Better Sooner Than Too Late: Why Bullies Like Putin or Trump Must Be Neutralized

It is often said that history does not repeat, but it rhymes. The phrase is usually credited to Mark Twain, though its exact origin is uncertain. Still, the wisdom rings true. Events may not copy themselves exactly, but the patterns come back in new forms, offering warnings to those willing to listen.

In the 1930s, Hitler tested Europe one step at a time. He met hesitation and delay, and each time he gained more ground. Appeasement was meant to preserve peace, but instead it gave him space to grow stronger. By the time the world realized the danger, the price of resistance had multiplied beyond measure.

Today, Vladimir Putin follows his own pattern of probing and pushing, destabilizing neighbors and daring the world to stop him. At home, figures like Donald Trump show how a leader who disregards rules and laws can corrode democracy from within. Both are bullies in different arenas. Both thrive when their abuses are tolerated. 

And both remind us that silence or delay is not safety, it is surrender. When despots and demagogues behave like spoiled children with the world’s most dangerous toys, silence is not safety. We must neutralize their tactics, raise the political and economic costs, and deny them the power to make aggression pay. 

Those steps should be taken by accountable national leaders working with allies, and by citizens of those nations within their nations, not by those narcissists who trade spectacle for statecraft. 

Insist on firmness that is principled, lawful, and collective, so the bully cohort across our nations and world learns that provocation never pays.

The Danger of Delay

Putting up with bullies always leads to more of the same. Each unchallenged act teaches them that their behavior works. They see hesitation as weakness, never as maturity. What looks like restraint to us looks like an invitation to them. Delay does not buy peace, it buys time for the aggressor.

Neutralization Over Tolerance

Neutralizing aggression does not require reckless escalation. It requires consistent, sharp, lawful responses every time.

• Intercept and escort intruding aircraft, and make the evidence public.

• Expose propaganda with facts before it takes root.

• Answer cyberattacks and hybrid operations with defenses and proportionate countermeasures.

• When civilians or allies are directly threatened, act firmly under clear rules of engagement.

The principle is simple. Every act of aggression must cost more than it gains.

Why This Matters

Democracies cannot afford to mirror the lawlessness of their challengers. But they also cannot afford to let violations slide. The path forward is principled firmness. Bullies are not stopped by words or patience. They are stopped when their tactics fail every single time.

The Choice Before Us

We face the same dilemma today that others faced in the 1930s. Do we delay and appease, or do we act early and firmly? Doing nothing may feel easier in the moment, but it stacks up danger for the future.

The stakes are high: national sovereignty, democratic freedom, and the credibility of institutions at home and abroad. Leaders must have the courage to act sooner rather than later. Citizens must demand it of them. Better sooner than too late.

Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Online Book Reviewing - Bullies & Short Story Cliffhangers

An author I know recently said the following:

"Yet another disturbing trend. I found out through someone who I met in an online writer's group, that any author online is being told what they're allowed to write based on bullying comments posted on Amazon. Sad. We shouldn't be violating freedom of speech in order to avoid online miniature tyrants posting crap because they can and no other reason than that. But then, I've noticed this growing trend since the beginning of this century. It's the same with any debatable issue. Bullies, abuse, discrimination, sexual assault, racism, hate crimes, the list goes on. Using bullying as an example, instead of promoting "don't get bullied" we should be focusing on simply "don't bully."

"Those who are published online only, [are] completely independent. Mainly through self-publishing, like KDP. I'll be the first to admit that yes, there is a lot of crap out there, but I don't feel any of it justifies playing bully online, never mind suppressing freedom of speech. Amazon's so-called reviews are now riddled with the worse crap I've ever seen from the most amateur self-published kindle."

I can certainly understand hating poor works and wanting to say so. There are too many amateurs and wannabe writers out there who really don't know how to write a productive  and useful review. Or to simply be a decent human being.

"I'm seeing the opposite problem. Mary Sue types, mainly. Those who sound like they could know what they're talking about by throwing around big technical terms, when they are, in fact, full of shit:

This book is badly written because it uses a modifier that's outside of the realm of professional writing.

"Er, how about simply saying that you didn't like the story and be done with it? Or, better yet, don't give amateurs undue attention. Now, this wouldn't disturb me so much if these kinds of reviews were common with ANY kind of story. An author friend of mine who offered a free short story via KDP, was so severely bashed because, zomg, it reads like a short story, not a novel. Obviously...
It seems this huge assumption has taken over. Published and/or available to purchase online, you must be an amateur, by default. No hope for you."

There is a way to write a good review. Without being petty, ignorant, or typical in cutting another down to build yourself up. Typical bully behavior that shows to anyone who can read and clearly understand what they read, just who you are as a reviewer (and a person) and what your worth is in this society of literature.

I recently had something curious happen to myself about a short story ebook I published. I don't really think the reviewer was being a bully. But I did feel the initial reviewer's rating was somewhat unfair. At very least I think it gives an incorrectly colored consideration of the story. One that had done well elsewhere.

I had one review on Amazon for my story, Mr. Pakool's Spice (now also available as an audiobook). That review sat on Amazon for that story alone, for some years. One wonders if that was in part why it was the only review.

Reviewers, amature or otherwise, need to realize that in posting the first review of any work, they have gained a vaulted status. One that can shade how others perceive the story before they read it. IF they even get to, as they may be put off buying the ebook in the first place, by that initial, single review.

First review from 2013:

"I did enjoy the journey portion of the story, of the father and his two children and their attempts to survive a zombie apocalypse. However, just as the story was getting very interesting, I turned the page to find out it was done. A HUGE cliff-hanger? On a short story?"

The reviewer essentially said they had really liked my story, but because they hadn't realized it was a short story when they got to the end, they took umbrage with its length and gave it not at least four out of five stars, but three.

This story by the way, was previously published in an anthology with other writers where it was well received. This reviewer did cause me to go through all my short ebooks and put in the beginning of the description the words: "This is a short story...." Because apparently some need that help.

I did find the review lacking in some ways. Obviously, or I wouldn't be bringing this up here. So, just a bit about reviewing and author's works online:

From Dudley Court Press site:

"Specific Tips For Goodreads And Amazon Reviews
Most review sites like Amazon and Goodreads ask you to rate the book, usually from 1 to 5. Each site uses the ratings a little differently, but keep in mind that a 1 and a 5 should be very rare. For Amazon reviews, a 3 is borderline for success. So, save a 2 for a book you really don’t like and a 1 for complete failure. These numbers can mean a difference between being promoted on the site and falling into a black hole."

Eventually I got another review actually giving my story five stars. But it was also a review which sadly came, five years later! Which gave me a 4.2 rating overall for all of that time that the first review remained the only review. Makes one wonder, if that had any impact on no further reviews or purchases (I don't really know what sales is on that story...actually, I just looked it up... it's sold 230 copies to date with only two reviews. Come on, really? Two?).

The 3 star review pretty much bummed me out as I thought it wasn't really deserved. That story hasn't gotten a lot of attention I'll admit, but I think the new audiobook using a voice actor, really helps to flesh it out and offer the listener even more. The audio version ending gives me chills now every time I hear it.

The newest review somewhat in reply to the first reviewer's rating, which obviously they too believed was somewhat unfair, simply says:

"I've read several short stories by JZ Murdock, and this ranks amongst his best. Highly recommended."

That was certainly pleasant to read. Apparently not everyone had a problem with the story. But to each their own. Still, about ending short stories with a cliffhanger....

One comment about short story cliffhangers on Yahoo says:

"Best Answer: Of course it is! Some of the best stories I've read ended on cliffhangers and I actually prefer cliffhangers that really make you think rather than happy endings, but that only applies in some circumstances if it's a really good happy ending."

The Teaching Cove site has an interesting article on using cliffhangers in short stories and offers five examples by famous authors: Guy de Maupassant, Mark Twain, Richard Matheson, Richard Connell Doyle, Edgar Allan Poe. Some pretty good company I must say and  some of my favorite authors of all time!

Regardless, I wouldn't actually call it a cliffhanger ending. Not to give spoilers, but the surviving main character(s), though still in the overall situation at the end, there is actually a major resolution to one of their greatest concerns and most deadly considerations.

Also, it was after all priced as a short story, and the pages were clearly indicated on its Amazon page as being only thirty-five pages long, so...a short story. While the reviewer felt it ended with a cliffhanger, really it was an exploration of a piece of the experience the characters were trying to survive in, exploring some unique behaviors of the zombies in the story.

People don't realize, or don't care all too often, just what their comments do both to sales and to the author's feelings. If you want to be a useful part of the life of a story or book, give us productive comments. Give the author a reason to do better. Give them how to do better, offer them useful and productive comments. A reason to strive to do better than you perceive they have done.

We want better writers and authors. Do we really just want to brutalize people for their efforts? Or do we want to be a positive catalyst for change in the literary realm?

One wonders sometimes just why people write such damaging and useless reviews.

Self esteem problems maybe?

The Writing Center at the University of North Carolina gives this advice:

Finally, a few general considerations:

• Review the book in front of you, not the book you wish the author had written. You can and should point out shortcomings or failures, but don’t criticize the book for not being something it was never intended to be.
• With any luck, the author of the book worked hard to find the right words to express her ideas. You should attempt to do the same. Precise language allows you to control the tone of your review.
• Never hesitate to challenge an assumption, approach, or argument. Be sure, however, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.
• Try to present a balanced argument about the value of the book for its audience. You’re entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice strong agreement or disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a good one, and every author deserves fair treatment. Harsh judgments are difficult to prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.

Huffington Post offers this bit of advice and so I will leave you with this:

"So let’s sum up. Reviews are about books and for readers; they’re not about you the reviewer for you the reviewer. If it’s in your character to need attention, don’t write useless reviews, start a blog. Or better yet, become a cable news anchor."