Many people write or speak to tell us what we should think. Some want to be believed because they are experts, or think they are. Some want to be believed because they claim to speak for us. Some have had revelations. Others want us to trust them because they communicate through prominent media outlets. Many tell us what we should think. I write to encourage my readers to think for themselves. I write to ask you to inquire. Question me. Have fun.

Comment of the Day
The Editorial Board should have no opinion

Jul 11, 2020

The WSJ Editorial Board expressed its opinion about the case of Michael Flynn. It does not matter what they said; in my book, the Editorial Board should have no opinion on any topic. Editorial boards’ job is not to lecture, but to facilitate views from individuals who can present valid arguments. The Editorial Board's job at the WSJ is to guarantee to me, a subscriber, that the different opinions presented are fact-checked. I pay a subscription for the WSJ because I do not have the time nor the means to fact-check whatever is written and posted on the internet. I do not pay for the subscription to be brainwashed by whatever the self-anointed authority of the Editorial Board believes is right. I can make my judgment based on the facts and their interpretation by other individuals.

More parenting is needed
Aug 01, 2019
Peter Gray in Psychology Today advises for less parenting. The problem is exactly the opposite: There is not enough parenting. In the past, when most of our ancestors lived in self-supporting households, often a farm, out of necessity, children were an integral part of whatever adults needed to do during their daily life, and they learned that way. Now, we do not need to do as much at home. Work is outside the home, food is brought in, heat is turned on and off, and mysteriously magical, colorful screens are the center of most activities. If we leave children free to explore what they find the most attractive, they will play video games. There might be some educational value in it, but one needs to learn much more. Hence, we need more effort in parenting, with parents doing more in the home than is otherwise required, and spending more time with children outside in order to introduce them to the real world. This realization hit home after I witnessed the surprise of a 7-year old seeing apples on my apple tree.
Less fight more work
Jul 30, 2017

The fight over Obamacare repeal is over, at least for now. The GOP can start to work on a new proposal that each of us can look at it, and then compare how my particular health care solution would play in it, as compared to Obamacare. In a television interview, HHS Secretary Tom Price said that Obamacare “may be working for Washington, it may be working for insurance companies, but it’s not working for patients.” Maybe it is time to consider patients’ involvement in the preparation of an Obamacare alternative? It could be that Obamacare repeal failed just because it has been prepared by Washington with consultation from insurance companies. Let us start with addressing 19 health care issues that politicians avoid talking about.

How to pay for the wall?
Apr 04, 2017

If you want to build the wall, pay for it with your own money. How much of your own money are you willing to donate? Trump received 62,979,879 votes. If each of Trump’s supporters voluntarily donates at least $1,000, which corresponds to about $42 per month for the next two years, and if we encourage those who are more affluent to double their donations, then Trump can have on hand about $100 billion, which may suffice for a substantial piece of the wall. Hence, all of you who are talking loudly about spending my money on building this wall, stay away from my wallet, but open your own wallet and send money to the “Build the Wall Fund.” Put your money where your mouth is.

What is wrong with Russia?
Dec 22, 2015

It appears that Russian leaders cannot free themselves from the medieval concept of regional influence, where weaker neighbors were subdued into becoming serf states. Is anyone capable of explaining to them that in these times of a global economy, any influence comes from economic strength? Russia, thanks to its size, natural resources and well-educated labor force, has everything that it takes to maintain a dominant position in the region, just by maintaining free trade with all its neighbors. It can do so without military interventions in Georgia and in Ukraine. Russia has everything that it takes to be a respected wealthier neighbor, to whom everyone in the region would turn for help when needed. Instead, it is a bully and a hooligan. It would take so little to change that. But it is so hard for Russia to do it. 

Closed mind for closed borders
Nov 19, 2015

Known to some as a libertarian, Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. speaks against open borders. His argument is that it is an infraction against private property. He misses the point that most people migrate just because Mr. Rockwell’s neighbors want them on their private property – for picking apples, washing the dishes or writing a computer code. Then, Mr. Rockwell wrongly laments that those foreigners invited by his neighbors violate his private property rights by loitering in the public spaces that he frequents. He wants the government to deny the rights of his neighbors to do on their private property whatever they wish, so he will not need to face immigrants in the public spaces. Mr. Rockwell left the train called “liberty” at the station called “xenophobia.”    

They do not know…
Sep 14, 2015

Mr. Trump says: “A lot of what I’m doing is by instinct.” I prefer that our President would make decisions based on systematic due diligence. The instinct that guides Mr. Trump in his professional life arrives from his vast experience, starting when he was growing up under the mentoring of his successful father, followed by a solid education and years of practice. Mr. Trump's confidence is misguiding, as it gives his supporters the illusion that someone who mastered real estate dealing can be equally skillful as President. It is similar to the illusion surrounding Dr. Carson, that he can be as good a President as he is a brain surgeon. If both gentlemen were humbler, they would realize that they qualify to be President equally as much as Mr. Trump qualifies to conduct brain surgeries and Dr. Carson to run Mr. Trump’s real estate empire. The problem is not that they do not know many things they should; the problem is that they do not realize that.

More Comments

Why do most Westerners misunderstand Russia?

They do not know history.

Vikings had a route of trade with Byzantium going through today’s Russia and Ukraine. About 1,100 years ago, today’s Kyiv became a prominent post on that route. Local Slavs took control, and in 988, a local prince, Vladimir the Great, took Christianity from Byzantium and married the emperor’s sister. It marks the beginning of statehood in the lands of Ruthenia. Similarly, as all over Europe, the beginnings were chaotic, and borders were liquid until the Mongols’ Golden Horde took over in 1237. For the next 240 years, Mongols worked in unison with Tatars, and in Russian history, that period is known as Tatar Yoke.

Mongols did not conquer Lithuania. Lithuanians gradually chipped away at the Golden Horde’s western Ruthenian lands, and by the middle of the 14th century, they controlled territories of today’s Belarus, most of Ukraine, and a part of today’s western Russia. In the 15th century, Lithuania went into a union with the Polish Kingdom, forming the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the 17th century, Russia began shaving off Ruthenian lands. By the beginning of the 19th century, Russia controlled most of them, except a small part of western Ukraine, which went to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The Tatar Yoke on most of today’s European part of Russia lasted for about 240 years, until 1480. Mongols and later Tatars allowed local principalities to govern themselves, keeping them divided. They could reward generously for loyalty and ruthlessly punish betrayal. They imposed hefty tributes and duties, requested maintenance services for their officers and military, and demanded gifts for their dignitaries. The clergy was exempt from tributes. Regularly, local princes were called in front of the Mongol Khan; they never knew if they would return alive.

That system kept vassals poor, hampering trade and entrepreneurship.

Russian principalities resisted. In 1480, the Grand Prince of Moscow, Ivan III, forced the Golden Horde to back off. Next, he took control of all Rus’ territories by politics and brutal force, calling himself a tsar. Modern Russia was born. In the following centuries, Russia conquered the former Golden Horde territory, the entire Siberia and took most of the former Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. That Russia turned into the Soviet Union after World War I. After the USSR fell apart in 1991, it has left us with qualms about Russia and its intentions.

Like it or not, we are what history made us

Many historians point out that 240 years of the Tatar Yoke put Russia behind Western Europe, where crafts advanced and cities flourished. The concept of a “free man” had been gaining traction. The Magna Carta was issued in 1215. Just west of the Golden Horde, in 14th century Poland, a political system emerged, whereby all landowners (nobility) were equal men and the king was not their ruler, but their leader, the first among equals. Townspeople did not have political rights, and serfs worked and lived in slave-like conditions. After all, it was feudalism.

Gradually, Western Europe gravitated, at least ideologically, to the idea of 1776 that “all men are created equal.” It is meaningful that it took one more century to extend that idea to people of color and an additional half a century to give equal political rights to women. And many still claim that we are far from satisfactory in those respects.

By comparison, let us go back to the Tatar Yoke times when a man had only as much freedom as granted by the whims of a ruler. After freeing themselves from the Tatar Yoke, Russian rulers did not know any other social order. Being free from the coercion of another man or giving that freedom to another man was hard to imagine then. They used similar methods to conquer their neighbors and former oppressors. These totalitarian governing methods existed in tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union. Concepts of equality based on moral grounds, religious messages, or Western ideas kept arriving, but they conflicted with centuries-old traditions.

Today Russians will ardently deny that their political thinking is subconsciously rooted in the old oppressive methods from the Tatar Yoke era. On the other hand, Ukrainians see a clear connection between the political doctrine of the Tatar Yoke and the contemporary concept of the Russian sphere of influence.

The case of Jacek Karpiński

Let us look closer at the current Russian doctrine of the sphere of influence as a modernized version of the medieval Tatar Yoke.

In my previous article, I describe an incident of a Soviet dignitary extorting a painting during a “friendly” visit to Poland. His behavior was a textbook example of the Mongol luminary extracting a gift from his Russian subject centuries back. He deserved that “gift” because Poland was in the Soviet sphere of influence.

One may ask, how many gifts might Russians extort from Ukraine? Is it worth the fight? The gift case helps to illustrate the Russians’ understanding of the sphere of influence on a human level, but the most harm comes from the influence in commerce. The case of Jacek Karpiński comes to mind.

Many see Jacek Karpiński as a Polish version of Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. In the 1950s, he pioneered the development of advanced electronics, which landed him a yearly internship at MIT. After catching up with the technology leaders, in the 1960s, he focused on what was then called “minicomputers.” In 1971 he introduced K-202, the product of his life, a worldwide top-of-the-line minicomputer. The design required microchips made in the West, but the supplier agreed to resell, worldwide, K202s that were manufactured in Poland.

At that time, I studied electronics. Our polytechnic had just gotten its first mainframe computer, occupying one wing of the main building. K-202 was small enough to be put on the desk or underneath it. A vision of getting K-202s in every lab was exciting.

Karpiński’s invention got a lot of publicity in Poland with the help of my mentor and friend, Stefan Bratkowski, a political writer and passionate promoter of computer technology. At that time, I was an intern at Życie i Nowoczesność, ŻiN, (Life and Modernity), a weekly section of Życie Warszawy (Life of Warsaw), the major newspaper in the capital region, now defunct. I saw censors blocking articles about K-202. I learned how much energy Stefan put into advancing the case by using his connections. All went to waste because the Soviet Union couldn’t take full control of making advanced computers in Poland in technological partnership with a Western company. Poland was in the Soviet sphere of influence; the economic interest of Poland needed to yield to the imperial interest of the Soviet Union.

Personally, I lost double. There were no jobs for computer engineers in Poland when I graduated. If thousands of K-202s had been manufactured yearly, Poland would have needed more electronic engineers than it could have educated. My second career shot was at political writing, and I was successful at ŻiN. After shutting down the K-202 project, not much later, apparatchiks fired Bratkowski and his team. Supporting the K-202 case was one of the reasons. So, my hopes for making a career in political writing were dashed, too.

The long shadow of the Tatar Yoke

I know about many similar instances of Soviet interests impeding Poland’s ability to prosper.

I thought about these cases when, days before Ukraine signed an association agreement with the European Union in 2014, the Russian president stepped in, claiming that this agreement would be bad for Russia’s interests. For most Westerners it sounded like a reasonable concern. For someone knowing the history of Russia, it was an argument deeply rooted in the political concepts of the Tatar Yoke.

One can repeat a Russian’s argument that major Western countries have their spheres of influence as well. If so, how are Russia’s special interests in Ukraine any different?

For Westerners, history has embedded in our thinking that all men are equal, all independent nations are sovereign. But the world is imperfect. With indignation, we see that the rich have stronger cards than the poor do. Many in the West blame the poverty and crime in Latin America on the undue influence of the United States. But they do not see that Chile is doing much better than neighboring Argentina. They do not ask how the once poor Ireland joined the club of the richest by playing with the same international corporate giants, which are blamed for lasting poverty in many underdeveloped countries.

In the Western world, we have a system, which in its concept is moral. Formally, every man and every nation have equal rights to prosper. Our system is imperfect because humans run it. By the system’s rules, no one is deprived of the right to prosper. Cases like Chile or Ireland show that some find better ways than others.

In the West, we can find instances of undue political interference. It might be a contract or international treaty in which a stronger party is taking advantage of a weaker side. If discovered, the immorality and potential illegality could be reversed.

Russians, looking at the faults in the West, ask what is wrong with their influencing Ukraine. What Russians ask for is establishing a rule that Ukraine has no right to be fully sovereign. The Russians’ approach is rooted in the Tatar Yoke logic that some political entities have superior rights over others. Russians ask that, due to the imperfections of our moral concept, the West should accept as legal the fundamentally immoral concept that countries neighboring Russia have no equal rights to prosper.

Yet, why should Ukraine give up its economic interests for the sake of satisfying the imperial interests of Russia?

Leave a Reply

About me

I was born in 1951 in Gdansk, Poland.
Since my high school years, I have interest in politics and love for writing. During my college years, I started writing to student papers and soon became a freelance author to major Polish political magazines.

In 1980 I wrote a book “Czy w Polsce może być lepiej?” (“Could it be better in Poland?” – this book is available only in Polish) analyzing major problems in Poland at the time and outlining possible solutions.

I was among those Polish political writers who by their writings contributed to the peaceful system transformation that finally took place in 1989. Since 1985, I have lived in the Chicago area. I went through the hard times typical of many immigrants. Working in the service business, I have seen the best and the worst places, I met the poorest and the richest. I have seen and experienced America not known to most of the politicians, business people, and other political writers. For eleven years, I ran my own company. Presently, I am an independent consultant.

My political writing comes out of necessity. I write when I see that the prevailing voices on the political arena are misleading or erroneous. Abstract mathematics and control theory (of complex technological processes) strongly influenced my understanding of social phenomena. In the past, my opponents rebuked my mathematical mind as cold, soulless, and inhuman. On a few occasions, I was prized for my engineer’s precision and logic.

I have a master’s degree in electronic engineering with a specialization in mathematical machines from Politechnika Gdańska (Technical University of Gdansk).

... more