate for the president to be able to fire anybody and "bring the deep state... to heel."  We know the Trump team has planned to do a more thorough job to make America fit their image. 

One view might be that Trump's first term was a rehearsal.  In the future we have to be concerned how Trump will react to humiliation.  On another hand there are plenty of right wingers ready to pick up where Trump has left off.  Will voters "wake" up?

Mr. Nobody Against Putin

 "Mr. Nobody Against Putin" (2025) won the Oscar for best documentary feature.  Admittedly it was done without permission of most of the subjects or of government authorities.  Although much was done openly, it was essentially an undercover procedure as it revealed truth against power.

Pavel  Talankin among other things was a school videographer in the city of Karabash, Russia (noted for its pollution) and for awhile it provides a cover for his anti war views, but he learns he has to be cautious, most of the staff knows his anti-war attitude.  Part of his job was teaching students video production skills including editing.

Putin is quoted a few times saying "War is not won by commanders.  War is won by teachers."  After Russia invaded Ukraine there is a marked increase in propaganda  coming from education authorities and passed down through the teachers.  Marching drills become part of the curriculum.  Marksmanship is practiced and at one point it is noted that grades declined and the teachers realized nothing could be done about the military training.

One example of the propaganda was Putin pointing out that Kyiv was one of the key counter forces against the Nazis when they attacked Russia.  Some members of the Wagner group attended the to lecture students.

Students and staff have brothers, fathers, husbands and sons involved.  We learn the desperation of at least one relative who wanted to get out of the military and subsequently died.  The deaths are noted by relatives, but kept quiet from the general public.  Pavel was not allowed to videotape a funeral, but provided us with some audio coverage.  

The fact that you are able to view this film indicates Pavel is no longer in Russia.  

This information was difficult to be revealed and to be organized to a credible production.  Here are some of the key people.

Without Pavel Tarankin, there would be no film.  He grew up and worked in Karabash, Russia.  After his escape he worked with Danish and Czech experts to put it together.  He served as co-director and cinematographer.  When he had to show the Oscar trophy to airport authorities he was told it could be a weapon.  When he reached his German transit point, the Oscar had disappeared.  Fortunately it has been recovered.

David Borenstein was the producer, director and writer.  When Pavel reached out regarding his efforts he made contact with David who encouraged him to stay a little longer.  David had been a graduate from the University of Florida with degrees in Chinese and political science.  He then spent 10 years in China working on a film project.  He had started in radio broadcasting.  He has 6 producing credits, 6 for directing and 4 for writing including episodes for Nova.  During his Oscar acceptance speech he made some anti Trump remarks.

The music was shared.  Jonas Struck has been guitarist and songwriter with the Danish rock band, Swan Lee.  He has 41 composing credits, 15 for the music department and 12 for soundtrack.  Michal Rataj was a Czech composer and sound designer with 26 composing credits and 2 for the music department.

Editing was also shared.   Rebekka Lonqvist has 29 editor credits, 6 for the camera and electrical department and 4 for the editorial department.  Nicolaj Monberg has 48 editor credits, 17 for the editorial department and 2 for directing including "Borgen". See   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/07/borgen.html

I watched it on a DVD, but believe there must be other ways you can check this one out.  My version was subtitled. You may get a more accurate view of Russian leadership regarding the illegal invasion of Ukraine.

Diversion by a dictator

 Trump is acting like a dictator.  We hear a few Republican congressmen dislike some of his policies, but somehow they let him do what he wants.  His chosen advisers are selected for their loyalty and are quite adamant what a great person he is--proof of their loyalty.

Some voters like much of what he has done.  They fear immigrants and are stirred by talks of eating dogs, murdering innocent people, etc. etc. although the facts are, immigrants actually have less violent crime and are hard working tax payers.  The MAGA supporters generally hate racial minorities and homosexuals.  They think taxes are always too high although they don't seem to notice that inequality is widening and the national debt is a contributor to inflation.

Some of them are willing to overlook his sexual escapades and his gender bias.  But he realizes that part of his base is Christian evangelists who normally frown upon sex outside marriage.  Many others also are disgusted with what has been suggested by the Epstein Files.  Trump has already announced that he has been completely exonerated.

That is hard to digest.  Pam Bondi years ago gave Jeffrey Epstein preferential legal treatment and seems to be delaying more information.  Melania Trump apparently was introduced to Trump by Epstein and it seems she had some sort of relationship before hooking up with Trump.  Admittedly there is a lot of gossip, but it appears truth has been blocked.

Some of his policies have upset even some of his MAGA supporters.  ICE has been more intrusive and brutal than anticipated.  His tariffs have aggravated inflation.  What to do?  He cannot admit mistakes, but blames others and exaggerates his merits.  Diversion usually works.

We all detest drug abuse and the gangsters that profit from it.  To prove how determined he is to stop it, he bombs boats that without proof supposedly are drug running.  Then he attacks Venezuela and removes its leader, admittedly a criminal himself.  Not sure how that will work out, but it seems the U.S. has greater control over oil.  They have used that control to strangle Cuba.  As an aside the Cuban Revolution got popular approval by ridding the country of gangsters and exploiters.  

Drugs like everything have a supply and demand dynamic.  There is a lot of complexity over drug abuse, but surely more effort should happen to ease the need for an illegal supply.

Still the Epstein Files are gaining attention and mid-terms are not that far away.  To stay out of prison he needs to be president with legislators he can control.  Lots of efforts to gerrymander and talk of restricting voting to diminish Democrats.  

Iran is something popular to criticize.  A theocracy with fundamentalist views and corruption has been noted.  Their hatred of Israel is frightening.  They strongly support the Palestinian cause which until recently was opposed by Americans and most westerners.  United States does not have clean hands regarding Iran  see http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2025/09/king-of-kings-iranian-revolution.html Trump does not have clean hands either.  One of his acts once elected was to tear up the Iran nuclear agreement.  He criticized that Obama gave them a large amount of money, not crediting that it was money that had been confiscated plus interest.  Who knows how they might have softened Iranian attitudes if working with them?  He realized Israel feared and hated Iran and Evangelicals sided with Jewish occupation of the Holy Land.  

Yes, Iran is a terrible place where many are abused and free speech is almost criminal in some cases.  But there are other terrible places.  Trump seems to admire Putin and certainly supports his efforts regarding Ukraine.  Does he think the attacks are justified, no big deal or does Putin have some kind of hold on him.  Hopefully Ukraine would get a better deal from a different president.

News coverage has changed.  When Russia attacked Ukraine there was a lot of front page articles and many minutes on tv and radio.  When Hamas attacked Israel the coverage shifted.  Since then some Americans have realized Palestinians have long been poorly treated.  Netanyahu facing serious legal prospects stepped up reprisals hanging on to when Trump might be elected.  They are both in a similar situation and it is easy to speculate that Netanyahu encouraged an invasion of Iran and of course the terrorists supported by Iran.  

Hate can always be exploited.  Trump certainly needs to find excuses to divert attention.  It is too bad that saner minds have so little influence.  For all of us.

I hope that Iran is restored to democracy and becomes a positive influence for the world.  Might happen, but a long war might be beneficial for Trump's status quo.

It feels good to rant, but I hope more can be done to improve our situation.

A blog from Trump's first term regarding Iran:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/05/alarm-bells-on-iran.html

Autocracy, Inc.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall, in 1989 we in the west felt relieved and somewhat victorious.  We had broken the evil Communist Empire.  We felt liberal democracy was pre-ordained and it was just a matter of time before the rest of the world adopted our way.

Communism was an ideology that some believed in, but a few powerful people used it as a tool for their benefit.  According to author Anne Applebaum, the ideology we should be concerned about is autocracy.  In one sense it is not an ideology, but really just concentrating power for its own sake.  Loyalty to the leader is more important than ideology.

Westerners including Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Angela Merkel honestly felt one way of bringing Russia and China to our way of freedom was through trade.  In reality we have enriched their economies and allowed them a bigger platform.  

Several nations are united in a distaste and fear of America with its western allies as a threat to their power.  Such diverse countries as Russia, Iran, China, Venezuela, North Korea and Cuba support one another.  India is one example of a democratic country that is dependent on Russian energy.

Vladimir Putin as mayor of St. Petersburg had control of export licenses and skimmed off the fees for himself.  A Russian company with Putin listed as an advisor was listed on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange that German Intelligence determined was laundering Russian money.  Before too long Putin became president, changing the rules so he could have more control.  Some westerners were ready to launder the ill gotten gains of the autocrats that was a key to their enriching themselves and maintaining power.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/freezing-order.html

Putin felt Ukraine should be restored to the Russian Empire.  Ukraine put up more resistance than expected.  At about that time I was tutoring a Ukrainian and we noted the newspaper coverage of the battles.  However when Hamas attacked Israel, the newspaper coverage immediately priortised the Mideast.  Iran was a financial supporter of Hamas and the Houthis. 

Autocrats use several tools to maintain their power.

The concept of sovereignty plays a critical role in their projection.  Many international groupings expressed the need for respecting human rights  Autocrats played that idea down and substituted the idea  each country was sovereign and no other country should interfere with its internal affairs.  Meaning that sovereign countries decide what is acceptable within their boundaries.

Controlling media is vital.  In their own country as much as possible  they take over media with perhaps two examples being Iran and China.  With modern technology autocrats have found ways to infiltrate their "enemies" who are more concerned about human rights.  Disinformation is spread through networks with their identity hidden.  The Russians do have presidential preferences, but are just as concerned about causing division to weaken democracies. They successfully delayed aid to Ukraine with outright lies.

Legalities are used to track activities of citizens.  Also to hide illegal money, many western countries do not require the name of the actual owner for many transactions. 

Autocrats finance terrorism (and divisive groups) to undermine their "enemies".   Russia supported Assad in Syria and went to the trouble of lying about the White Helmets. 

Assassinations are used not only to get rid of a particular person, but to intimidate others.  At the same time they do not want to draw too much attention that might turn off prospective allies or alert their enemies.  Two big examples were Khashoggi and Navalny.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2023/01/navalny-hero-for-our-times.html

How can we fight back? 

Autocracies do have different ideologies, but they seem to recognize a comradeship and support one another.  One illustrative example is Iran and Russia whose ideologies are opposed, but they share a hatred or fear of democracies.  Anne thinks the democracies need to think in terms of a war against autocracy and its predecessor, kleptocracy.  Isolationism is a fatal luxury.

Need to make transfers of money transparent.  Without making money laundering illegal, there would be consequences if both parties were public.  Some businesses and politicians like to claim they have nothing to do with autocrats while they enrich and empower themselves.

Disinformation needs to be countered.  The American Global Engagement Center set up in 2023 to try to pre bunk disinformation (as opposed to de bunking afterwards).  AI is going to be an integral part of our future and is likely to be abused by autocrats (and other greedy entities).  International standards of transparency should be established that would showcase abuse. 

Jake Sullivan warned of the danger of becoming overly dependent on China.  The Chinese government subsidizes businesses to seek inroads into other nations.  They put in an effort to develop (or steal) technology.  They are looking at Russia invading Ukraine and see that fits their idea of taking over Taiwan.

Anne Applebaum feels that the free world "understand that one nation's freedom can often depend on the strength of freedom in others."

Climate change is a global crisis that few in real power accept.  That could change by force of circumstances, but it is too risky to wait.  There are big obstacles in the way, but a concerted effort has to be made to make this a global effort.  Ironically the country doing the most is autocratic China who expects to gain economic power from their efforts.  One of their edges has been access to key minerals, but in fact there are other sources that need to be developed.  This is a topic in itself, but ridicule should be turned upside down so that deniers are made to feel it.

The book was published in 2024 so although Trump was vocal he didn't really get into power until 2025, but I would say Anne Applebaum would agree Trump is displaying a determination to be an autocrat.  Her book has many more details to help readers understand the problem that faces us.

Jane Goodall and her famous last words

Jane Goodall is one of those people we wish there were more of in the world.  Most of us live in urban environments with our pet dogs and cats, but mostly separated from nature.   We forget we are part of nature.

The concept of "Famous Last Words" is to interview notable people to not be aired until after their death.  Originated in Denmark.  Very personal.  This is really the first episode to be aired.

 

In the interview she is very conscious that when her audience sees the film she is already dead.  Most of it is her story and opinions.  To some the idea might seem morbid, but Jane seemed appreciative of the opportunity.

The interviewer, Brad Falchuk, also the producer had learned she liked a shot of whiskey to warm up and so they both enjoyed some whiskey together.  He was very good at putting her at ease to express herself freely.  The cameras were mobile and most important not visible.

As a youngster she had a strong curiosity about animals including worms.  Most mothers would be upset with their daughter handling worms, but Jane was encouraged to express her fondness for animals.

She was one of three women chosen by Louis Leakey to study primates in their natural surroundings.   Although she did not have a Bachelor's degree she was admitted for a Ph.D at Cambridge.

When she first arrived in Africa she was soon alone and not sure where the chimpanzees were to be found.  She was not bored, but found other creatures to observe.  One such study was of dung beetles who perform a task that helps balance nature.  She did meet up with some chimpanzees and had to earn their trust.  As she got more comfortable she was able to observe their similarities to humans.  Chimpanzees were able to make tools, go on organized war parties against other chimps, could pass on information to future generations and were emotionally complex. 

Her first husband, Hugo von Lawick  was a photographer assigned to take still shots and film of her with the chimps.  They became attached and married and had one son Hugo.  She related in her last words interview that her son took the divorce very hard.  After an education in England Hugo preferred to build boats in Tanzania.

Her second husband was Derek Bryceson who had been a director of a natural foundation.  They were married until he died of cancer five years later leaving her a widow for the rest of her life.

Opinions might have been carefully expressed in public, but here she strongly lets us know she does not like Donald Trump.  One can only hope that more people will respect her views than that of Donald Trump.  Elon Musk and Putin were also singled out as vile people.

Some phrases she used were "Your life matters", "Don't lose hope" (she felt the world was in terrible shape) and we are all "part of nature."  When asked how she saw her purpose she replied "

This photo has a personal connection for me.  I met Bruce Lawes at a horse show where he was exhibiting a visually dynamic realistic painting of a horse.  I have followed him partly through his former agent, Glenda Fordham a Facebook friend.  I had seen this photo earlier and can imagine he took the pains to get the painting as realistic and memorable as possible.

She died in her sleep in Los Angeles on October 1, 2025 and the film was released only a few days later.  The film can be seen in full on Netflix.  Her last words can be found here on Youtube:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfLKHY52ERc

The film was based on a Danish series "Det Sidse Ord" in 2020.  

The Cowboy and the Queen

"The Cowboy and the Queen" (2023) showed up at the Hamilton Public Library in DVD format bringing back a lot of memories.  Most of my life has been in cities (with one big important exception) and I really had no connection with horses.  A combination of working with newspapers and working with a cleaning product I got a chance to sell ads for a horse publication, "The Rider."

I was given an opportunity to watch a Monty Roberts demonstration near Newmarket.  I was barely conscious that most horse owners used traditional methods of "breaking" horses that did seem rough.  In my efforts to sell ads I realized that most of my horse prospects did in fact rely on traditional methods.

In "The Cowboy and the Queen" we get brief histories of both Monty Roberts and the Queen.  She lived a privileged and public life but when World War II came she was involved in the war effort.  One of the joys in her life was horses which she loved riding and later got involved with race horses.  Monty grew up with a father who was a traditional horse trainer and was also abusive. At about age 9 he substituted for Elizabeth Taylor for some horse jumping scenes in "National Velvet" (1944).  

He had been very successful at rodeo and other riding contests.  It was thought he could be groomed for movies, but he hated the idea.  He learned that horses were too often killed to create an exciting effect in a movie battle scene. 

While young he got a chance to observe wild Mustangs and it modified his thinking as he felt he understood they had their own language.  Over time he developed his own unique method of gentling horses.  Despite success he attracted strong criticism.  His father maintained that a horse has to know who is boss.  Then out of the blue he was contacted by the Queen of England.  She had read some articles about him and felt that he was likely right.  He got invited to England to demonstrate his methods.  He actually got a tough test with two big, unruly horses, but he was able to get a saddle on these horses in 22 minutes and 19 minutes.  

She was able to get him involved in a documentary.  In this case he was challenged by wild Mustangs in the wild.  This took three days to master a join-up and interestingly enough the chosen horse lived over 30 years which is well beyond normal.  He wrote a book about his experiences, "The Man Who Listens to Horses" (1996).  Talking with the Queen, Monty declared he thought his methods could be adapted for humans.  He was already helping victims of PTSD.

Near the beginning of the film Monty was shown criticizing how humans abused one another focusing on Vladimir Putin.  He found horses more amenable.

They carried on a relationship that involved Monty visiting at least once most years.  She named one of her corgi dogs, Monty that turned out to more unruly than the others.  Monty attended the Queen's funeral in 2022.

He is shown feeding some wild deer who lived near him.  Monty commented that they were more "flighty" than wild horses and you had to earn their trust which he obviously enjoyed doing.

This documentary captures how he changed training horses and how the Queen helped his efforts.  Here are some of the contributors to the film.

Andrea Blaugrund Nevins, was the director, writer and producer.  She had graduated from Harvard and went on to become a sports reporter.  She has 8 credits as a producer, 7 as a director and 5 for writing.  This was her last film before dying at age 63 in April 2025.

Graham Clark was a writer, editor and producer.  He has 4 credits for the additional crew, 3 for editor and 2 for the editorial department.  This was his first effort for producing.

Craig Richey was the composer.  He graduated from the Juilliard School of Music.  Craig has 50 composing credits,and 7 for the music department.

Watching Monty Roberts live demonstration was one of the highlights of my work.  I came to respect horses.  Unlike a dog, it would have been easy for a horse just to run away instead of being mankind's most effective transportation for centuries.  

There are a lot of little things in the documentary that helped develop the more famous things.  Very inspiring and worth watching.

Why Isn't Trump in Prison?

There isn't going to be any new information on Donald Trump that hasn't already been aired--there are no secrets, although a lot of details that have been overlooked or forgotten.  

Before and during his first presidential time he very loudly proclaimed he had nothing to do with Russia and has since made fun of the Mueller Report.  He actually had a history with Russia.  He visited Moscow and had planned to build a Trump Tower there.  He did in fact take one of his beauty pageants to Russia.  When he had financial problems leading to bankruptcy with casinos it has been speculated that he laundered money for the Russian mob--in any case he did get back on his feet.   We don't know, but Putin and those before him have a reputation for seeking compromising material on foreigners who might have influence.

Not sure how well they might have succeeded, but on television with Putin beside him in Helsinki he proclaimed that he felt Putin told the truth against 16 American federal agencies who felt otherwise.  More recently he blamed Ukraine for attacking Russia and that Zelenskyy was a dictator.  With his Vice President he demanded an apology.  He agreed with Russia that Ukraine should not join NATO.  Ignoring an agreement when Ukraine voluntarily gave up its nuclear arsenal.  Recently while Ukraine is being bombed the U.S. cut off intelligence that could have allowed some lives to be saved. Again we are left with the notion that Trump admires Putin; he is stupid or there really is some sort of hold on him.  More perspective on Russian connections:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/house-of-trump-house-of-putin.html

The Mueller Report has been dismissed by Trump supporters.  Much of it had been redacted, but nonetheless there were convictions with some of the guilty parties exiled in Russia.  Read more...http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/07/the-mueller-report-and-american-voter.html

Further Trump has indicated he thinks NATO is not a good deal for America.  The trans Atlantic alliance has worked well as a deterrent and has been called to action a number of times.  I don't quarrel that other members do not all have 2% of their budget on defense.  The truth is that most of them spend more money on different priorities like health and education.

How does one define treason?  At what point is it considered punishable by prison?  

What many people consider criminal occurred on January 6, 2021.  There was a riot in which some were injured and some died directly and indirectly.  Why?  A little speculation, but is obvious that Trump did not accept the voter's verdict.  Not necessarily unusual or unjustified, but there is a system of courts that determine the truth.  Again he didn't like the result and encouraged people to come to Washington to "fight like hell or you're not going to have a country".  He tried to get the Vice-President to refuse to verify Joe Biden's election ignoring advice from many experts that it would be unconstitutional.  

The House of Representatives was able to put together a hearing which is not by itself constitutionally binding.  Cleverly the only witnesses were Republicans, many of whom were close to the President during the events of January 6th.  To outsiders this was impressively damning evidence.  The catch was that it was not legally binding.  It should have been brought to the proper courts, but for various reasons it kept getting delayed along with another damning accusation regarding government archives.  Some of us would think this would be among the very highest priorities, but the case NEVER made it to where it could be finally decided.  See more... http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/january-6th-hearings.html

Trump is a rich, powerful man with a lot of experience being sued.  Occasionally he has paid a fine, one of the most spectacular ones over the Trump College where he paid $25 million before the 2016 election.  He found delaying was the most reliable way and he hired lawyers skilled at it.  A study on how he got away with avoiding legal problems check  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2023/08/untouchable-how-they-get-away-with-it.html

How did he get elected.  Partly by appealing to prejudice, but that is not necessarily his fault--he just took advantage and admittedly fanned it.  Many extreme right wingers thought he had the necessary appeal so the legislature could favor the wealthy more than the constitution currently allows

Perhaps I really do have Trump Derangement Syndrome   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2025/02/is-trump-derangement-syndrome-valid.html

Instead of praising him for all the good things he has done his supporters should reflect on what non-indictable decisions he has made that have harmed all the citizens.   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/10/the-non-indictable-sins-of-trump.htm   

There is much more anti-Trump material in my posts and I wonder what I would do if he finally disappears.

Ice

 The world watches as America has been taken over.  Trump and his crew are changing the laws for their personal benefit.  The suckers who voted for them have not quite caught on yet, but the conversions will start slowly.

 I live in a fairly safe place among the Great Lakes.  Last year I only shoveled my sidewalk on a corner once.  There was more ice than on previous years.  This year there has definitely been a much more serious problem with ice and on the Valentine weekend more snow than I can remember.

Climate change is dismissed, often with a laugh.  But the situation only gets more obvious.  Looking in your own backyard only tells a small part of the story, but the evidence is getting closer to home each year.

Most of us in Ontario have figured out that climate change is for real, but haven't suffered too much yet.  Americans have had lots of opportunities to reflect on the changing weather.  Mammoth hurricanes have hit the Southeast whose myopic citizens mostly voted for Trump crooks.  Forest fires have been more severe on the west coast who mostly have voted other than Trump, but their votes don't have as much impact.  From my Canada we have had severe forest fires that sent smoke to New York City.  

Do you really believe that self serving bullshit from the Trump gang?  Don't be too embarrassed to admit you made a serious mistake, but unfortunately we will all suffer for at least a couple of years.  I understand (I do believe scientists) that the effects will continue for quite a few years to come regardless.  The solution will take time and a lot of effort and sacrifice.  Trump's oil buddies will resist as much as possible. 

The weather was only one big LIE.  There are many others being uncovered.  Remember always the rich take care of themselves for they feel the need for more money.

It is hard to understand Trump siding with Putin.  One bully to another might be one explanation, but it seems likely Putin has some sort of hold over Trump.  In any case favoring Putin over Ukraine is very bad for the rest of the world.  Rewarding criminal behavior only encourage more of it.  Ultimately the more money comes from the rest of us.

The rich get richer and the poor continue downhill.  The law is made by rich people who got elected by the masses.  It is no accident about inequality.  Too many of us are easily manipulated, but at some point you need to WAKE UP.  The smug think saying "Woke" is an insult, but they are the ones who are dishonest.  The Greens were not wrong, just didn't get started soon enough.

As a Canadian perhaps you think my opinion doesn't matter.  The whole world is watching and suffering and hoping somehow the powers that be come to their senses or in other words WAKE UP.

Bob Woodward's latest

It is frustrating that more American voters did not pay attention to many points made by Woodward.  Short term thinkers felt Biden was responsible for inflation, more so than the man who botched the pandemic.  They ignored the real dangers of climate change.  A number of responsible military and political people warned Trump was recklessly irresponsible.  His authoritative manner might seem commendable, but too often was harmful, often very harmful.

Bob Woodward is unique.  He is in a position that allows different powerful people to be honest, or at least it appears to be so.    Woodward's secret is that all his interviews (most of which are recorded) are done under the cover of "deep background" which meant the given  information could be used, but would not be attributed to anyone.  He did not get permission to talk to either Joe Biden or Donald Trump, but did have a lot of confidential interviews with key players. 

Joe Biden jumped to the defense of Ukraine, but also made it known there would be no American military combatants.  After October 7th he was quite adamant that he would support Israel, but no Americans would be fighting.  He also criticized Israeli settlements in Palestine and stated he felt there needed to be a two state solution.

You will learn about Netanyahu and Zelensky.  And Hunter Biden.  And Jake Sullivan.  And many others that have some responsibility for the way the world is headed.

All Arab leaders felt Hamas needed to be destroyed.  It also appears that Netanyahu supposed by even more extreme believers felt that not only Hamas needed to be destroyed, but that Palestine needed to be tramped down.  In the Mideast two driving forces are Hate and Fear.  I would add Face as the politicians feel locked in.  Woodward captures some of the hypocrisy that most politicians use to gain or maintain power.

He did note Biden's aging and that staff was trying to hide it.  It is unfortunate that not enough comments were made in public about Trump's deteriorating capability, but Woodward does note a few instances of it. 

The narrative goes up to the replacement of Biden with Kamala Harris.  She receives scant mention beforehand and there had to a cut off, but the debate she clearly won was not included.  Although I wish she had received more coverage,  I also regret more voters didn't get a chance to read it or at least hear discussions

It may seem that reading "War" is a waste of time after the election, but I disagree.  Woodward has given a lot of insights into people who are still making decisions that effect us all.  Perhaps more important he has also given us insights into how power works. 

An earlier blog post on a Bob Woodward book  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/11/fear-another-anti-trump-book.html

Post Election 2024

As a Canadian I look at the American election as insanity.  The two most heard excuses for their choice were the economy and immigration.

The economy really means the cost of living which certainly merits serious concern.  The big question should be "Why"?  A little overlooked history should have been noted.  Obama took over a financial crisis and over eight years turned it to a rising economy.  Trump's first action was to put in a large tax reduction that not only added to the deficit, but also increased inequality.  Others can argue about how he handled the economy after that, but in general jobs were lost and inflation moderately increased that is until the pandemic crisis that Obama warned was possible.  Not Trump's fault, but he acted almost criminal in his management--mocking experts and discouraging masks and vaccines.  Lots of jobs were lost, businesses closed and critically supply chains were disrupted.   A few businesses were able to take advantage and others went under

There are many ways a government might approach the problem--an important component would be to pump in more money.  Climate change didn't stop and agriculture suffered meaning food prices went up.  Climate instances have increased and have had a negative impact on prices.  Money was borrowed and some was printed, otherwise the job situation would have been pretty bleak.  Trump negotiated a deal with Saudi Arabia designed to increase oil prices.  These last four years of recovery have been difficult times with difficult decisions required.  Compared to the rest of the world it must be said the Biden administration made the better choices, but Americans really didn't care how other nations fared.  Did voters really think the world has fully recovered from the Covid pandemic?

Immigration does bring out emotions.  One question seems to be unasked--why the increase and desperation?  Climate change plays a role, but also so do repressive governments.  Expect more immigration pressure.  Gwynne Dyer in a recent blog pointed out the pressure definitely will increase and anticipates the borders can be sealed by actually shooting violators.  It is past time for greater global co-operation.   Read more:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/10/intervention-earth.html

What should have been unforgiven was Trump's efforts to discard a bi-partisan effort to deal with the immigration crisis.  Trump was pretty open about it--he wanted an issue to campaign on.  As we got closer to the election, both the economy and the border situation markedly improved, but one would not know it from the bombast coming from Trump.

It seems these two issues were so important that voters could overlook character in their assessment of who should make the national decisions for the next four years.  Trump with high priced legal help (much paid by his adoring fans) has evaded courts that he seems to realize have incriminating evidence that could put him in prison.  The fact that he intimidates those who do not cater to him--that he uses excessive bragging and blaming others.  The fact that he has a relationship with Putin that bodes ill for Ukraine (and others) doesn't seem of concern.  He also seems to favor Netanyahu who is avoiding a two state solution (and also prison).

Perhaps the biggest disappointment was that the recent victims of hurricanes for the most part voted for climate change deniers.  They had been lied to and still preferred to believe the misinformation rather than actual facts.   

Some will claim the Democrats should have ditched Biden before and found someone better than Kamala Harris.  My very personal view is that Kamala was the person with the right temperament and ability, but being a woman of mixed racial heritage probably did offend some sensibilities.  The Republicans highlighted by Trump did exert pressure on Biden, so much so that the Democrats felt they had to do something.  Although many would disagree the arrangement with the Biden administration was basically working--Biden made good decisions and took expert advice.  If he doddered around where cameras could catch him and let himself take a cold to a debate that obviously created a problem that Trump was quick to exploit.

I revealed my preference for Kamala more than four years ago.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/02/the-iowa-caucus.html

Lots of things will happen in the next four years.  Climate change will become more evident.  Foreign powers will take advantage of American isolation.  Chinese leverage will likely be boosted.  Regulations of all sorts will be alleviated with untold effects, not all of which will be good.  Almost for certain inequality will increase.  Will the voters wake up?

College educated voters respond better to the Democrats, but in truth most did not study the facts enough.

A great plan to benefit those at the top has reached another level.  Check  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/05/monopolies.html

Thank you for letting me vent.  

The Choice

 A very momentous decision is about to be made.  The "Free world" could be led by an egotistical maniac with dictatorial tendencies.  Or the choice could involve someone who has a record of actually improving lives and thinks much deeper.  Or some might vote for a third party, but with the U.S. electoral system the way it is that would be counter productive.

An important element of the decision is that many people have a very distorted view.  

Going back a few years the Democrat, Barrack Obama took over a mess left by the Republican George Bush.  Almost right away he stopped the downward spiral and gradually turned the economy around and after eight years he handed over a growing economy to Donald Trump.  One of Trump's first priorities was to reduce taxes, particularly for the wealthy.  This helped pump a lot of money into the economy, but it also increased the deficit that Republicans declared would be covered by the improved economy (not so).  Another feature was that it increased inequality.  To better understand Republican priorities check  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/05/monopolies.html

Things seemed to be okay while a few economic factors declined, but were easily overlooked.  When the Covid 19 Pandemic started the Americans were unprepared (some Republican budget cuts didn't help).  Trump took over the government publicity.  He mocked a well respected expert, Dr. Fauci.  At one point it became conservative thinking to resist the need for masking and vaccinations.  His actions likely caused a huge number of deaths and made the economy worse.

Beyond Trump's mishandling, the pandemic affected the entire world, rich and poor.  At one point it was necessary for governments to spend large amounts of money.  People were not spending money as jobs were scarce and supplies were difficult to find as many scooped up and hoarded what they could find.   Businesses were adjusting to new conditions and supply lines shriveled.  While Trump was still president inflation went down to less than 2% (because people were not buying), but quickly changed when large amounts of money were put into the economy.

When Biden took over more money was spent and a lot of energy applied to attracting jobs.  Consumers were ecstatic and started buying again.  Supply lines were still in recovery.  Another factor was climate change that affected food supplies (fires, floods or droughts) meaning some products were scarce.  Inflation was a result of money pumped in and supply chains being diminished.  People seemed to think Biden was the cause of the misery of high inflation.  Granted prices are difficult compared to five years ago, but the question should be, who is to blame?  Who offers the better solution?

They seem to think Trump's economy was better, but was it?  Biden's economy has outperformed all other wealthy nations that had undergone the same pandemic.  But Americans have a tendency to think only of themselves.

Trump didn't just damage the economy, some of his other moves also had long term consequences.

The International Climate Agreement was abandoned.  The Republican conservatives (note those with vested interest) mocked climate change.  It is hard to understand how urgent, but the evidence is mounting and still there is resistance.  The United States is the natural leader, but those in control are protecting their selfish interests.  What are the consequences of not effectively dealing with climate change?

The Iran Agreement had been negotiated by Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia.  Basically it was to force Iran from advancing to a nuclear weapon.  At the time Iran had maintained all its requirements.  It seems likely first that Trump was pressured by conservatives who detested Iran, but also by  Israel who wanted it broken.  Another perspective on Iran:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/the-iranian-dilemma.html

Was an opportunity to steer Iran in our direction missed?  The consequences have been disastrous.  Iran has gravitated to the orbit of Russia and stirring up trouble in the Mid-East.

The Israel connection was strengthened.  Trump's first foreign visit was to Saudi Arabia, but partly the aim was to get a business deal for Israel.  They moved their embassy to Jerusalem.  These moves were without consulting Palestine.  There was already a lot of resentment.  Did Trump's decisions increase or decrease that resentment?  Netanyahu seems to feel if Trump wins in November he can continue his war against Hamas.  Trump has some strong hints he supports Netanyahu.  Check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/07/crisis-of-zionism-book-review.html

Immigration is a concern.   Ironically America NEEDS immigrants, both to do the grubby work, care for an aging population, but also to innovate for the future.  Educated Europeans are not as anxious as they once were.  They already have less inequality.  A bi-partisan solution favored by border guards was blocked by Trump who felt he wanted the issue to campaign on.  Does racism play a role in anti immigration rhetoric?  Businesses love cheap labor.   

Trump admires Putin, or maybe he has personal reasons for supporting his interests.  He claims he could end the conflict very quickly.  It is speculated that he would make land adjustments based on military positions.  We can't be sure what he would really do, but we do know he has been behind Congressional delays in funding Ukraine's battle against an imperialist enemy. 

Any one is entitled to make a mistake, but perhaps some voters have been mesmerized by style.  Exaggeration, blaming, mocking non supporters are not the marks of  a leader.  Lying should be unacceptable.  Inciting an insurrection is grounds for prison.

That is all on the one hand.

Joe Biden may have appeared under the weather in a critical debate and long term his age is a legitimate concern.  But he made mostly good choices, perhaps with the help of well chosen staff.  Not sure of his motivations under pressure, but he made a choice for the betterment of America.

Kamala Harris has a sterling record of getting results that improved lives of people.  I suspect her plans are more progressive than conservatives would like, but the U.S. has a long way to catch up to what needs to be done. The Republicans in general are still resistant, even mocking efforts to fight climate change.  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2024/09/kamala-harris-truths-we-hold.html 

 The choice seems a no brainer.  But maybe we will come to better appreciate their educational system.

 In June 2016 I suggested the election was an IQ test; http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2016/06/the-american-iq-test.html

Litvinenko

 "Litvenenko" (2022) is based on a true story, that on the surface is hard to believe.  It takes not only skill, but also gall to pull what the Russians did and have since repeated.  We are introduced to Alexander Litvenenko as he finished up a meal in September of 2006.  Almost right away it seems he is in the hospital  and now bald.  They call in the police who are at first skeptical as he claims he has been murdered and names his murderer, Vladimir Putin.  Doctors and researchers try to find out what is killing him, but it is finally found to be polonium and Litvenenko already knows he will die.

The rest of the series is devoted to trying to learn how it was done and what was the motive.  The English police actually traveled to Moscow where they were misled.  The scientific search did establish two men who actually executed the poisoning.  Marina wanted to follow her husband's request to blame Putin publicly.  The British government refused to cover it citing international concerns.  A lot of effort to reverse, but it is several years before we see an archived video of Prime Minister Theresa May announcing the Russian government's responsibility for the murder.  We are told that in September  of 2021 the European Court of Human Rights declared the Russian Government was responsible for the assassination.  

For motive we know that Litvinenko had been ordered to kill a Russian businessman and refused.  He was persecuted and publicly criticized by Vladimir Putin.  He fled with his wife and son to Britain, went into their security protection and eventually became a British citizen.  Before Theresa May made her announcement, Putin made a statement claiming Litvinenko was so low he was below Putin's attention and certainly not worth killing.  Obviously Litvinenko was not below his attention.

Since that time we have seen other suspicious deaths.  Alexander Navalny got a dose on an airplane and fortunately the plane was diverted to a hospital where they knew what to look for and could fix it. 

Polonium is a word I recently learned more about.  I had read the word in news coverage of a few other Russian assassinations attempts. I thought it was an exotic chemical.  Tutoring an English language student we learned that polonium had first been discovered by Madame Curie who was looking for something else which turned out to be radium.  She named an unexpected element polonium as a tribute to her native country, Poland.  It is rare, but her discovery was not in Russia. The over riding factor is the cost of  mining it, unless of course you have a priorty for needing a difficult to trace poison.   

Jim Field Smith was the director and an executive producer.  He had been a member of the Dutch Elm Conservatoire, a comedy sketch group that toured the United Kingdom.  He has 18 credits as a director and 15 as a producer. 

George Kay, wrote the script and was an executive producer.  He has 24 credits as writer, 9 as producer and 2 for directing.  He crated and wrote the scripts for "Lupin" (2021-2023). 

Gabriel Prokofiev wrote the music.  He is the grandson of famous Russian composer, Sergei Prokofiev.  He has composed classical and electronic music with his compositions being performed by such orchestras as BBC Philharmonic, St. Petersburg Philharmonic, Seattle Symphony Buenos Aires Philharmonic and the Royal Seville Symphony.  He has 7 film credits. 

Ed Moore was the cinematographer  He has 24 cinematography and 26 camera and electric department credits including "Shetland" (2018).

David Webb, was the editor.  He has 30 editor credits including "Sex Education" (2019-2024) and "The Gentlemen" (2024).

Mark Bonner played Superintendent Timmons.  He has 77 credits including "Wire in The Blood" (2002), "Line of Duty" (2014), "Grantchester" (2024), "Unforgotten" (2017), "Shetland" (2015-2020) and "Guilt" (2019-2023).

Margarita Levieeva played Marina Litvinenko.  She was born in Leningrad and had two grandmothers who survived the World War II Leningrad Siege.  In her youth she was involved with rhythmic gymnastics.  She has 38 film credits including "The Lincoln Lawyer" (2011) and "The Blacklist" (2013-202016).  Check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2023/09/shostakovich-and-siege-of-leningrad.html

Sam Troughton played a key detective, Brian.  He had performed on stage for both London's National Theatre and the Royal Shakespeare Company.  He has 40 film credits including"Foyle's War" (2012) and "Chernobyl" (2019).

Mark Ivanir played Alexander Goldfarb, a close friend of the Litvinenko family and an outspoken Putin critic.  He was born in Ukraine and immigrated with his family to Israel.  With the Israeli army he took by in a clandestine operation to bring Ethiopian Jews to Israel.  After his army time he enrolled in a clown school and as a clown he traveled over Europe.  With his military experience and his lingustic talent he fit into a lot of films.  He speaks English, Ukrainian, Russian, French,Yiddish, Hebrew, Arabic and German..  He has 155 credits including "Schindler's List"(1993), "The Blacklist" (2014) and "Away" (2020).

David Tennant played Alexander Litvinenko.  He was the youngest student at the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama.  He became a prominent member of the Royal Shakespeare Company.  He has 175 acting credits and 5 as a producer.  His films include "Foyle's War" (1992) "Hamlet" (2009), "Escape Artist" (2013), "Broadchurch" (2013-2017), "Des" (2020) and "Inside Man" (2022). 

Stephen Campbell Moore played the barrister Ben Emerson.  He has 61 credits including "The Lady in the Van" (2015) and "Downton Abbey" (2019).

American voters need to be aware that Vladimir Putin is someone who Donald Trump seems to admire and publicly supports.  Never forget that Trump took Putin's word against his own security experts.   Check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/house-of-trump-house-of-putin.html

I watched a DVD copy.

As usual I have bolded the first mention of films I have seen.

Tired of Winning

 Donald Trump does not deserve as much attention as he gets, but unfortunately he still haunts our lives.  There is a lot of old material in "Tired of Winning" (2023) but it is focused on post 2020 and has a lot of personal coverage of the author.  It just reinforces the repulsiveness of the Former Guy.

 He is classically selfish.  Believes he is the center of the world.  He can play by his own rules.  Very angry with obstacles.  Will seek revenge against anyone who offended him.

 Behind the scenes there was some discussion about invoking the 25th amendment including among cabinet ministers.  I suspect the reason it didn't progress was fear.  Trump had a strong voter base that supported his vindictive responses to any criticism.  His base supported him much more than the Republican party.

Another example of Trump's power comes with Kevin McCarthy.  After January 6th he used some harsh criticism of Trump, but shortly afterwards he met with Trump and re affirmed his loyalty.  It was quite a tough road to reach his goal of becoming House Speaker, but would not have been possible without Trump's support.

Loyalty is a key requirement.  His power comes from disgruntled voters who think they have found their champion.  They feel their lot in life has been affected by government rules and admire Trump's belligerent style.

After the 2020 defeat some were fired and of course a few resigned.  The January 6th Inquiry was totally Republicans who knew Trump well, but his base paid almost no attention.  They for the most part dismissed the testimony or felt his championing their interests more than made up for it.

The day before his 72nd birthday he was charged with illegally taking possession of classified material.  We were shown what sloppy conditions the material was stored and heard stories that he sometimes presented some of the material to guests with little regard for security.  His base thought it was more proof of persecution.

Trump sued many of his enemies and also needed cash for his own legal problems.  The money came from his campaign funds.  His base presumably felt this was necessary to protect Trump's power.

Another factor confirmed in this account was that he hated any criticism of Vladimir Putin, a man he admired for being a strong man.  This meant also that he promised to stop any any support for Ukraine.    The Republicans had had  policies attacking Soviet and Russian aggression.  That is reflected in current Republicans opposing aid to Ukraine.

As an outsider it seems incredible that Trump has so much support.  It will take more than evidence referred to in this book to change his base.  One can hope that the insanity will at least gradually erode with all the legislation scheduled.  Unfortunately his tactics of delaying help his cause.

Trump and the Middle East continual crisis

There are many factors involved in the current Middle East Crisis with some people wanting to bomb Gaza out of existence and others rioting to give Palestinians independence.  Trump definitely has played a role, but really was a tool for other interests.  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/07/trump-as-tool.html

 As part of his election campaign Trump would cut Muslim immigration and helped stir up anti Islamic sentiments to gain votes.

Once elected his first foreign visit was to Saudi Arabia which is a bit of mystery.  They are a big oil producer and exporter, but have not been a big ally of United States.  During the Trump reign efforts were made to create new ties between Arab nations and Israel which on the surface should be welcome by everyone.  On the negative side one of the understandings was that they were expected to accept the Israeli perspective on Palestine.

Later on the Trump administration made efforts to please Israel perhaps the biggest effort was to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.  This pleased evangelical voters and Sheldon Adelson, the casino owner, but not so much Muslims who see Jerusalem as one of their holy cities.  Going back to Harry Truman each American president has protected Israel through their many attacks by their Arab neighbors.

Getting out of the Iran agreement apparently was done to please Israel and one casino donor.  Iran did not do anything against the agreement.  The effects are hard to measure, but are mostly negative.  Iran felt it was acceptable to edge towards the nuclear bomb which by itself would cause anxiety to its Arab neighbors.  They sought to find new friends.  More on Iran's role:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/the-iranian-dilemma.html

 Somehow when the Russians got stymied in trying to crush Ukraine, Iran decided to supply some military supplies such as drones.  They are natural enemies, but they both hate the U.S.  

Iran has been implicated in doing small things to aggravate the U.S.  One of their projects has always been to support the Palestinian cause.   They have given military aid to Hamas.

Putin needs a distraction.  Already some factions in the U.S. are wanting to cut back military support for Ukraine.  Trump denies any Russian support for his election campaigns, but that is very difficult to deny.  It is also difficult to deny that for one reason or another Trump did Putin's bidding.  See  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/house-of-trump-house-of-putin.html and       http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/freezing-order.html

Benjamin Netanyahu has been focused on changing Israeli law to protect himself.  Many are accusing him of being distracted from signs of Hamas planning a major attack.  The attack seemed aligned with another Arab country, Saudi Arabia signalling they were willing to make an agreement with Israel.  Apparently Hamas did see an opportunity.  

President Biden is locked in to past U.S. commitments and feels obligated to maintain a relationship with Israel.  He noted there have been provocations from settlers on occupied land.  He also suggested he hoped talks would get back on track for a two state solution.  This seems to be a small step in the right direction.  Americans have given Israel several billions of dollars of military equipment and have used their veto at the United Nations to squash any votes that might hurt Israel.

Nobody can be certain what happen in the next weeks or next few years.  Has mankind learned to better deal with the cycle of violence?   More thoughts:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2023/11/can-we-stop-cycle-of-violence.html

 Hatred is a powerful force that makes it almost impossible to understand how your interests have been subverted.  I keep hoping a disaster will open the truth, but hatred always seems to have the upper hand.  How can you trust your enemy when they don't trust you?

The Shortest History of War

 Gwynne Dyer is a much respected analyst and writer of military affairs.  The ideas and understanding offered need to be understood by a wider audience and yes it is a matter of life and death for global civilization.

The purpose of this book is to illustrate how human nature (and technology, but really human nature) has led us to our current perilous state and how we can hope to extricate ourselves.

 He does pack in a lot of information, but is well written.  One useful tool is flow charts.

Aggression against outsiders has always been with us.  Evolution has favored the winners. Survival has required force and when you add in fear war seems inevitable.  Our nearest primate relatives the chimpanzees do organize to fight other groups of chimpanzees.

The first humans who organized into tribes were hunter-gatherers who tended to avoid conflict, but it is inevitable.  They tended to be egalitarian which helps to reduce wars.   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/07/selected.html

The agricultural era led to wars.  Some speculation that it might have been spurred by what might be termed "pastoralists" who were more mobile than farmers, but likely envied farmers in settlements who had goods that were envied and might be had with force.  This in turn led the farmer settlers to construct walls and later to develop soldiers.  The farmer settlers tended to be less equalitarian than hunter gatherers.

As settlements became larger and less equalitarian leaders developed who had interests that were opposed by leaders of other settlements.  Armies could be formed and/or mercenaries hired.  We follow the development of weapons and strategies.  A problem that probably was always there is that most soldiers are reluctant to kill. 

Dealing with that has been an ongoing problem that commanders have developed strategies to overcome.  One comes from training camps that isolate from regular social circle.  Psychology used to toughen up.   Patriots are better fighters as inspired by Napoleon.

Distancing your soldiers from the enemy lessened reluctance to kill.  Germans enacted aerial attacks on civilians and the English soon followed.  Air staff reported not even seeing the victims, just smoke and explosions.  Modern warfare has seen the increasing use of drones where those in control are often hundreds, even thousands of miles away.

Nuclear weapons change thinking.  Leaders realized whole cities could be wiped out, but doing so would invite retaliation which we learned could lead to a nuclear winter.  As the Soviet Union increased its arsenal and China jumped in the ingredients for civilization extinction were in place.  The big powers realized they could not attack one another without the risk of escalating.  Wars have continued, but never with the big powers against once another.  Perhaps the greatest danger is between Pakistan and India  as they are adjacent and hate each other.

The future is discouraging with nationalist sentiments very global, but Dyer feels we have made some progress and there is hope.  The League of Nations failed to stop World War II and leaders realized that stopping World War III was critical.  To get the cooperation of the main powers (in effect the winners of World War II) they offered a veto.  The United Nations has been able to provide troops to enforce ceasefires on a few occasions.  A World Court has managed to convict a few war criminals, but again the major powers have mostly refused to join, although frequently refer to them. 

Quoting the author:  "If the time has come to devise a different method of settling our disputes, it can done only with the cooperation of the world's governments, for it is the absolute independence of national governments that makes war possible.  Unfortunately mistrust reigns everywhere and nations seldom allow even the least of their interests to be decided by a collection of foreigners."

Many government and military leaders do support a greater platform for a world government, but elected politicians reading the will of voters are catering to the fears of people.  That is where the opportunity lies.  Rational self interest dictates we need a better way of mediating conflicts and restraining nationalist  sentiments.  It is a battle to get enough people to as Dyer suggests "accept a mutual recognition that we are all better off when we respect each other's rights and accept arbitration by a higher authority, instead of killing one another when our rights come into conflict."  A tough task but since hunter gatherer days we have gradually widened our acceptance of others from kin to tribe, to nation and so on.

Climate change (if not fear of nuclear disaster) may be the issue that encourages people to realize they really do have common interests.  We have always had common interests, but have let emotions stop us from working together.  There has been slow progress and we need to keep trying.

Before leaving I would like to defend Gwynne for some criticism he received for predicting Russia would not invade Ukraine.  He basically had pointed out how incredibly stupid an invasion would be.  He was right, it turned out to be incredibly stupid.  Putin was not stupid, but he let his egotism overcome his intelligence.  Dyer notes writing in March 2022 that he cannot predict how it will end, but suggests possible outcomes that may or may not advance his hopes.

An earlier book on war:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2021/12/war.html

 Another intelligent and relevant book by Gwynne:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/12/growing-pains-as-seen-by-gwynne-dyer.html

A personal appearance in Hamilton:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/04/gwynne-dyer.html

The Russian conundrum

My memory let me down.  I was under the impression Mikhail Khodorkovsky had been a long time friend of Putin and fell out of favor.  In fact he was a successful businessman who offended Putin after a few years of giving advice.  Mikhail was a leading advocate for western business practices and philanthropy.

As he recounts the perfidy of Putin while extolling his own virtues one hesitates a little as to who is telling the truth.  But there can be little doubt about who has almost no credibility--Putin.  It is too bad that more people didn't heed the words of Khodorkovsky decades ago and perhaps there would have been no need for this book.  His perspective and opinions would serve western powers better than currently.

Khodorkovsky did not have wealthy parents, but he got a good education.   His academic interest was chemistry.  Some bankers liked him and helped him to get access to foreign currencies through bigger banks.  This allowed him to put together a group that took over a heavily indebted state company, Yukos that had not been able to pay its employees.  With better business practices modeled on western practices the company was straightened out.  With good timing it rose to be the largest tax payer in Russia and Mikhail to be the richest man in the country.

Along the way Khodorkovsky was strongly advocating western business practices and democratic systems.  He had many times been called to advise Putin, but too much criticism of the Russian way was too much and Khodorkovsky was eventually charged with spurious crimes and spent over 10 years in prison, mostly in a remote area. 

In 2013 he was released to England where at first he thought things were progressing in Russia, but soon felt otherwise.  Watching the BBC to improve his English he was struck that the rest of the world depicted Russia quite different than what he was familiar with.  It was also quite noticeable that in Russia all Western governments were criticized.

A pro Moscow government in Ukraine was ousted and Russia was determined to assert itself.  In 2014 Mikhail flew to Kiev and spoke at Maidan Square to support Ukrainians and later to Donbas.  He had set up an advocacy group, Open Russia promoting democracy running unopposed outside Russia but over the years repressed in the country.

Putin is deceptive, saying whatever his audience will accept.  Putin's rationalization in a quote:  " A strong state is not an anomaly to be got rid of.  Quite the contrary, it is the source of order."

Putin is motivated in large part by domestic politics. The economy is poorly managed and  Putin has found foreign aggression raises his popularity.  He manipulated elections and when he constitution restricted him to two terms he used Dmitry Mededev as a front man and then rewrote the constitution.

A key person in Putin's setup is Yevgeny Prigozhin who started as a food vendor in St. Petersburg and came to the attention of Putin.  Not put off by his gangster reputation and prison history,  He came with Putin to Moscow and was tasked with organizing a mercenary group that is officially denied.  They seem to appear at various hot spots such as Crimea, Syria, Libya, Georgia, and Central African Republic.  Prigozhin was put in charge of interfering in the American Election of 2016 which involved projects in 2014.  Many of the Russian efforts involved social media.  Robert Mueller correctly identified Prigozhin's role which ended in a sanction.  

They did not at first expect Trump to win, but wanted to tarnish America's image.  They  complained against immigration "failures" Black Lives Matter, Muslims.  A favorite strategy was to suggest voter fraud.  They did hack some Democrat emails to hurt Hillary Clinton..  

Khodorkovsky noted that the Mueller Report was very accurate regarding Russian efforts at the 2016 election.  Trump went so far as to fire the FBI director among other efforts to stop the report.

Russia uses poisons with a lab specializing in the nuances.  We know they have been used on dissidents as well as former agents, but it is possible we don't know all of the victims.  Alexei Navalny, a popular dissident was poisoned twice and saved only by alert doctors and others willing to bend protocols.

Like Michael Cohen, Mikhail believed that Putin did not necessarily have some kind of information on Trump who he thought just admired the stealth of the Russian leader.  But perhaps there was some sort of hold--check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/06/house-of-trump-house-of-putin.html

After Joe Biden took over the presidency Putin did not let up.  The January 6th insurrection demonstrated American hypocrisy.            

The Russians are credited with cyber attacks against American corporations with ransomware and also the Joe Biden administration.

Moldova was a small country bordering south of Ukraine.  During most of its existence it had a pro Moscow government.  A few years ago that government was replaced and when Russia invaded Ukraine Moldova supported Ukraine.  Russia had already started supporting an opposition party.  Putin also props up the autocratic Belorussian government and although not able to get them to attack Ukraine, have been using their territory for launching missiles.

Russia has long used China as an ally to frighten America, but Russia no longer has the leverage over China that it once had.  Noteworthy Putin visited China during the Winter Olympics to shore up support and actually started the invasion during the Winter Paralympics against protocol.  China has tried to stay out of it.

His advice is worth considering.  He notes that the sanctions used are often depicted as against the Russian people and feels sanctions need to be specifically against members of the administration.  Courage is needed to stand up to abusive government behavior.  With Open Russia, Mikhail supports opposition publications and tries to educate journalists.  He feels confident Putin will eventually be gone as he makes too many mistakes.  There may well be an heir, but likely a crisis will depose of them.  

Quote from the author:  "...a new society cannot be built with anger and revenge" and "...forgiveness is dearer than punishment."

How do you think we should deal with Putin?

An example of Russia fitting in with the rest of the world with my most recent post:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/11/compartment-number-6.html

The Revenge of Power

Fareed Zakaria seems a good source for interesting ideas.  Moises Naim visited a second time with a new book that seemed worthy to read.

 In a previous book Moises pointed out that power was being diffused.  The average person had access to information.  In effect many micro powers have developed as many were able to break from isolation with their interests and concerns.  All the factors in "The End of Power" (2013) are still active.  Check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/08/the-end-of-power.html

The focus expressed in this book is that autocrats and would be autocrats  are constantly trying to consolidate their power.  Their strategies are not all new, but technology has given them more tools and they seem to be progressing faster than democracy. 

Silvio Berlusconi represents an earlier parallel to Donald Trump.  In 1994 he had worked himself up from a cruise boat singer to a media conglomerate owner.  He had built up a playboy image and was being investigated for tax evasion and bribery.  He decided to start a political party.  His media staff became candidates and he used his dominating resources to good advantage.  Like Trump, Berlusconi cultivated publicity.  He became leader of one of the largest economies in the world.

Rodrigo Duterte with his death squads met a concern with people fearful of violent drug dealers with a solution that met their concerns.  The simple solution to a serious problem.

In contrast Hugo Chavez was a good listener and understood concerns of the poor.  Author was a cabinet minister under Nicolas Maduro.  When he got power he expropriated much land and started a spiral that ended up in poverty and disaster.

Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson point out that nations fail when those who produce wealth lose faith with the state's impartiality and realize that the fruits of their labor are likely to be plundered and transferred to the politically connected.  Check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/11/why-nations-fail.html

The best targets for autocrats are disappointed people, those who find their lifestyle and their dreams declining.

Populists refer to elites as aloof and out of touch.  Expertise is discounted.  This allows those striving for power to offer their own simpler solutions.  This leads to polarization as their fans take sides against the established opposition.  Lately the truth is blatantly overwhelmed with a new "truth."  Surveys showed that anti-expertise voters were key to the Brexit campaign.

Followers identify with Trump by not wearing masks and not getting vaccinated.  For many segments it has reached the stage where marriage and dating decisions are affected by identify.  When celebrity leaders break a norm, their fans do not turn on them, instead they turn on the norms.

Pandemic accelerated some movement and also revealed incompetence.   Inequality has increased and inflation has been another outcome.  Trump lost the 2020 election in part because of his incompetence revealed during the pandemic.

Autocrats support one another.  Currently we are seeing OPEC, Brazil, Hungary, Iran and others lending support to Russia when it attacked Ukraine despite no provocation.  An interesting observation is that autocrats congratulate one another as legitimizing actions that also boost their egos.  Trump had been told by insiders to avoid congratulating Putin, but he could not resist.  The author maintains that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election as did other nations including China, Turkey, Iran and the United States.

Autocrats can evolve to criminal activities.  The author points to Venezuela where kickbacks to drug dealers eventually led to the government taking over sections of the trade.  Other nations have gotten involved in weapons, cigarettes, even illegal immigrants.  Russians have used Interpol to chase after dissidents--check:   http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/10/freezing-order.html

Can anything be done? 

Electoral systems do make a difference.  Gerrymandering in effect is letting politicians select their voters.  Citizens United legalized actions that would be illegal in other jurisdictions and raised the ceiling on campaign costs.  Lack of trust in experts has allowed bombastic politicians to con us--check http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/07/expertise-too-often-shunted-aside.html

Citizen Assemblies bring random voters together to discuss the issues (with neutral advice).  Their recommendations are to be put to a vote in Parliament or Congress.  As it is many votes are deferred for political reasons despite being favored by a majority of citizens. 

Journalism  can play a role.  There had been a trend towards what might be called "bothsiderism" which basically means both sides get to present their case even if one side is dishonest and hateful.  The truth gets shunted aside.  Who decides what is truth?   Naim's earlier book demonstrated that because people have more access to information and to each other they formed little groups with more power than they had as individuals and those dynamics are still happening.  Politics is more than entertainment and more than a horse race.

Education is critical.  One survey pointed out that most Americans could not pass a United States citizenship exam, yet civics courses have been cut in many jurisdictions.  Critical thinking should be part of all courses.

The Big Lie is still believed by too many.  It seems strange that no actual proof has been found for this provocative claim.  It is likely that for many it is really an excuse to attack their opposition.  Some are contemplating forbidding election deniers elected political positions.

The author offers thoughts and suggestions how to fight autocrats, but perhaps a good start would be for more people to read this book.  Admittedly it adds to our discomfort for the future, but it does offer some remedies. 

A view of leadership that takes us back to origins may expand your understanding:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2014/07/selected.html