Connect by David Bradford & Carole Robin

3.27 / 5

Some spelling errors in my copy, but other than that, the book is about the six pillars of having an "exceptional" relationship. Exceptional is of course a subjective term, and is used — often synonymously — with "fulfilling." While I may not agree with that, the pillars are certainly interesting.

1. be authentic
2. both people can be vulnerable
3. proceeding with the understanding that self disclosures won't be used against you.
4. having the ability to be honest with each other. this includes the range of emotions and constructive feedback of behaviours.
5. Dealing with conflict productively using the four step process listed:
   • have the other person take the issue seriously.
   • share what's going on with them.
   • come to a mutually satisfying solution.
   • decide what repair work must be done.
6. commit each other's growth and development.

A criticism of this work, and one that doesn't really get talked about, is forced interactions. Some people are forced to work with sociopathic, narcissistic, or toxic people and they have no choice. When dealing with these human stains, none of the steps work, and of course that's not what the book is about, it's about "exceptional" relationships with friends, co-workers, and families; nevertheless, the conflict management, and steps to build a relationship will not work on these people. People who thrive on conflict and drama would enjoy nothing more than seeing your vulnerability, and will use that information as a weapon.

Other than that, this is nothing that hasn't been said before. It tries to be Carnegie's "How to Win Friends & Influence People" but with a more dry style.

An End to Evil by David Frum

0.01/5

This is warmongering propaganda. A neocon revelry of dangerous militant colonials who in their self-righteous indignation attempt to moralize their war-crimes and atrocities.

Where does "freedom" — ; the very "goal" of the war on "terror", fit into the belief that we must all carry biometrical cards? "If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear!" This is is the war cry of fascists and authoritarians. It's said when they are eroding your human rights, social liberties, and attempting to brainwash and alter your beliefs for their own personal benefit.

This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And it's our future as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.

Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.

Encouraging other Americans to "report suspicious activity" and simultaneously believing that law enforcement and immigration officers don’t have enough powers and must be given more carte blanche in dealing with the populace is the war cry of dictators and totalitarians. These are actual domestic and foreign policy recommendations from the book, and the only two I will address, for I do not have the time to pick apart the infinitude of insolent claims made.

Stalin's regime relied heavily on "mutual surveillance," urging families to report on each other in communal living spaces and report "disloyalty."

Where does truth fit into the numerous factual inconsistencies, intellectual dishonesty, and bad faith arguments in this book, written by one of the architects of one of the greatest lies, cons, and manipulations of American foreign policy throughout our history? Where does empathy fit into the American constitution that every man, woman, and child is entitled to the pursuit of happiness? I guess I missed the fine-print saying if you're Iraqi, N.Korean, or Iranian, you're out of luck and should be murdered because you have resources America needs.

Schwarz documents that war advocates like Frum still can't tell basic truths about Iraq even as they adopt the posture of contemplation and remorse. In particular, Frum's claim that Saddam maintained a nuclear weapons program until 1996 is indisputably false.

"Of course it's about oil, it's very much about oil, and we can't really deny that. From the standpoint of a solider who's now fought in the middle east for six years – my son-in-law's fought there for four years, my daughter's been over there, my son has served the nation; my family has been fighting for a long time."

Gen. John Abizaid, former commander of CENTCOM speaking about the Iraq War. "People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America's national interest. What the hell do you think they're talking about? We're not there for figs." ~ US Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, about the Iraq war back in 2007.

Empathy, freedom, and truth have no place in the ideology advocated in this "book", because this nearly 300-page rant is propaganda. It's a militarist, fascist, surveillance police-state that is as self-righteous, black-and-white, and moronic as it is ignorant and nonsensical. The only reason why Frum is "anti-Trump" now is because Trump is blatant and obvious in his xenophobia, in his racism, in his sexism, and in his cruelty. Make no mistake, Frum and co. are idelogically identical to Trumpism and Republicanism. We may only hope that a day will come wherein publishers will turn down such hogwash and opt for more informative, historically accurate, and apt analysis of foreign policy and global politics, that would be the true end to evil.

Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari

2.97/5

A “historical” account of the human race. Historical is in quotes because although this is a fantastic and well-researched book, there are definitely moments where Eurocentrism seeps through. There are numerous instances of justification/rationalization for the horrors committed by capitalism under the guise of business: slavery, deception, banking fraud; and most importantly, the conquest of the Caribbean islands and the Americas. These are natural byproducts of capitalism, yet again Harari talks about these byproducts as necessary evils. As if it the battle between capitalism versus communism persists. At least it’s not communism! This is redundant. From a historical perspective, it is absurd to set up economic arguments exclusively between capitalism and communism. Other hunter-gatherer systems are briefly discussed in the early chapters but dismissed once we evolve into the capitalist model. We are always led to believe, from political leaders to intellectuals to athletes to historians to philosophers, that the alternative to capitalism is communism and vice versa; this is simply not true.

Another example occurs in the explications regarding European conquests: Cortés's “discovery” of the Mayan empire, and Pizzaro’s “discovery” of the Incan empire are discussed at length. Pizarro, taking notes from Cortés, executed the last Incan emperor by strangling him with his bare hands.

Cortés and Pizzaro systematically contributed to splitting both empires from within. They ignored the rules of engagement and committed genocides worthy of filling entire classrooms (we never learn about this in school); yet the term discovery is itself ambiguous. How could we have discovered a place which clearly already existed with its own political, economical, and social systems and hierarchies? This is evidence of our ignorance, yet the admittance of this ignorance, for some unknown reason, costs us our humanity as our “conquering” mentality is made something to be proud of, to boast of, to brag about; the notion that the “savages” had no interest in conquest because they lacked that coveted “European curiosity” is astounding.

Cortés was equally ignorant about the Aztecs, but he and his men held significant advantages over their adversaries. While the Aztecs had no experience to prepare them for the arrival of these strange-looking and foul-smelling aliens, the Spaniards knew that the earth was full of unknown human realms, and no one had greater expertise in invading alien lands and dealing with situations about which they were utterly ignorant. For the modern European conqueror, like the modern European scientist, plunging into the unknown was exhilarating.

Nevertheless, if you understand that there is an embedded bias towards European/Western culture, especially in the realms of economics and politics, and proceed to read the book with a critical eye — as you should with anything you consume — the book is fantastic magnum opus by a great scholar. The research is well thought out, and most of the studies alluded to are sourced in the back. The sections on genomes and gene-editing is fascinating and attempts to guess where the research will head in the next two decades. Perhaps this is discussed in more advanced detail in the next book: Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow.