Posts Tagged ‘North Korea’

The Great Successor

June 29, 2019

“The Great Successor” is the title of a new book by Anna Fifield. The subtitle is “The Divinely Perfect Destiny of Brilliant Comrade Kim Jong Un.” Should you be wondering why you should be interested in Kim Jong Un, HM will first explain why he is interested and then will explain why you should be interested. HM is interested because he served in Korea in the military and has does much reading on Korea. His wife is Korean. And he knows much of the history of Korea. Korea is a peninsula that managed to maintain its integrity and culture in spite of many invasions by China and Japan. At the end of WW II the United States divided Korea in half: the south to be occupied by American soldiers and the North to be occupied by Soviet soldiers. The Soviets only entered the war after the Atomic bombs had been dropped on Japan. Nevertheless, they were given half of the peninsula, not only dividing a culture that had existed for over a thousand years, but effectively assigning the North Koreans to hell.

Nevertheless, it was an interesting experiment. South Korea became a prosperous capitalist country selling automobiles and electronics to the rest of the world. North Korea, remained poor, but nevertheless developed nuclear weapons, long range missiles, and a frightening cyberwarfare capability. Actually the west has more to fear from North Korea’s cyberwar capabilities than it does of its nuclear and missile delivery systems.

If this isn’t enough to encourage you to continue reading, consider that Kim Jong Un is an individual for whom Trump has tremendous admiration and respect.

The Soviet Union installed Kim Il Sung as the dictator of North Korea, who eventually invaded South Korea and started the Korean war. He also started a brutal dictatorship that endures today. Kim Il Sung eventually died and his son Kim Jong Il succeeded him. He continued the brutal dictatorship. Kim Jung Un is the third in succession. To the best of HM’s belief, this is the first and only hereditary dictatorship. The actual lineage here is confusing. Although the sons were hereditary, there is no rule of succession. Different mothers, and younger sons were selected to get the best, most promising dictators.

Kim Jong Un differs from his father and his grandfather as he was educated in the west and has traveled extensively. To understand Kim Jong Un it helps to understand the Machiavellian principles by which he governs.

“He embodies the dictim laid out five centuries earlier by the Italian Nicolo Machiavelli in his book: that it is better to be feared than loved. In the first year of his reign, Kim Jong Un put his country, already the world’s most isolated, on lockdown. He had security along the river border with China reinforced. He had patrols stepped up. His efforts to thwart attempts to escape were much more draconian than his father’s.”

“Like his predecessors, he has managed to survive as a dictator by controlling an entire nation through a relatively tiny group of people. It was another rule expounded by Machiavelli: don’t worry about the general population; just be sure to enrich a small, elite group.”

Blaine Harden, a Korea expert who wrote the enthralling, true account of a Korean escaping to freedom in his book “Escape from Camp 14: One Man’s Remarkable Odysses from North Korea to Freedom in the West.” Here is the review he provided of Ms. Fifeld’s book. “The Great Successor shows how a pudgy young heir to tyranny—using fratricide, nuclear terror, crony capitalism, and strategic flattery of a vain American president—has become a sure-footed Machiavelli for the twenty-first century.”

Readers might have seen pictures of the North Korean capital, Pyongyang. Part of it looks something like Manhattan and has been nicknamed Pyonghattan. But only the most loyal Koreans are allowed to live there. Ninety % of North Koreans are dirt poor, trying to scrape out a living via individual capitalism who need to bribe officials to keep their illegal enterprises going. About 10% of North Koreans can be regarded as being relatively well off. And the top 0.1% are obscenely wealthy.

The North Koreans studied Donald Trump. They saw his narcissism as a point of entry. They knew he would be a sucker for a deal on nuclear arms. Of course, they initially insulted Trump and Trump responded in kind. But the goal was to set up a meeting with the President of the United States. Never before had a North Korean leader met directly with a President of the United States. Typically, there are many negotiations before such a meeting can take place. And agreements have been made absent a direct meeting with the President of the United States. But Trump, viewing himself as the great deal maker, agreed to meet directly with Kim Jong Un. Although nothing was accomplished at the meeting for the Americans, North Korea achieved a first for the country by managing to meet with the American President.

A subsequent meeting fell flat, but Trump remains entranced with this North Korean dictator. He thinks he has established a bond. Kim Jong Un writes flattering letters to Trump, who regards Un as his buddy. Trump’s promised not to spy on North Korea.

Some points need to be understood. The only goal Kim Jong Un has is to stay in power. He cares nothing about the welfare of his people. Although he might sign agreements to denuclearize, he will never denuclearize. The memory of Mummar Gaddafi sticks strongly in his mind. Gaddafi agreed to denuclearize and ended up dying in a ditch. The best hope for Kim Jong Un is that he will suffer an early death. He is in extremely poor health.

Censorship, Disinformation, and the Burial of Truth

January 20, 2019

This is the eighth post in a series of posts on a book by P.W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking titled “Likewar: The Weaponization of Social Media. Initially, the notion that the internet would provide the basis for truth and independence was supported. The Arab Spring was promoted on the internet. The authors write, “Social media had illuminated the shadows crimes through which dictators had long clung to power, and offered up a powerful new means of grassroots mobilization.

Unfortunately, this did not last. Not only did the activists fail to sustain their movement, but they noticed that the government began to catch up. Tech-illiterate bureaucrats were replaced by a new generation of enforcers who understood the internet almost as well as the protestors. They invaded online sanctuaries and used the very same channels to spread propaganda. And these tactics worked. The much-celebrated revolutions fizzled. In Libya and Syria, digital activists turned their talents to waging internecine civil wars. In Egypt, the baby named Facebook would grow up in a country that quickly turned back to authoritarian government.

The internet remains under the control of only a few thousand internet service providers (ISPs). These firms run the backbone, or “pipes,” of the internet. Only a few ISPs supply almost all of he world’s mobile data. Because two-thirds of all ISPs reside in the United States, the average number across the rest of the world is relatively small. The authors note that, “Many of these ISPs hardly qualify as “businesses” at all. Rather, they are state-sanctioned monopolies or crony sanctuaries directed by the whim of local officials. Although the internet cannot be destroyed, regimes can control when the internet goes on or off and what goes on it.

Governments can control internet access and target particular areas of the country. India, the world’s largest democracy had the mobile connections in an area where violent protests had started out for a week. Bahrain instituted an internet curfew that affected only a handful of villages where antigovernment protests were brewing. When Bahrainis began to speak out against the shutdown, authorities narrowed their focus further, cutting access all the way down to specific internet users and IP addresses.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has poured billions of dollars into its National Internet Project. It is intended as a web replacement, leaving only a few closely monitored connections between Iran and the outside world. Italian officials describe it as creating a “clean” internet for its citizens, insulated from the “unclean” web that the rest of us use.

Outside the absolute-authoritarian state of North Korea (whose entire internet is a closed network of about 30 websites), the goal isn’t so much to stop the signal as it is to weaken it. Although extensive research and special equipment can circumvent government controls, the empower parts of the internet are no longer for the masses.

Although the book discusses China, that discussion will not be included here as there are separate posts on the book “Censored: Distraction and Diversion Inside China’s Great Firewall” by Margaret E. Roberts.

The Russian government hires people to create chaos on the internet. They are tempted by easy work and good money for work such as writing more than 200 blog posts and comments a day, assuming fake identities, hijacking conversations, and spreading lies. This is an ongoing war of global censorship by means of disinformation.

Russia’s large media networks are in the hands of oligarchs, whose finances are deeply intertwined with those of the state. The Kremlin makes its positions known through press releases and private conversations, the contents of which are then dutifully reported to the Russian people, no matter how much spin it takes to make them credible.

Valery Gerasimov has been mentioned in previous healthy memory blog posts. He channeled Clausewitz in speech reprinted in the Russian military newspaper that “the role of nonmilitary means of achieving political and strategic goals has grown. In many cases, they have exceeded the power of the force of weapons in their effectiveness.” This is known as the Gerasimov Doctrine that has been enshrined in the nation’s military strategy.

Individuals working at the Internet Research Agency assume a series of fake identities known as “sockpuppets.” The authors write, The job was writing hundreds of social media posts per day, with the goal of hijacking conversations and spreading lies, all to the benefit of the Russian government. For this work people are paid the equivalent of $1500 per month. (Those who worked on the “Facebook desk” targeting foreign audience received double the pay of those targeting domestic audiences).

The following is taken directly from the text:

“The hard work of a sockpuppet takes three forms, best illustrated by how they operated during the 2016 U.S. election. One is to pose as the organizer of a trusted group. @Ten_GOP called itself the “unofficial Twitter account of Tennessee Republicans” and was followed by over 136,000 people (ten times as many as the official Tennessee Republican Party Account). It’s 3,107 messages were retweeted 1,213,506 times. Each retweet then spread to millions more users especially when it was retweeted by prominent Trump campaign figures like Donald Trump Jr., Kellyanne Conway, and Michael Flynn. On Election Day 2016, it was the seventh most retweeted account across all of Twitter. Indeed, Flynn followed at least five such documented accounts, sharing Russian propaganda with his 1000,000 followers at least twenty-five times.

The second sockpuppet tactic is to pose as a trusted news source. With a cover photo image of the U.S. Constitution, @partynews presented itself as hub for conservative fans of the Tea Party to track the latest headlines. For months , the Russian front pushed out anti-immigrant and pro-Trump messages and was followed and echoed out by some 22,000 people, including Trump’s controversial advisor Sebastian Gorka.

Finally, sockpuppets pass as seemingly trustworthy individuals: a grandmother, a blue-collar worker from the midwest,a decorated veteran, providing their own heartfelt take on current events (and who to vote for). Another former employee of the Internet
Research Agency, Alan Baskayev, admitted that it could be exhausting to manage so many identities. “First you had to be a redneck from Kentucky, then you had to be some white guy from Minnesota who worked all his life, paid taxes and now lives in poverty; and in 15 minutes you have to write something in the slang of [African] Americans from New York.”

There have been many other posts about Russian interference in Trump’s election. Trump lost the popular vote, and it is clear that he would not have won the Electoral College had it not been for Russia. Clearly, Putin owns Trump.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

WannaCry & NotPetya

July 19, 2018

This post is based on “THE PERFECT WEAPON: War, Sabotage, & Fear in the Cyber Age,” by David E. Sanger. The North Koreans got software stolen from the NSA by the Shadow Brokers group. So, the NSA lost its weapons and the North Koreans shot them back.

The North Korean hackers married NSA’s tool to a new form of ransomware, which locks computers and makes their data inaccessible—unless the user pays for an electronic key. The attack was spread via a phishing email similar to the one used by Russian hackers in the attacks on the Democratic National Committee and other targets in 2016. It contained an encrypted, compressed file that evaded most virus-detection software. Once it burst alive inside a computer or network, users received a demand for $300 to unlock their data. It is not known how many paid, but those who did never got the key, if there ever was one—to unlock their documents and databases.

WannaCry, like the Russian attackers on the Ukraine power grid, was among a new generation of attacks that put civilians in the crosshairs. Jared Cohen, a former State Department official said, “If you’re wondering why you’re getting hacked—or attempted hacked—with greater frequency, it is because you are getting hit with the digital equivalent of shrapnel in an escalating state-against-state war, way out there in cyberspace.”

WannaCry shut down the computer systems of several major British hospital systems, diverting ambulances and delaying non-emergency surgeries. Banks and transportation systems across dozens of counties were affected. WannaCry hit seventy-four countries. After Britain, the hardest hit was Russia (Russia’s Interior Ministry was among the most prominent victims). The Ukraine and Taiwan were also hit.

It was not until December 2017, three years to the day after Obama accused North Korea of the Sony attacks, for the United States and Britain to formally declare that Kim Jong-un’s government was responsible for WannaCry. President Trump’s homeland security adviser Thomas Bossert said he was “comfortable” asserting that the hackers were “directed by the government of North Korea,” but said that conclusion came from looking at “not only the operational infrastructure, but also the tradecraft and the routine and the behaviors that we’ve seen demonstrated in past attacks. And so you have to apply some gumshoe work here, and not just some code analysis.”

“The gumshoe work stopped short of reporting about how Shadow Brokers allowed the North Koreans to get their hands on tools developed for the American cyber arsenal. Describing how the NSA enabled North Korean hackers was either too sensitive, too embarrassing or both. Bossert was honest about the fact that having identified the North Koreans, he couldn’t do much else to them. “President Trump has used just about every level you can use, short of starving the people of North Korea to death, to change their behavior,” Bossert acknowledged. “And so we don’t have a lot of room left here.”
The Ukraine was victim to multiple cyberattacks. One of the worst was NotPetya. NotPetya was nicknamed by the Kaspersky Lab, which is itself suspected by the US government of providing back doors to the Russian government via its profitable security products. This cyberattack on the Ukrainians seemed targeted at virtually every business in the country, both large and small—from the television stations to the software houses to any mom-and-pop shops that used credit cards. Throughout the country computer users saw the same broken-English message pop onto their screens. It announced that everything on the hard drives of their computers had been encrypted: “Oops, your important files have been encrypted…Perhaps you are busy looking to recover your files, but don’t waste your time.” Then the false claim was made that if $300 was paid in bitcoin the files would be restored.

NotPetya was similar to WannaCry. In early 2017 the Trump administration said that NotPetya was the work of the Russians. It was clear that the Russians had learned from the North Koreans. They made sure that no patch of Microsoft software would slow the spread of their code, and no “kill switch’ could be activated. NotPetya struck two thousand targets around the world, in more than 65 countries. Maersk, the Danish shipping company, was among the worst hit. They reported losing $300 million in revenues and had to replace four thousand servers and thousands of computers.

The Shadow Brokers

July 18, 2018

This is the fourth post based on David E Sanger’s, “THE PERFECT WEAPON: War, Sabotage, & Fear in the Cyber Age.” Within the NSA a group developed special tools for Tailored Access Operations (TAO). These tools were used to break into the computer networks of Russia, China, and Iran, among others. These tools were posted by a group that called itself the Shadow Brokers. NSA’s cyber warriors knew that the code being posted was malware they had written. It was the code that allowed the NSA to place implants in foreign systems, where they could lurk unseen for years—unless the target knew what the malware looked like. The Shadow Brokers were offering a product catalog.

Inside the NSA, this breach was regarded as being much more damaging than what Snowdon had done. The Shadow Brokers had their hands on the actual code, the cyberweapons themselves. These had cost tens of millions of dollars to create, implant, and exploit. Now they were posted for all to see—and for every other cyber player, from North Korea to Iran, to turn to their own uses.

“The initial dump was followed by many more, wrapped in taunts, broken English, a good deal of profanity, and a lot of references to the chaos of American politics.” The Shadow Brokers promised a ‘monthly dump service’ of stolen tools and left hints, perhaps misdirection, that Russian hackers were behind it all. One missive read, “Russian security peoples is becoming Russian hackers at nights, but only full moons.”

This post raised the following questions. Was this the work of the Russians, and if so was it the GRU trolling the NSA the way it was trolling the Democrats”? Did the GRU’s hackers break into the TAO’s digital safe, or did they turn an insider maybe several. And was this hack related to another loss of cyber trolls from the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence which had been appearing for several months on the WikiLeaks site under the name “Vault 7?” Most importantly, was there an Implicit message in the publication of these tools, the threat that if Obama came after the Russians too hard for the election hack, more of the NSA’s code would become public?

The FBI and Brennan reported a continued decrease in Russian “probes” of the state election system. No one knew how to interpret the fact. It was possible that the Russians already had their implants in the systems they had targeted. One senior aide said, “It wouldn’t have made sense to begin sanctions” just when the Russians were backing away.

Michael Hayden, formerly of the CIA and NSA said that this was “the most successful covert operation in history.

THE PERFECT WEAPON

July 15, 2018

The title of this post is identical to the title of a book by David E. Sanger. The subtitle is “War, Sabotage, & Fear in the Cyber Age.” The following is from the Preface:

“Cyberweapons are so cheap to develop and so easy to hide that they have proven irresistible. And American officials are discovering that in a world in which almost everything is connected—phones, cars, electrical grids, and satellites—everything can be disrupted, if not destroyed. For seventy years, the thinking inside the Pentagon was that only nations with nuclear weapons could threaten America’s existence. Now that assumptions is in doubt.

In almost every classified Pentagon scenario for how a future confrontation with Russia and China, even Iran and North Korea, might play out, the adversary’s first strike against the United States would include a cyber barrage aimed at civilians. It would fry power grids, stop trains, silence cell phones, and overwhelm the Internet. In the worst case scenarios, food and water would begin to run out; hospitals would turn people away. Separated from their electronics, and thus their connections, Americans would panic, or turn against one another.

General Valery Gerasimov, an armor officer who after combat in the Second Chechen War, served as the commander of the Leningrad and then Moscow military districts. Writing in 2013 Gerasimov pointed to the “blurring [of] the lines between the state of war and the state of peace” and—after noting the Arab Awakening—observed that “a perfectly thriving state can, in a matter of months and even days, be transformed into an arena of fierce armed conflict…and sink into a web of chaos.” Gerasimov continued, “The role of nonmilitary means of achieving political and strategic goals has grown,” and the trend now was “the broad use of political, economic, informational humanitarian, and other nonmilitary measures—applied in coordination with the protest potential of the population.” He said seeing large clashes of men and metal as a “thing” of the past.” He called for “long distance, contactless actions against the enemy” and included in his arsenal “informational actions, devices, and means.” He concluded, “The information space opens wide asymmetrical possibilities for reducing the fighting potential of the enemy,” and so new “models of operations and military conduct” were needed.

Putin appointed Gerasimov chief of the general staff in late 2012. Fifteen months later there was evidence of his doctrine in action with the Russian annexation of Crimea and occupation of parts of the Donbas in eastern Ukraine. It should be clear from General Gerasimov and Putin appointing him as chief of the general staff, that the nature of warfare has radically

changed. This needs to be kept in mind when there is talk of modernizing our strategic nuclear weapons. Mutual Assured Destruction, with the appropriate acronym MAD, was never a viable means of traditional warfare. It was and still is a viable means of psychological warfare, but it needs to remain at the psychological level.

Returning to the preface, “After a decade of hearings in Congress, there is still little agreement on whether and when cyberstrikes constitute an act of war, an act of terrorism, mere espionage, or cyber-enabled vandalism.” Here HM recommends adopting Gerasimov and Putin’s new definition of warfare.

Returning to the preface, “But figuring out a proportionate yet effective response has now stymied three American presidents. The problem is made harder by the fact that America’s offensive cyber prowess has so outpaced our defense that officials hesitate to strike back.”

James A. Clapper, a former director of national intelligence said that was our problem with the Russians. There were plenty of ideas about how to get back at Putin: unplug Russia from the world’s financial system; reveal Putin’s links to the oligarchs; make some of his own money—and there was plenty hidden around the world—disappear. The question Clapper was asking was, “What happens next (after a cyber attack)? And the United States can’t figure out how to counter Russian attacks without incurring a great risk of escalation.

Sanger writes, “As of this writing, in early 2018, the best estimates suggest there have been upward of two hundred known state-on-state cyber atacks—a figure that describes only those made public.”

This is the first of many posts on this book.

It’s True, Trump Doesn’t Lie

June 5, 2018

The title of this post is identical to the title of a column by Dana Milbank in the 30 May 2018 issue of the Washington Post. The column begins with examples of lies told by Donald Trump. They will not be repeated because everyone has heard these lies many, many times. Milbank writes, “Calling him a liar lets him off easy. A liar, by definition, knows he’s not telling the truth. Trump’s behavior is worse: With each day it becomes more obvious he can’t distinguish between fact and fantasy. It’s an illness, and it’s spreading.

There is a name of the illness that Trump is experiencing and that is the delusional disorder. The test that would confirm this disorder involves hooking him up to a polygraph (lie detector). If documented lies were not detected, that would confirm that he has the delusion disorder. This means that Trump has lost touch with reality. And this is truly frightening with the President who is supposed to have control of the nuclear football (let’s hope that that is wrong). Milbank writes, “Trump’s not a liar. He’s a madman.” Frankly, it does not matter whether Trump has this disease or not. Trump does not care about objective truth, and in his version of reality, what is true is whatever benefits him at the moment.

What is also of concern is what neuroscientist Tali Sharot noted that people “may sensitize to the president’s falsehoods in the same way that they do to overused perfume, making them less likely to act to correct this pattern of behavior.” This might account for why people who carry water for the president, many Republicans, Rudy Giulani, newscasters, and columnists continue to carry water rather than denounce the president.

It is quite apparent that Trump feels he will be found guilty on a number of counts. However, if he can discredit the Justice Department, that might not matter. Giuliani has already announced that this is the strategy. One can gauge the degree of Trump’s guilt by the number and intensity of his attacks on Mueller and the Justice Department. He might even fire Mueller. This would create a Constitutional Crisis from which the worst result would be Trump declaring himself president for life.

Although we all wish for successful negotiations with North Korea, the outcome of these negotiations are irrelevant to Trump’s guilt. Even if he should be successful and win the Nobel Prize, that should not exonerate him from whatever crimes he might have committed.

Remember that Jimmy Carter was awarded the Nobel Prize for negotiations he brought about with North Korea. However, it turned out that North Korea had cheated on the treaty that had been negotiated. So even given ostensibly successful negotiations, it will be some time before it can be accurately assessed whether they had been successful.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Literacy and Freedom

October 10, 2016

Literacy and Freedom are Chapters 7 and 8 of “Progress:  Ten Reasons to Look Forward to the Future”  by Johan Norbert.  As the purpose of these blog posts is to update our mental models regarding how much change there has been between now and the past, only the nature of the improvements will be presented, and not the innovations that underlay the improvements.  As it is only a fraction of the improvements that are in the book can be related, so this is a matter of necessity or convenience, depending on your perspective.  If you are interested in the technology and practices that underlay these improvements, please read the book.  Indeed, everyone should benefit from reading this book.

One could make a good argument that a literate society is a prerequisite for a truly free society.  The chapter on literacy begins with the following quotation from Plutarch:  “The Mind is not a vessel that needs filling, but wood that needs igniting.  Literacy is one of the most important skills as it is the capacity to acquire even more capacity.  It makes it possible to make much greater use of knowledge that others, even others who long ago have passed away.  Literacy makes it possible to pick up skills and ideas that make us more productive and able to use technology better.  It is also required to be an active an informed citizen and to follow and participate in the world of knowledge.  It has a very strong influence on our health and the health of our children.

According to the OECD’s best estimate two hundred years ago 12% of the world’s population could read and write.  Until then, literacy was mostly a tool for the bureaucracy, the Church and the merchant class.  Many of the elite and slaveowner’s should they be considered elite thought it dangerous for the poor to become literate.  The fear was that they would become unhappy with their lives and stop accepting their lot in life.

Initially charity groups and philanthropists started schools for the poor.  Then, as governments realized that educating the poor would increase their productivity and, perhaps, participate in government began funding schools.  There was immediate feedback here in that economic benefits were clearly recognized.  Even when public schools were very few, there were literate people who instructed the illiterate.  One Swede noted that in the sparsely populate northern part of Sweden, “that, although public schools are very few, nevertheless the literate instruct the others with such enthusiasm and the greater part of the common people and even the peasants are literate.”

Progress in literacy followed economic development quite closely.  In western Europe, the United States and Canada around 90% of children attended school in the late nineteenth century.  In 1900 less than 10% of the population in South Asia, the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa had received basic education.  By the 1900s around half had.  Today it is around 75%.  In Latin America, the proportion increased from 23% in 1900 to 94% in 2010
The global literacy rate increased from around 21% in 1900 to almost 40% in 1950, and in 2015 it was 86%.

The chapter  Freedom begins with a discussion of slavery.  Norbert notes that slavery is the most brutal form of oppression the world has known.  Chattel slaves were the property of someone else, who could order them around, beat them at will, give them away or rent them. Moreover, slavery once existed everywhere.  Slavery once was so common that even the few vocal opponents owned slaves.  They were forced to perform chores and crafts, to work in the fields or down mines, and even into prostitution.

According to the Greek historian Herodotus, slaves in Ancient Sparta outnumbered free individuals by seven to one.  Even in democratic Athens there were likely more slaves than free men.  It was a sign of utmost poverty not to own at least one slave and the literation is filled with scenes  of slaves being flogged for disobeying their masters.

Julius Caesar brought slave traders with him on his campaigns and sold prisoners directly to them.  When he defeated a Germanic drive he sold all 53,000 survivors as slaves on the spot.  These slaves lived extraordinarily difficult lives in brutal circumstances.

As Spain and Portugal took control of America in the 1500s, the indigenous people were oppressed and enslaved.  There were a few brave opponents to this practice, the most prominent of whom was the Spanish Dominican friar, Bartolome de las Casas.  He argued that indigenous people had the right to their own persons, beliefs and properties.  Las Calas was an early, and perhaps the first proponent of human rights theory.

Nevertheless, slavery became a, if not the, central feature of the settlement of the new world.  Even European economies benefited. Even states in the northern United States where slavery was not practiced benefitted from the economy that was based on slavery.  England took the courageous act of banning slavery.  It took a Civil War in the United States to end legal slavery.

The abolishment of slavery was indeed an important step in the advancement of freedom.  Yet in the year 1900, exactly  zero % of the world population lived in a real democracy in which each man or woman had one vote.  Even the most modern and democratic countries excluded women, the poor or ethnic minorities from elections.By 1950, the share of the world population living in democracies had increased from zero to 31%, and by 2000 increased to 58% according to Freedom House, the civil liberties watchdog.  Norbert notes that today even dictators have to pay lip service to democracy and hold staged elections.

Communism in the west was abolished peacefully.  It still exists in Asia, most notably in China and most notoriously in North Korea.  Norbert notes that peaceful mass movements against dictatorships stand a better chance of successful democratic than violent revolutions.  Unfortunately neither peaceful nor democratic movements are presently succeeding.  And if a regime is ruthless enough, consider Assad in Syria, it is difficult to depose given an alliance from another authoritarian regime.  HM would argue that  peaceful demonstrations work when there is some predisposition on the part of the existing regime to concede.

In 1991 Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman mentioned that a London Newspaper          200 years earlier explained that 742 million people were led by arbitrary government and only 33.5 million people live in reasonably free countries.  That meant that freedom deprived people outnumbered free people by 22 to 1.  When Friedman spoke, he updated those numbers using Freedom House’s estimates and said that the ratio had fallen to about 3 to 1.  Friedman concluded that “We are still very far from our goal of a completely free world, but on the scale of historical time, that is amazing progress.  More in the past two centuries than in the prior two millennia.”

According to Freedom House 40% of the world population now lives in free countries, while another 24% live in partly free countries.  Norbert notes that this is more progress in two decades than in two millennia.

If you have yet to do so, go to http://www.gapminder.org.   It is a very interesting website.  You might find the documentary “Don’t Panic End Poverty” well worth viewing.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Cognitive Capital

June 21, 2015

I was intrigued by the Association for Psychological Science (APS) session on cognitive capital, primarily because of the title.  I had not encountered this concept very often in the past, yet the concept would seem to hold much promise.  The papers presented at the session defined factors leading into what they called cognitive capital and then showed a high positive correlation between cognitive capital and the the economic success of  different nations.  Although interesting, I really was not interested that much in the papers themselves.  First of all, even if they have regressions equation indicating the contributions different variables make to cognitive capital and economic success, and no matter how big the data are, they are still correlational studies and do not prove causation.  And some of the variables were political in my view, such as private ownership.  Private ownership might indeed be a factor in a country’s success, but I don’t regard it as being a measure of cognitive capital.  It might help the exploitation of cognitive capital, but I regard the concept to be too important to be muddied up by questionable factors.

When I did a search for “cognitive capital”  I discovered a variety of enterprises capitalizing on the name, but I found no entry in the Wikipedia.  To me, this indicates that the concept deserves serious attention from serious researchers.  The concept has enormous intuitive appeal.  So much work and productivity is dependent upon thinking, and that is cognition.  Brains do provide the neurological substrate for cognition, but it is effective cognition that leads to success, and the failure to recognize good ideas, that is, the cognitive failure to recognize cognitive success.

One of the best examples I can think of regarding the importance of cognitive capital is Korea.  Korea was a rural country that was colonized by Japan in the early 20th century.  The Japanese exploited Korea until they were defeated in World War 2.  Unfortunately, the United States permitted the country to be divided in half with the result of the northern half becoming a ruthless communist dictatorship, and the southern half being a struggling capitalistic state.  However, the Koreans put a great deal of importance and had a high literacy rate.  They had cognitive capital to develop and exploit, which they did.  The result is one of the most advanced countries with respect to technology.  And it is important to realize that it is only half a country.  North Korea is one of the poorest and most oppressive countries on earth.  One that suppresses rather than fosters cognitive capital.  Unfortunately, the limited fostering of cognitive capital that they have done has lead to nuclear weapons and computer hackers.

So I think a good question is how can cognitive capital be fostered.  Free higher education is one means.  Perhaps the best investment the United States ever made in cognitive capital was the GI Bill after World War 2 that provided the means for millions of veterans to pursue higher education.  I believe that much of the subsequent success of the United States was the result of the GI Bill.  So why is higher education so expensive in the United States? Research should be targeted at initially reducing and ultimately eliminating these costs and examine the benefits that stem from this investment in cognitive capital.  Similar experimental studies should be done so that causation can be established in lieu of correlational studies.  In elections I want to see politicians saying that they will invest in cognitive capital.  And citizens should demand public investments in cognitive capital.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.