Garys Books

Friday, August 16, 2019

The Day the World Came to Town

Book: The Day the World Came to Town: 9/11 in Gander, Newfoundland
Basic Information : Synopsis : Characters : Expectations : Thoughts : Evaluation : Book Group : Book References : Good Quotes : Table of Contents : References

Basic Information:

Author: Jim DeFede

Edition: ePub on Overdrive from the Fresno County Public Library

Publisher: William Morrow Paperbacks

ISBN: 0060559713 (ISBN13: 9780060559717)

Start Date: August 13, 2019

Read Date: August 16, 2019

256 pages

Genre: History,

Language Warning: None

Rated Overall: 4 out of 5

History: 3 out of 5

Synopsis (Caution: Spoiler Alert-Jump to Thoughts):

Planes in flight are caught with their intended airports closed to them on 9/11. 39 planes landed in Gander, Newfoundland. How does a small town care for an influx of foreigners about half of their population? Defede tells this story of passengers being unloaded from planes and whisked away to be fed at waiting lodging through out the region. The stories are personal and heart-tugging.

Cast of Characters:

Lopers-Clark, Roxanne and Alexandria: Just adapted Alexandria in Kazakhstan. Returning back to Texas.
Roth, Petra-mayor of Frankfurt
Werner Baldessarini-chairman of Hugo Boss
Vitale, George-New York State Trooper who was in Ireland to plan security for New York governor's visit. Returning home he threw himself into the work. It was only when a call from Newfoundland came unexpectedly, he let himself go.
O'Rouke, Hannah-Visited Ireland. Lost her son in one of the towers in New York on 9/11.
O'Driscoll, Maria and Lenny-Visiting Ireland. Classical violinist
Fast, Barbara-General, chief intelligence for US military, overseeing Europe, Asia, and some of the Middle East
Cash, Bill-owned a company which builds off-shore oil platforms.
Farrar, Deborah-got romantic with Greg Curtis, also a passenger who was stranded. Unknown in 2002 how the romance will turn out.
Briels, Clemens-Not talked about in the book. But when he left, he left a drawing. Turns out the Briels is a world class artist who was one of the offical artists for the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Syak, Rabbi Leivi-Orthodox Jew
Gray-Felder, Denise-vice-president of the Rockefeller Fund. Donated funds for school computers and for people in need.
Zale, Lisa-lived in a tent while in Gander, by choice.
Wood, Sara-lived in a tent while in Gander, by choice.
Berenson, Marisa-Super-model
Elliott, Claude-mayor of Gander
Fudge, Oz-one of two constables in Gander
Harris, Bonnie-Looked after the animals
Humbly, Linda-Looked after the animals
Tucker, Vi-looked after the animals
Smith, Eithne-Worker in Gander who befriended the Jewish community
O'Reilly, Harold-a lead supervisor of air traffic controllers at Gander
MacLeaod, Bruce-Gander resident who helped out making sure everyone was taken care of no matter how late.
Shepard, Rose-Irish resident of Gander
Knoth, Captain Reinhard-Lufthansa pilot. Arranged for his passengers to make it to New York city. But those who wanted to return to Europe, he had arranged for an immediate return flight.

Expectations:

Recommendation: Margaret from Book Group

When: August 2019

Date Became Aware of Book: Early on, but more in article form

How come do I want to read this book: Book group

What do I think I will get out of it? Interesting human aspect

Thoughts:

Introduction
- What kind of people are the people of Newfoundland? Combination of English and Irish. Their language was akin to Shakespeare. The speech seems to be more of third person present.
- Newfoundlanders (or Newfies) lean on each other to help and survive. Was this because it was a small community?
- A local song called No price tags on the doors of Newfoundland sums up the mentality of the island.
- The people of Newfoundland dropped what they were doing, placing their lives on hold, and gave of themselves. Why?
- The conclusion is the terrorists meant to expose the Western world’s weakness; Gandor showed its strength.
Day One
- Chapter One
  - Described the various passengers on some of the planes and why they were making the trip.
  - The streets of Gander are laid out to resemble a goose.
- Chapter Two
  - Air space in the US was closed. Planes in foreign territory could not enter the US. Planes were rerouted to airports in Canada. Gander was the one furthest to the east. There was the realization at over 12,000 people could be coming to a town of 29,000.
- Chapter Three
  - Describes the reactions of passengers when their plane was rerouted.
  - Werner Baldessarini, Hugo Boss’ chairman was also part of the crowd which got trapped at Gander. His revelation was that his worries was small compared to what had happened. Priorities changed.
- Chapter Four
  - Describes how a sleepy town became the center of activity for arriving planes.
  - Symbolic of the type of effect and spirit of 9/11 on Gander is the bus drivers. They had been on strike. When they understood the magnitude of the problems, they returned to drive their buses.
  - One town’s person who experienced the day described the close of the day like driving on an icy road in a snowstorm. You do not know how scared you were until you arrived home.
- Chapter Five
  - Deplaning passengers in Canada. The process and what happened to them
  - A comment was that it was amazing that none of the passengers were cranky or complaining-all seemed to be in good spirits.
  - The people of Gander were very accommodating, trying to meet all the needs of each passenger.
  - Reactions when people saw the video on 9/11 ranged from shock, anger, sadness, and disbelief. But also pride, the pride of being an American and that our nation would stand up to the terrorist and not give in. What was your reactions to 9/11?
  - The President's speech. How did his words affect you on that day? Now?
Day Two
- Chapter Six
  - Gander residents were opening up their homes and lives to the plane people.
  - How do I assist when people are in need?
- Chapter Seven
  - While the passengers were being taken care of, was their animals on-board which needed looking after? Can they be taken off of the planes? This included the usual assortment of dogs and cats, but also some more exotic animals such as Bonobo monkeys.
- Chapter Eight
  - Flight 5 becomes a party plane. Even when off-loaded, it is more party on the ground. What made this a party plane:
    - Recognition that 9/11 was a tragic day, That being cooped up in a plane was minor to what was happening in New York and Washington DC
    - Griping would not do them any good
    - Flight crew unlocked the liquor carts.
- Chapter Nine
  - One of the specialized issues facing the hosts was specific dietary needs. In particular the Orthodox Jewish community.
  - Question: How could somebody do something so evil, something that adversely affected so many innocent lives? What constitutes the evilness about this action? The size? The killing? How about when American's kill others?
- Chapter Ten
  - More on Newfoundland hospitality, only thing in a smaller town.
Day Three
- Chapter Eleven
  - More on Newfoundland hospitality, only thing in a smaller town.
  - The question comes up again, why would anyone take so many innocent lives?
- Chapter Twelve
  - More on Newfoundland hospitality-this time with toys for children. Plus other things of need
  - Does Jamie know about the Bonobo monkey's? Also are they closer to being human than any other animal?
- Chapter Thirteen
  - Some of the issues facing the passengers, such as Werner Baldessarini. He found himself hunting for underwear at WalMart. Dissatisfied with what he found, his staff found a fashion store which carried Hugo Boss items and the owner hand carried the clothing to him.
- Chapter Fourteen
  - Some of the passengers think they have landed in another world-a world of trust and courtesy. On the other hand, some of the visitors were high up people, such as those running the Rockefeller foundation. When asked how materials would be returned back to those who loaned them, the reply was, it did not matter.
- Chapter Fifteen
  - Time to start getting prepared to leave Newfoundland. Would they be returning to Europe or the US? Most preferred the US. But other forces would play into this as well. Some passengers resisted going back to Europe when informed late in the process.
Day Four
- Chapter Sixteen
  - Adventures of getting out of Canada by land. Car rentals cannot be taken across the border, hurricane might hit land, closing the ferry route. Or getting out by air-the airspace in the US was only beginning to open up and not all airports were available.
  - While many of the passengers were getting cranky with the uncertainty, some like Baldessarini was enjoying experience life more as a common person rather than being pampered. He realized the hospitality he was experiencing was something which was not easily dismissed or ignored.
  - What is a community? To the Rabbi, it was a group of people bound by faith and common values. The Rabbi understood from his work with drug addicts in London that there are good people in the world. He realized that the people of Newfoundland were among them. Why were so many people in London either tried or were addicted to drugs while here in Newfoundland, only one eighth of that number were? The Rabbi realized it was this sense of community and working with each other to better them.
- Chapter Seventeen
  - Talks about the Newfoundland Screeching-In ceremony. This is where a visitor becomes an honorary Newfie. Some of the passengers took part in this. There were other goodbye celebrations as well
Days Five and Six
- Chapter Eighteen
  - Everybody is going home. Some get to see a bit more of Newfoundland than others as their hosts would take them back to the airport via a scenic route. Romance was part of the adventure. When it came to leave, would the romance continue? One of the moving stories is a closet Jew came to see the Rabbi and get counseling about how to be Jewish. He had been part of the Polish exodus of children.
  - The Rabbi sums it up the best:
    - the generosity she and others at the school had shown would be remembered and celebrated for a very long time. Their actions were more than just taking in passengers whose flights had been delayed. The Newfoundlanders had provided a caring haven for hundreds of people at a moment when they were scared and far from home. They were made to feel safe and secure when the world around them seemed anything but.
- Chapter Nineteen
  - The two families going by land. Others were taking round about ways to get back. The Rabbi could not travel on the Sabbath nor on Rosh Hashanah. So his travel plans were tight, but some Newfoundlanders found a way to make it work.
  - We never know when a far off tragedy will affect us. That is a lesson which Gander was taught with 9/11.
  - Interesting reaction. The province government let Gander know that they would provide funds for a “thank you” party. The town leadership accepted. But the townspeople did not think it would be right to have a celebration while there was so much tragedy in the world.
Epilogue
- Chapter wraps up the stories of those who the book follows. Goes through life back in the US, reunions between passengers and towns people, and things passengers did to return thanks for the goodness they felt in Gander.

It is noted that Gander is laid out with a duck head. Here is an image from Google Earth:

Evaluation:

This is a feel-good story about the day of and following 9/11. Planes were still in the air approaching the United States with their destination airports closed. Many of them turned back or were able to land at major airports in Canada. But several of them, 39 planes, landed in Gander, once a thriving stop over town for both military and civilian planes, but now more a place to land in an emergency.

How does a town of 29,000 handle the influx of 12,000 passengers, to be kept for an unknown number of days? Friendly hospitality is the answer. Apparently Gander and the region excels in this. Defede tells the stories of several passengers and townspeople. All of them heartwarming. Most of them are common people, a few prominent.

It is a good, quick read, guaranteed to make you realize there are good hearted people in this world. The book is written about a year after 9/11, so the stories were fresh in people's minds. Just the after stories are a bit cut short.

Notes from my book group:

What would your reaction be to debarking from a plane in a different country than you expected?

Picture yourself as one of the crew of one of the planes when you were still flight. What reactions would you have had when you first heard. What considerations would you be faced with? Would you have told the passengers what happened? When would you tell them?

One of the reactions which passengers had when they found out about the events of 9/11 was wondering if there was a terriorist among themselves. How can you tell who is a terrorist?

Was Gander and the region prepared for this emergency? How did they react when they realized the magnitude of the problem? How do you think Fresno would react in a similar circumstance? Is there a difference? Why? The question which I asked myself while reading this book is, “how do I help those in need?”

When you heard about the towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon being hit, what were you doing? What was your reaction? What did you do? Did you listen to the president's speech that day? What were your thoughts when he was talking? Now?

How could somebody do something so evil, something that adversely affected so many innocent lives? What constitutes the evilness about this action? The size? The killing? How about when American's kill others?

Werner Baldessarini realization was that he was involved with something special. Even though he could leave, he did not want to. What made him stay? What made it special to him? What can we learn from his reaction?

The Rabbi raises the question, What is community? What was his answer? Is this true? What would be your answer? Do you experience community? What does a sense of community bring to you?

The Rabbi sums it up the best:

the generosity she and others at the school had shown would be remembered and celebrated for a very long time. Their actions were more than just taking in passengers whose flights had been delayed. The Newfoundlanders had provided a caring haven for hundreds of people at a moment when they were scared and far from home. They were made to feel safe and secure when the world around them seemed anything but.

Many of these questions are either from or adapted from LitLovers.

Why the title of The Day the World Came to Town?
How would you classify this book? Does it work for you?
Did the ending seem fitting? Satisfying? Predictable?
Which character were you most drawn to? Which you wanted to know more about? Less about?
- Which character did you identify with?
- Which one did you dislike?
Every story has a world view. Were you able to identify this story’s world view? What was it? How did it affect the story?
In what context was religion talked about in this book?
Was there anybody you would consider religious?
- How did they show it?
- Was the book overtly religious?
- How did it affect the books story?
Why do you think the author wrote this book?
- If the author wrote the book today, how do you think he would write it 18 years after the incident?
What would you ask the author if you had a chance?
What “take aways” did you have from this book?
Describe the culture talked about in the book.
- How is the culture described in this book different than where we live?
- What economic or political situations are described?
- Does the author examine economics and politics, family traditions, the arts, religious beliefs, language or food?
How did this book affect your view of the world?
- Of how God is viewed?
- What questions did you ask yourself after reading this book?
Talk about specific passages that struck you as significant—or interesting, profound, amusing, illuminating, disturbing, sad...?
- What was memorable?

From the Mini Book Bytes blog:

The Day of the Attack:

Do you remember where you were when you first heard about the terrorist acts on 9/11? What were your initial reactions? How did these reactions change as the day want on? How was it different for us living in the Midwest compared to people living closer to the attacks?
Were you watching TV that day? What role did the media play in the way viewers reacted to the attacks? At the time, what were some of the images that made an impression on you?
When Mineta ordered the planes down, “…the US was effectively passing the potential threat posed by these planes onto” Canada…Despite the risk, Canada didn’t hesitate. 6 Discuss. Do you think this was fair?
On P. 19, DeFede talks about Captain Knoth. As he waited for instruction, he wondered about the people on his plane. How would you have felt as a pilot or flight attendant? What would you have told your passengers? How would you have felt as a passenger?
On p. 61, DeFede writes about one of the passengers studying her fellow passengers and wondering: What does a terrorist look like? She didn’t know. Think about the word “terrorist” for a moment. What images/stereotypes come to mind? Where do these stereotypes come from? How do we break down these stereotypes?

Gander:

Has anyone visited Gander?
Discuss the culture of Gander. How does it differ from yours? Is anyone from a small town?
Discuss the importance of Gander in getting the planes down quickly & safely.
Are there any stories that stood out? Please share specific quotes or passages.
Some passengers craved news, others wanted to avoid it. Discuss.
Would you invite strangers into your home? Why or why not?
Discuss the Screeching-In ceremony in Chapter 17. Does your family or hometown have special celebrations? If so, tell us about them.
After all the passengers left, the people of Gander turned down a party. Why? How do you think the people of Gander felt after everything was over? Discuss the Newfie way. (Chap. 19)

Returning Home:

Everyone has a different way of coping with stress. When it came time to get back on the planes, “…there was genuine fear among the flight crews,…” 173 Consider the events of 9/11 & imagine having to get back on a plane. How would you have felt? How would you have handled it?
In Chapter 15 when the Lopers discover that their flight is not going back to the U.S. as planned, but returning to Germany, they decide to drive. They had to figure out their own way home. What would you have done?
The chairman of Hugo Boss, Baldessarini could have gone home on a private jet. Instead he returned with his fellow passengers. He said,”… flying home while the others were left behind would have been an act of betrayal of everything that had happened over the last 72 hours. He would go when the others went…He was in this until the end.” 194 Discuss his reasoning. What would you have done?
Do you feel differently after these events when you fly? Do you still fly? Do you feel safe?

The Legacy of 9/11:

Discuss some of the other stories from 9/11.
How did life in America change after 9/11? Who was most affected by these changes?
Did the story make you question any of your own beliefs?
How did the events of September 11 bring out both the “worst” & the “best” in people?
Have the events of 9/11 changed your daily lives in a positive way? In a negative way?
What is the legacy of 9/11? What does it mean to live in a post-9/11 world?
Would you change any of the policies or laws that have been put in place since 9/11?

About the author & the book:

Why did the author open the book the way he did? (the adoption story)
Is the author’s background reflected in the book? Discuss the writing style. This was the author’s first book. Was the writing accessible to readers at large?
What is original about this book? How is it different from other books?
What was the author’s attitude towards his subject. How do you think the author was changed by the experience of writing the book.
What did you think about the title of the book? Why was it titled that way? Can you think of an alternative title?
What’s the overall message the author is trying to convey?

Wrap-up:

For the person who chose the book, why did you select it?
Did you know anything about this event prior to reading this book?
What preconceived notions did you have about 9/11 before reading this book? Did these change after reading the book?
Did you learn something new? If so, what was it? If not, how did the author fail?
Did you learn anything new about yourself as you read the book? Please share.
Do the issues raised in this book affect your life now? In the future? How so?
Did this book broaden your perspective of the world? In what way?
Has reading this book changed your opinion of person or events?
FYI – There is a Broadway musical called “Come From Away.” Do you think it would make a good movie? Who would you pick to direct & star in it?
Rate the book from 1 – 5. What are the book’s strengths and weaknesses? Would you recommend this book to readers who don’t read nonfiction? Why?

Book References:

Dictionary of Newfoundland English

Good Quotes:

First Line: “Where are you going?”
Last Line: Walking through the entrance, Roxanne said the only thing that made sense in that moment, two words she’d waited more than a week to say: “We’re home.”

Table of Contents:

Introduction
Day One
- Chapter One
- Chapter Two
- Chapter Three
- Chapter Four
- Chapter Five
Day Two
- Chapter Six
- Chapter Seven
- Chapter Eight
- Chapter Nine
- Chapter Ten
Day Three
- Chapter Eleven
- Chapter Twelve
- Chapter Thirteen
- Chapter Fourteen
- Chapter Fifteen
Day Four
- Chapter Sixteen
- Chapter Seventeen
Days Five and Six
- Chapter Eighteen
- Chapter Nineteen
Epilogue

References:

Publisher's Web Site for Book
Author's Web Site And Facebook
Amazon-Book
Amazon-Author
Barnes and Noble
GoodReads-Book
GoodReads-Author
Huffington Post review
Mini Book Bytes blog
A Book Lover’s blog

Saturday, July 27, 2019

Love Your Enemies

Book: Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt
Basic Information : Synopsis : Expectations : Thoughts : Evaluation : Book Group : New Words : Book References : Good Quotes : References

Basic Information:

Author: Arthur C. Brooks

Edition: epub on Overdrive from the Fresno County Library

Publisher: Broadside e-books

ISBN: 0062883771 (ISBN 13: 9780062883773)

Start Date: July 11, 2019

Read Date: July 27, 2019

256 pages

Genre: Essay

Language Warning: None

Rated Overall: 4 out of 5

Synopsis (Caution: Spoiler Alert-Jump to Thoughts):

Conservative politically, Brooks looks over the political landscape and sees not only values he does not endorse from his own party, but the conversation in America has degenerated. Contempt for opposing sides of issues is rampant-he believes this is the central issue. Brooks outlines the issues and then walks through what he considers some solutions, which he calls rules.

Rule 1. Stand up to the Man. Refuse to be used by the powerful.
Rule 2. Escape the bubble. Go where you’re not invited and say things people don’t expect.
Rule 3. Say no to contempt. Treat others with love and respect, even when it’s difficult. Rule 4. Disagree better. Be part of a healthy competition of ideas.
Rule 5. Tune out: Disconnect from unproductive debates.

Thoughts:

Introduction: Are You Sick of Fighting Yet?

Definition of our country’s problem today: we have a culture of contempt.

Contempt: Anger mixed with disgust. Complete disdain. Arthur Schopenhauer’s definition: unsullied conviction of the worthlessness of another.

Brooks understands that this is the worst political climate since the Civil War.

Not a member of a political party, but is a believer in free enterprise. Says that he is a somewhat more on the conservative leanings. He was 54 years old and the head of a conservative, free enterprise think tank-now is a professor at Harvard. Also is a Catholic and teaches marital relations seminars.

He cites an instance where people came together, even though they are on the opposite side of things. At a pro-Trump rally, the MC, Tommy Hodges, noted a counter-demostration which Hawk Newsome (Black Lives Matter of New York) was a leader of. Tommy decided to give Hawk two minutes of speech time during the demonstration. He talked about why Black Lives Matter is needed. Some of the things Tommy said the crowd booed. But many of the things there was resonance with. Such as needing to get rid of bad cops like you would a bad plumber. It is not only Black Lives which matter, but all lives, it just seems like there is more injustice happening on the black side of things. That is what they want to get corrected. This created a better understanding. After Hawk’s speech, several people came up to him and said that they understood better what was happening. After all of that and back at home, Tommy decided that he would rather love people than blast them. (Respect and Rebellion web site, also the Daily SIgnal with an interview with Hawk Newsome) This is probably the most powerful story in the book and one which Brooks continues to go back to time and time again.

Hawk notes that political violence is something other countries experience, not what the USA does. Hodges also says it is time to bring everybody together. Set a new standard.

Brooks says that contempt is a false choice given to us by today’s leaders. Brooks talk at Harvard.

He is not looking for civility and tolerance-he thinks those standards are too low. He feels that to make a change, love is the standard to shoot for. Love as in popular culture is weak. He quotes Thomas Aquinas: To Love is to will the good of the other.

Disagreement is not grounds to compare a person or ideology to people or systems which have killed millions of people. There is more room in the middle for most discourse, you just have to find it. That is pretty much what the book is about.

1 The Culture of Contempt

A 2014 study found an asymmetry in belief of motives by those who are political opponents. Usually you think your ideology is based on love and benevolence while your opponents based upon hate and evil. Right now this rivals the Palestinians and Israelis. This means there is limited room for bipartisanship in America.

But anger is not the cause-he points out that anger is not a big factor in marriage separation. This difference in perception about what you are trying to accomplish leads to contempt, which causes separations.

With politics, competitors also need to be collaborators[a major point in the book]. Contempt does not lead to working together. It makes you want to defeat a person.

Like a drug addiction, we are responsible for the fuel coming into our system which breeds contempt. But there are pushers like there is with drugs which provide the fuel. It builds them up and tears down our nation. It is noted that we get most of our feedback on social media, even dating apps, from friends who are like minded. There are five like-minded friends to every friend who thinks differently.

Kindness and respect will generally turn contempt into friendliness. According to Matthew Lieberman, a UCLA psychologist, we desire positive social connections-which shows why we gravitate to like-minded friends. I think Brooks idea is that the kindness and respect will provide the positive connection Lieberman is talking about. Lieberman says to happiness is gives you the same well-being as earning an extra $100,000-probably a lot easier too.

Brooks brings up the point, how much would you suffer to be right on a point. The separation of a friendship can feel like a broken bone. But isn’t there a sense that friendship should be built on “trueness” rather than falsehood? Would agreeing with a friend for the sake of friendship be something horrible? I think there must be a way to be “right” but still not divide a friendship. Many of the great people in the past were able to be friends while working opposite sides of an issue. How did they do it?

Dr. John Gottman rules for marital harmony as applied to America:

Focus on what is causing the other person’s distress. Listen, not rebut.
Adopt the five to one rule: five positive comments to one negative.
Contempt is never justified.
Associate with people who disagree with you. Make new friends with differing opinions.

Dalai Lama-When you are treated with contempt, don’t view it as a threat but as an opportunity.

Conquer anger through gentleness, unkindness through kindness, greed through generosity, and falsehood by truth. Be truthful; do not yield to anger. Buddist teaching.

Attitude follows action.

2 Can You Afford to Be Nice?

For leaders, civility is a valuable commodity. It allows for initial connections and relationships to develop. You admire leaders who lift you up, not those who are jerks. This is not borne out with President Trump. Many people view his lack of civility as being a sin of honesty and forthrightness, not of being a jerk, I am not one of them.

Brooks points out the Nelson Mandela is sort of an extreme case of civility. He says that Mandela felt that goodness wins a moral struggle-sounds like Ghandi here. Even when persecuted unjustly, treat others with kindness and respect. If you did not, it was a failing of character.

Gratitude is, quite simply, a contempt killer. Brooks says that gratitude is needed most when facing hostile people.

3 Love Lessons for Leaders

Brooks raises the question: when is it time for a leader to be a tough leader? Is it when the nation is divided? Seemly lost its ability to be governed? He brings up Machiavelli about it is safer to be feared than loved. It is hard and exceptional to be a leader who is loved. Daniel Goleman says these are called coercive leaders-that is the feared, not loved leader.

Interesting. Jonathan Haidt, who Brooks talks about later in the book, says that both liberals and conservatives use the same terms but mean different things. Brooks talks about the gap between the classes in America. He says that liberals talk about an income gap. But he thinks it is more of a dignity gap-the work which a person has available to them. A book by a conservative puts forth the dignity rather than money thoughts is Hillbilly Elegy by J.D. Vance. Brooks says that to feel dignity, you need to feel needed by others. This does explain the rage which many people feel and the lack of understanding by the more liberal members of our society. There is something to be said that if liberals are from the upper classes, there is not as much experience with this lack of being needed. It looks on the surface like things are a matter of not enough money. On the other hand, conservatives seem to discount the money aspect and say live on dignity, money will follow sometime.

It is hard to stand up to a coercive leader-there is a need to support the person who does stand up. There is also an attraction to the dominant leader-an admiration of power and security presented by the person.

Free speech has been shut down by either side. Little exchanging of ideas occur, even, or maybe particularly on college campuses. This is another place where ideas should be talked about, rather than shouted at each other-my words, not Brooks.

Brooks thinks that dignity is the key. There is space under this banner for ideas on both sides. Not so sure that liberals would agree with this. Not that they are against dignity, rather they also see things just as important or more so, such as justice and economic power.

There is a difference between coercive leader and an authoritative leader-Brooks’ verbiage. The authoritative leader gets mad, a righteous anger, on behalf of those who are vulnerable. Nelson Mandela is an example. There is no banishing a person because they are on the wrong side. Rather, you treat the person like a brother who is errant. Wrongness is forgiven and we move on. Righteous anger is an expression of generosity. It is not weak, but is strong for others.

In politics today, the biggest threat we face is rejecting kindness not in favor of anger, but of contempt. This is a weapon of mass destruction, a weapon we should not use. Ultimately, this is a loser weapon. People are drawn to long term happiness, particularly those who fight for others.

America was created more by disagreement than agreement. From disagreement they figured out how to govern through disagreement.

4 How Can I Love My Enemies If They Are Immoral?

Brooks talks about the moral depravity of our times where drunkenness and infidelity is accepted. But he also points out that in 2016 the candidates were calling each other names using moral overtones. He calls these moral battlefields. This sets the tone for our nation’s dialogue. No longer is it about having honest disagreements, but about who is more moral in a moral swamp.

The author then talks about Haidt’s work, particularly about what he calls moral foundations theory. Haidt thinks that certain things are innate rather than a blank slate at birth.Haidt talks about five foundations of morality:

Fairness
Care for others
Respect for authority
Loyalty to one’s group
Purity/sanctity
Also Haidt added liberty

The crux of the problem here is to define the terms so that we all agree. Haidt points out that liberals and conservatives have a set of different ideas of what is fair. Conservatives might think that as long as everybody has an equal chance at something-all are playing by the same rules, then that is fair. But a liberal might point out that discrimation in the past will not let people have the same opportunities.So the rewards have to be proportional to the needs vs to one's competencies.

Haidt goes on and says that it is not that a group of people, liberals in this case, have more or less morals, but that they are a different set of morals with different strengths and emphasises. Also on Haidt’s scale, a conservitive may have about the same strength in each of his five/six areas. While a liberal will usually specialize in a couple of them. This is set in today’s political climate.

Moral arguments beat economic arguments every time-whether we are liberal or conservative--we are all moral createurs who are encoded to value compassion and fairness. So when making an argument, ask where is my appeal to? Is it the majority or a select few of the minority? (Note: In my mind this question has to be asked fairly, not to everyone who is right type of argument, but how does it resonate with others beyond my own circle.

Brooks says there are three takeaways from moral psychology:

Focus arguments on moral values we share, such as compassion and fairness, rather than only one part of the population
Be wary of leaders who manipulate-particularly in politics and/or the media. The use of wedge issues to divide and fuel contempt.
- Divisive leaders emphasis certain values to the exclusion of others, usually their strengths and fault the other side for not being strong in these areas. Of course the other side has their own list of strengths and faults.
  - Sort of reminds you of Jesus saying don’t condemn someone else until you pull the plank out of your own eye.
- Brooks says changing someone, particularly in this manner is like changing taste buds.
- This extends to religious matters as well.
  - If we want unity, get outside of our comfort zones. Go where you are not welcome and talk with people.
Divergent moral values are not a bug, but a feature that can make us stronger
- Reflect on what the other side is saying
- Not only feelings, but what is right

5 The Power and Peril of Identity

Brooks opens the chapter with a question about which what mental picture do you have of four different types of people. This is a trick question designed to make you think about how you associate people with your own prejudices. (Gary’s note: If you think you are not prejudiced, how deeply have you looked at yourself. Let's say, if a person from a particular racial group approached you in a dark alley, which group would you fear less?) Brooks notes that at the end of things, what really matters is the intense love you feel towards another person.

People naturally sort themselves out by communities they can identify with. But this also creates us vs them situations. There are two kinds of social capital: bonding social capital-inward looking, the sameness which somebody has with me. Bridging social capital-usually built on something higher, such as we are all human, looks beyond our sameness. Bridging is more of a long-term picture while bonding is more instantaneous. Focusing on bridging can lead to acceptance. Look at how those involved with gay rights have bridged-we just want to be married, just like you.

Brooks points out that you cannot force people together-that is toxic. Discovering the “we” in the discussion can overcome differences. It needs to be an active choice to come together.

Differences are important. Just know the places we can come together.

Today there are three types of leaders:

Breakers-those who drive people apart by contempt. Can be found on both conservative and liberal sides.
Bonders-these are not those who drive apart, but they do not bring us together
Bridgers-those who try to bring people together. The “we” people.

6 Tell Me a Story

John Adams: Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. I have two competing thoughts. First, we need to adhere to that more today than anytime in my 65 years. The other thought is that Adams had not met President Trump. In today’s world, more data does not convince people, it just antignizes or makes people not want to talk with you. More data only is good for people who already believe. This is referred to as confirmation bias

Turns out that stories are a very good way to implant in people’s brains a set of beliefs. (Sometimes my children have told me, but it is just a story. Or my wife will talk about a historical fiction story. I feel that fiction is the most sinister way to supplant true facts with false interpretations.).

Statistics do not make connections-individual people do.

Stories can be powerful, both positive and negative. As an example, the stories told about the Jews by the Nazi’s drove a whole nation to try to annhilate a race. Or in the United States, the treatment of Native Americans took to dehumanize them, allowing for the taking of lands and lives. This is a warning about how people are portrayed-rapists, murders, … There is always an attempt to dehumanize. That is where what happens in a political rally where speakers are shouted down, or even on a college campus where a speaker is not allowed to speak. Le Bon showed that crowds insight people to act differently than if they were alone.

Trolling, anonymous posting, is one of the most destructive items on social media. It is was correlated with negative behaviors. (Brooks suggests if you are going out on a date, someplace in the conversation, ask, Do you have an anonymous Twitter account? If the answer is yes, RUN!) For those of us who do not troll, he suggests, they be ignored. Anybody who will not say who they are, should not be responded to. Also just cut back on the use of social media.

Find stories which resonate with a topics discussed. Better than preaching. A story should be concise and to the point. Hemingway wrote a whole story in six words. Brooks suggests as a starter, write down your story in twelve words or less.

7 Is Competition Our Problem?

Brooks talks about how certain recess games in elementary school are to be discouraged, more due to self-esteem issues. But he notes that there is a positive aspect as well-there is an emphasis on games where you cooperate rather than compete. He notes that competition is a second place action next to cooperation.

Fairness is part of competition, where there needs to be competition. No one wants to be in or see a game where rules are broken and there is no penalty. This implies that there are rules. Particularly meaningful and fair rules. Rules must be applied equally. Voluntary cooperation with the rules is a mainstay. Lastly, when competition is done properly, it unites people. Such as sports fans who are rooting for opposing teams will want to talk to others about the game.

Great leaders love competition because they know it improves them and their company. Only the mediocre prefers to go by without this improvement process. Bribes and other illegal activities are not part of competition or even getting ahead. It does not enhance greatness, rather emphasises how wretched a company/person is. Americans generally do not resent when a person gets ahead. What is resented is when there is cheating or the system gets gamed.

Brooks feels the most important competition is the competition of ideas. Having different ideas is not bad. Through this competition, you take away that which is not fit, leaving those which have possibilities.

If I am right and you are wrong, why talk? John Stewart Mills points out that it is in the it is when dissimilar ideas come in contact does progress happen.This is a hallmark of a free society, the discussion and m0lding of ideas.Shutting down ideas through protests or mocking or stifling it is either stupid or evil.

People no longer think that debate is possible. That when disagreements happen, then the talk is not heard. See Haidt’s book. We are learning to despise and ostracize, rather than understand and engage those with whom they disagree.

Brooks says that just tolerating or being civil is not a high enough standard to achieve excellence. One must be grateful for the opposition. Without them you cannot excel. Do we really want to live in a country where there is only one way to think? This in some ways reminds me of the ending of E.R.R. Eddison’s The Worm Ouroboros. After the wars end, their lives feel empty. When asked what do you want to do now? It was to engage in conflict.

Brooks points out that our freedoms are mutual-ours being mine and those who do not think like me. So if I am grateful for my freedom, I need to be grateful for their freedom as well. The point of true friendship is truth seeking, armistices are not a mechanism to get to the truth. Brooks summarizes Aristotle by saying: The highest expression of this Aristotelian ideal is that two people total disagree on a substantive thing but are willing to debate each other on it, precisely because they both care so much about the underlying issue on which they agree.

Brooks lists some “rules” to engage with

Rule 1. Find the friendly opposition. Brooks says that we tend to separate ourselves out from those who disagree with us. Without the practice of disagreement, you get defensive and angry.
Rule 2. Don’t attack or insult. Don’t even try to win. The purpose is to enrich the discussion, test out your point of view in a respectful way, and persuade someone you care.Chances there are people whom you love on the other side. By insulting those on the other side, you are insulting someone whom you love.
Rule 3. Never assume the motives of another person.
Rule 4. Use your values as a gift, not as a weapon. By using values as a weapon, you turn a positive into a negative. Sometimes a value is used to energize the base of a party. It used to be that the politician was saying this is what we believe, not that the other person is evil.

Ignorance of the other side and who they are and what they believe is a great part of the issue of contempt.

8 Please Disagree with Me

Brooks goes back to Aristotle and says that there are three kinds of friendship:

Utility-what each side can do for each other
Pleasure-we are drawn to each other due to a myriad attractions-intelligence, talent, ….
Good of the other-This is the highest form-a sense of virtue and trueness.

As you go up the ladder of friendship, you want to share more and more, even your disagreements. You are not going to be contemptuous in your disagreement because that would drive the other person away.

Conclusion: Five Rules to Subvert the Culture of Contempt

Rule 1. Stand up to the Man. Refuse to be used by the powerful. Most of us think that it is someone else is is being used, particularly if they have opposing ideas. Comes in two forms:
- Passive:tunning out the manipulators
- Active: Stand up against people on your own side who trash talk others.
Rule 2. Escape the bubble. Go where you’re not invited and say things people don’t expect.
Rule 3. Say no to contempt. Treat others with love and respect, even when it’s difficult. Even if you think they deserve contempt, do not be that way. This is your chance to change your own ways.
Rule 4. Disagree better. Be part of a healthy competition of ideas.
Rule 5. Tune out: Disconnect more from the unproductive debates. He is not talking about forever. But more take a break, a hiatus from debate. Learn to relax again and enjoy other things.
- Politics is like daytime soap operas. You can skip a couple of weeks and not have missed too much.
- Your vision will be clearer.
- As a reformed political addict, you will realize how much time you were wasting.

Evaluation:

From the title, Love Your Enemies, you wonder if this is a Christian book. I would say it's more of a Christian influenced book. While I am not sure how much there is about directly loving your political enemies in the book there is, it is a book directed towards softening attitudes. His main theme is to move us away from a culture of contempt from our enemies to one where we are grateful that we can live in a land where we can enjoy dialogue with those who have different views than us.

Does Brooks live up to his title? Probably not. The more complex and the more words one throws at something Jesus said, usually the less on the mark we are. But it is a good book for today. It is well worth a read and a pondering.

Note: This seemed to be the summer where I was to read this type of book. Also in the same lines is Peter Wehner’s Death of Politics and Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind.