Phil Mirzoev's blog

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Fukushima mess: why does Japan need any government at all?

    Just cannot help but make some notes on the notorious Fukushima accident, which for me once more demonstrates that in the 21th century even in the developed countries - even in the best of the developed countries like Japan - absolutely uncontrolled self-protected governments not only don't do any good in the realm of their direct 'responsibilities' but actually do as much harm and damage to their own nations as one can imagine, quite knowingly so too. (governments in their present form within present semi- or quasi-democratic systems). Would the emergency at Fukushima have been treated better without government and its secrecy and its procedures? No doubt as ever. There are a lot of engineers and specialists in emergency treatment and institutions specializing therein around the world: they - a group of independent engineers and specialists, even institutes - would have handled the situation incomparably better, absolutely no doubt about it, if - and that's a big IF, they would have given full information access and a full mandate to assess and treat the situation. Was this simple idea evident to Japanese government? Yes beyond reasonable doubts, but their own interests, fears and the qualities of the system in terms of responsibility-apportioning wouldn't let the government to outsource the problem. Do I consider the manner of handling the emergency a crime in a moral sense against the Japanese people? Yes! Does the same old question 'why do nations need governments in the form they are if they mess more than help things?' still hold? Not a shadow of a doubt!
According to the preliminary governmental report on Fukushima nuclear accident, the next problems took place in handling the emergency:

  • delays in relaying information to the public
  • managers' lack of knowledge of procedures to deal with emergencies
  • poor communications - between the workers and the government, among the workers themselves, and between government bodies.
Also the investigation found that... just wait for it... 'Tepco staff at the plant were not trained to handle emergencies like the power shutdown..'. My God, it's just like a large group of surgeons conducting a serious operation in hospital, NONE of them knowing what to do in case of a cardiac arrest! But in the same report the authors recognize that all those cases of negligence and 'mistakes' were not prevented and foreseen by the relevant regulatory bodies, which are governmental agencies. It is the responsibility of the state to guarantee the proper standards and public safety in engineering and industrial operations, let alone NUCLEAR POWER FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS (!!). One cannot come even close to putting on an equal footing the responsibility of a commercial company that produces planes that drop from the sky and the STATE which makes the laws and by-laws allowing for such planes to be produced. HOW COME that Japan nuclear regulators - very large and expensive vehicle - hadn't enforced any procedure and standard prescribing the practice of dealing with emergency black-outs (don't forget, flooding and stoppage of pumps and generators is one of the most commonplace well known emergency problems for a huge number of production facilities)?
I am myself an engineer by education and profession, and for an engineer it sounds like Ministry of Transportation not including in the traffic code the rules regulating intersections without traffic lights. Of course, it is not that the people in those governmental agencies don't know all this stuff and its importance - of course they know all this better than I do - but just because they have no accountability, transparency and control, which just allows them sit on their asses, eat taxpayer's money and do NOTHING, they do either nothing (in the best case scenario) or they try to save their posts at the expense of the lives of thousands of people. STATE SECRECY and outsourcing of the power station operation to a commercial - that is private - operator, gives even more confidence to the government in that NO ONE among the ministers or officials would be imprisoned for life for any accident even of the scale of the Fukushima meltdown.
But of course, what struck me even more, and, I think, many other engineers around the globe, who followed the situation at the Fukushima plant back in March 2011, are these two things:
1. Some absolutely freakish, cosmically stupid actions by the company-operator (Tepco), like sprinkling the reactors with sea water (to accelerate the dissolution of the rods etc) or, even worse, making their personnel walk knee-deep in usual rubber boots on the flooded floor of the leaking power block (!!) (you don't have to be even an engineer - a good 1th year college student can understand what it means with the reported levels of radiation inside and outside the building)
 2. Absolute non-transparency, huge lack of information for public, general blabbering by officials meant to say as little as possible and as late as possible - all this was also mentioned and recognized in that report.
Of course, this next-to-zero accountability of the government during the crisis at the Fukushima plant had nothing to do with the lack of information coming from the facility and operator to the agencies. Neither did it have anything to do with the 'parental concern' of the Government with the public panic element, though they tried to play this card (for the total lack of any other excuses): at that time, after the number of dead and missing was more than 15000 and the number of homeless was six-digit, there was nothing to add to or take away from the stoic spirit of the Japanese people, though, obviously, the lack of information conveyed to the public along with the visible effort on the part of the Government to withhold as much as info and truth possible, could somewhat enhance already existing fears. The only thing that can explain the whole mess happening at Fukushima is the same old reason: the Government and the operator were worried much more about their own skins than about the best possible solution to the problem and about people, they themselves as ever were paralyzed by fear - fear of the possible responsibility. And what they did, or to be more precise, what they DID NOT DO, was motivated not by their desire to channel as much professionalism and expertise in resolving the emergency, but by their desire to understand who was risking what and to which degree and work out the best compromise route to cover up the tracks and their asses, and cloud the distribution of responsibility; to be as much on the safe side as possible from the bureaucratic point of view and laws (even if the real actions of those guys were not the best to achieve this purpose after all - here I am talking about the motivations and blockages of the system as such).
The long and the short of it: the government as ever was concerned not with the lives of the people, but with their own skin, and used to the full all the levers and the self-imposed right to lie and play secrecy and not share with anyone independent the access to and control over the situation. The government and the company-operator instead of solving the problem were playing 'Ping-Pong' of responsibility, trying to figure out how to confuse things to the maximum degree and find a reasonable 'draw' solution in this game with minimal responsibility. The problem is not that it is some unique situation, the problem is that on the contrary this is absolutely the usual way how almost everything, for which government is responsible, works under condition of secrecy. In this respect this crime - and I prefer calling a spade a spade - is not unlike the zero preparedness of New Zealand government for the recent earthquake, where about 150 people died (about the high probability of which every technical student knew and every national channel had talked), not unlike the zero preparedness of Italian government for the recent earthquake, not unlike the recent shoot-out in Norway where police couldn't reach the island during a time period of almost one hour (!!) (see about Norway http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/07/few-comments-on-norway-apocalypse.html), not unlike Japan government again criminally neglecting the supply of water and food to those thousands of people stranded after tsunami (the third largest world economy - Japan, even if not having enough helicopters or planes, could quite easily pay and invite the US military based nearby, let alone all the Asian neighbors' aircraft resources available for money, but people were STARVED and on the brink of death from dehydration - Japan in the 21th century, I can't believe it!).
In the world - in Japan itself, in Germany and France, in the USA, in Britain, Finland - there are thousands of EXCELLENT, world class atomic engineers and specialists in elimination of emergencies, who, if given the access and INFORMATION TRANSPARENCY, could provide the necessary help and expertise, who could solve this task orders of magnitude better that those governmental and government-appointed  'custodians', without 'heroes' walking on the flooded floor around the leaking reactor to the amazement of the shocked public around the world.
It's not that government understand all these things any worse than I do, but it's just intrinsically, structurally motivated by other things - their self-justification and saving their face (no matter how successful or unsuccessful they happen to be in the end in achieving those aims); of course, it is a kind of shameful to use external specialists and resort to the aid from other countries, and it could be dangerous for the government if professionals and institutions from other countries will find out incidentally all the drawbacks, lapses and criminal omissions at a Japanese nuclear station. So saving its face and its skin (at least political) is the first priority - for the government it's worth MUCH more than millions of Japanese lives, or any nation's lives for that matter. That is what I mean when I say that governments usually are not only useless, but they are HARMFUL and VERY MUCH HARMFUL too. They inflict damage directly or indirectly on their own people in a situation where there's every physical possibility to avoid the damage and the actual people in government KNOW this.
This is just one more example to add to the unending succession of the same sort of crimes done by governments in the developed 'semi-democratic' countries, where there has accumulated a huge deficit of effective mechanisms of public democratic control over the governments, huge lack of information transparency and accountability of the state. Other examples include (but are not limited to) wars started just at the click of fingers where thousands of citizens are killed (thousands of American boys and girls in Iraq and Afghan war for example); or the endless governmental fight with drugs which is based on the endless supply and illegal production of drugs and creating good conditions for the mafia-supported shadow drug economy (of course governments are interested in supporting the endless fight and the endless drug use and illegal trade); creating purposely conditions whereby terrorists or just lunatics can easily make their own explosives and blow them up (Norway example http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/07/few-comments-on-norway-apocalypse.html) or buy and carry grenades (Belgium recent example); or subsidizing an artificial external enemy just to support an artificial cold war to make the state look more needed and protecting (South Korea and North Korea example, the US war on terrorism); creating special anti-human prison conditions not to reduce crime rates and the number of criminals but to support them in order to make governmental policing agencies and functions seem more important and needed and get the proper funding; laws legalizing the private possession and carrying of fire arms by anyone who is just of age and have a driving license (or even without it) - this list can be continued.
All this adds up to the same burning question WHY do the developed 'semi-democratic' countries NEED GOVERNMENTS in their present form?! Why indeed, if the governments are the main TRAITORS of the national interests - the interests of the PEOPLE - and the main TERRORISTS who, using secrecy laws to eliminate any democratic control, TERRORIZE their own population to meet their own disgusting ends (which they have the impertinence to call national interests)?
It's not that this problem doesn't have a solution in theory: the developed countries need to switch from being SEMI-DEMOCRACIES (or quasi-democracies) to the full-fledged democracies, with a new understanding of the responsibility of the state, fundamentally new standards and conceptions of TRANSPARENCY, PUBLIC CONTROL and PARTICIPATION. New conception of criminal law and responsibility would be important too, if the governments are to be left in their present form, because the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE cannot and should not be applied to them as in the case of usual citizens.

See also:
How to avoid ridiculously 'freak' wars like in Iraq and Afghanistan in future?!
Yes, Bradley Manning and Assange deserve the Nobel prize possibly more than Obama does! 
'A letter to a friend: don't have illusions, there are no good governments'
Some extra about the moral political crisis in the Western semi-democracies  

Why the US doesn't apologize for its recent killing of Pakistani troops

Monday, December 26, 2011

Hyundai pays tribute to Kim Jong-Il. What's next, tribute to Hitler?

Oh My GOD! The head of South Korean car-producing giant Hyundai arrived officially in North Korea to pay last tribute and mourn the deceased butcher and terrorist Kim Jong-Il!! Just pinch me, I can't believe I am not asleep! Of course everyone remembers from the history books how British, French in American corporations in the 1930s with full clout and support of their respective governments vied for the honor and privilege of taking and serving large industrial orders from Hitler's Nazi Germany(more often than not those were military-related orders), but what you can see now is something completely surrealistic: to put a proper analogy to this Hyundai official visit one should imagine something like Ford visiting Germany (with the permission and full support of the US Government too) AFTER the end of the second world war in order to PAY tribute to the dead Hitler with the aim of promoting national economic interests... My foot! Even the best satirists and comedians in the 21th century cannot think up in their wildest imaginings plots which could be even closely comparable to the political realities in terms of the bottomless abyss of cynicism and immorality of things done by governments of so called developed countries all around the world without a blink.
By the way,  I don't believe for a minute that South Korea government is really interested in the collapse of N Korean regime & in unification of the split nation, and such visits like this one of Hyundai just confirms me all the more in this disbelief. In many ways South Korean state does its best to preserve the status quo in North Korea, that's the anti-human weak regime, for as long as possible. If there was really political will to destroy this awful formation and unite the split nation - thousands of families - I honestly believe it would have been done LOOOOOOONG AGO without too much difficulty too. But the short-term interest of every incoming government is much higher that the lives of their brothers on the other side of the border and the tragedy of the split nation. No one wants to take this responsibility but, instead, everyone among the politicians wants to have a comfortable enemy nearby to lessen their responsibility for truly important things and hype their role as a defender of people from that enemy... - a form of state terrorism, so to speak, where people pays authorities for their own fears supported by these authorities.
If there were a real interest in coping with N Korean regime, there are a lots of good things and guaranties that South Korea could offer to those political 'clowns' in exchange for a fast reform or even revolutionary reform dismantling this extremely weak formation in matter of years. But that's not what South Korea government is concerned with, and its Western Allies (who love spouting about democratic values so much) for that matter.

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Why the US doesn't apologize for its recent killing of Pakistani troops

Now I very often hear questions like 'why doesn't Obama apologize for killing Pakistani troops' etc. It needs some sort of short clarification. 
The question 'why Obama doesn't apologize' is basically incorrect, just because within the American state system of coordinates the value of people lives beyond its borders is ZERO in the general case - it was so, it is so and it will be so in the foreseeable future.
A much more relevant question is 'why should he apologize?'. But not the other way around just because the modern state-nations structurally are not in the habit of apologizing, and the bigger a state the less desire it has to apologize for anything. They, if you like, are intrinsically immoral. That's how the modern (as a matter of fact very obsolete) state models work (even the so called democracies): what's done by state has the benefit of presumption of being morally right - not the other way around. The value of lives and national dignity of OTHER nations in the eyes of the US are no more than a PIECE of SHIT pardon my French  - that's how things are, were and will be in the foreseeable future. I am not very happy to remind about this unfortunate reality, but that's the way it is. Only AMERICAN PEOPLE can sometimes FORCE the US semi-democratic state to recognize something or apologize, but even in those rare cases it takes sometimes decades and thousands of lives. Moreover because there are no real democratic mechanism of control by the American people of what their state is up to BEYOND national borders, the probability that Americans will force their state to apologize to some fellow human creatures in some other part of the world is ABSOLUTE ZERO. 
You may as well ask why the US don't want to apologize to Japan for nuclear bombing of its civilians in WW2, or why Israel isn't in a hurry to apologize to Palestinians for the criminal blockade and occupation, or why Russian state is in no mood to apologize to the Chechen people... or why Turkey doesn't think of apologizing to the Armenians etc etc. That's the essence of the antique 'state-nations' - even 'semi-democratic' ones amongst them. The prestige and the presumption of the morality and justifiability of what is done by a state, especially beyond its borders, is granted at a fundamental level. Such things as Nuremberg process or recognition of the massacre of Polish elites by the Soviets and such like is a HISTORICAL and very very RARE EXCEPTION, caused by a very very specific set of circumstances and overwhelming proof of the scale of the crimes. So the question is, in my view, absolutely INCORRECT. To pin one's hopes on some miracle in this sense is also unreasonable because Obama, with all due respect, is not Vaclav Havel and can never have been one - Vaclav Havel is phenomenon that is impossible in usual, steady political conditions, kind of ' a freak of nature' bound with transitional revolutionary processes.
One can with the same vain hope expect Obama to apologize to own nation on the behalf of the state for thousands upon thousands of American girls and boys uniform KILLED in the Iraqi war (an tens of thousands more mutilated for life) which was started under the 100% false excuses and grounds from the first. It is not a matter of who is president - Obama is the best imaginable president for the US for my taste, but it is a matter of the antique political SYSTEM, of its intrinsically immoral core, which is based not on pursuing fairness and justice in the context of the absolute universal value of human life, but on the primacy of 'state national interests' and the state presumption of innocence and good intentions. Hence the state FORCE defines what is moral, not the other way around. So the question is not about Obama, the question is about the structure of the US state and the continuity of state interests. Only HUGE pressure and a very specific set of external circumstances could FORCE American government to give an apology to Pakistani nation of to anyone else for that matter.
A MUCH more relevant question in my humble opinion is that HOW DARE the US in the person of its president even MENTION some kind of moral grounds and make ANY kind of moral judgements about other parts of the worlds in which it has its interests and presence (including military one). I can perfectly understand why the US state treat any other nation and people beyond its border as historical manure in deed without even bothering to reliably hide or cover the fact, but how can it be at the same time so BRAZEN as to EVER allude to some kind of MORAL grounds - that's what is completely beyond me! How can the US in those circumstances seriously believe that there is still something left of their moral authority and image - that's a real puzzle.

See also on the close themes:
'A letter to a friend: don't have illusions, there are no good governments'
Some extra about the moral political crisis in the Western semi-democracies  
How to avoid ridiculously 'freak' wars like in Iraq and Afghanistan in future?!
Yes, Bradley Manning and Assange deserve the Nobel prize possibly more than Obama does!
America refused to teach Arabs democracy, then Arabs will teach the US democracy!

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

ECB starts printing money big time: nightmares come true!

The European Central Bank said it injected a record 489.19 billion euros (US$641bil) into eurozone banks in its first-ever three-year refinancing operation.
Sounds really apocalyptic but at the same time prosaic and predetermined. One can only imagine the dialog that took place between Angela Merkel and Sarkozy, it could have been something like this:

MERKEL: I am not sure... I do have some bad feelings and premonitions about unconditionally subjugating the one and only healthy donor-type economy in eurozone - Germany - to the parasitic majority of the whole company.. Don't think I am too scrupulous, but it looks a bit alarming in terms of possible historic responsibility...
SARKOZY: Oh, my dear Angela, come on, we live only once. Let's do the usual thing we in democratish countries always do in such situations - borrow from our children and grandchildren and postpone the big crash for several years... Even if it means a total collapse of the EU, this will not happen tomorrow and all those journalists and publicists, never mind our lot - politicians - will be saying that you just 'made a mistake' but you tried your hardest to save the whole thing... Nobody can accuse us of a CRIME we are protected by the 'half-democracy'. We just make sometimes mistakes... Nothing criminal... Lets live in the present - in this day - you and me have only a few years left in office... Let's not over-complicate things.

Instead of a comprehensive reform of the financial capitalism and democratization of the EU, they decided to do what almost all observers and analysts expected them to do in the end (you don't need an Oxford degree to make such predictions in the modern 'decomposed' Western political world): they 'leveraged' an already existentially dangerous structural problem. Instead of 'germanization' - okay, if somebody don't like this term, let them have Finlandization or Scandinavization - of those pseudo-democratic, American type oligarchic pluto-klepto-cratic neighbors like Italy or Greece - parasitic in essence (by no means do I blame the victimized people of those countries, rather the system and the state), they on the contrary bend down the heart of the European economy - Germany - to the dictates of its ill - now quite possibly terminally ill - members. They decided to treat the economic drug dependence with additional unending mega-shots of 'the financial heroin' - just to postpone the debts of the southern countries by loaning times more money at the expense of increasing the debts even more - to a fatal extent. And, mind you my dear reader, all those people in power KNOW what they do and all the consequences, which in my humble opinion, makes the difference between a mistake and a crime.
You also don't have to be Adam Smith now to understand that the huge economic problems of Greece, Portugal, Italy, Spain etc, possibly even France, are to do with structural problems of those economies, with the structural problems of their political models (especially in countries like Italy and Greece) and structural problems in the format of the eurozone - both political and economic. Those countries are in essence oligarchic plutocracies (which mistakenly considered by some credulous people to be democracies), where there's a continuity of interests of successive governments, which themselves in essence are nothing more than an appendage of the powerful rich group(s) - a kind of lackey, or doorman at the doors or the club, the owners of which never have been the peoples of those countries. Of course every new government in Greece borrowed as much as possible using state bonds just to stay in power and satisfy the ever-increasing appetites of their master - wealthy 'elites'. Now, when the situation came to a head in such countries as Greece where the minimum supply of liquidity is coming to an end (the state and banks just don't have a minimal amount of money to sustain the basic economic mechanisms, after all those huge loaned money just drained in the private pocket of the wealthy 10% of the population), they decided to pump an additional amount of this 'heroin' DIRECTLY through the bank system, and institutionalize this approach via change of the ECB role to a KIND OF Fed. Reserve of the US (which Germany resisted so long but unsuccessfully in the end). That means in essence printing money, and indirectly using taxpayers' (predominantly German taxpayer's) money for covering the losses of the banks which are too big to fail (mainly German and French banks financed the Greek banks directly or via government and now the insurance company called 'taxpayers all over the Europe' must cover this megatheft for free - see http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/11/greece-will-fail-without-euro-just.html). Immediately and unsurprisingly the banks on the first day of the auction grabbed almost 500 bln euros (!!) from ECB, and this is only a start. Looks like a 'safety shot' in the head of the economic union of Europe.
The second problem is the same old problem, which, in my view, from the very start of the EU became a time bomb for the very EU: the total absence of democracy in the very foundation of the EU (never mind eurozone), and, hence, legitimacy (http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/01/few-words-about-eu-good-idea-but-in.html). The use of Central Banks in itself for printing money and pumping liquidity into the banking system is not necessarily bad at all times, but the problem is that within democratic national systems, e.g. in the case of the USA, Japan, England etc, the emission and REDISTRIBUTION of money supply has legitimacy with the people (at least nominal), and the people, at least nominally, have the power to influence the policymakers directly (through local and general elections), influencing through them what can be an UNJUST and unbalanced redistribution of money and credit power in the national economy - there is at least on paper a democratic feedback and a place for the people in this pact between the state institutions. But nothing of this sort do you have in the EU - The Soviet Union of European Governments and Functionaries. Germans are 120% sure that the actions of the ECB are aimed at stealing their purchasing power and the value of their savings (which is 120% true too) just to save the foreign fat cats (who give nothing instead) and their own fat cats (in the form of their bankrupt banks).
And there's nothing that Germans can do about this within the EU bureaucracy's rules and so called 'laws' (a union which is in essence a form of usurpation of national sovereign powers and democracy, because it is not democratic in itself). This leads the whole system directly to a political crisis of an immense scale. But European 'leaders' just continue - knowingly so - to inject the 'heroin' into the poisoned bloodstream of the system, robe their taxpayers without saying a WORD about the critical situation with democracy and legitimacy of this whole rosy house named 'EU' (I am really amazed by the fact they call themselves 'leaders' since in my simple mind, leaders are exemplified for instance by some Roman generals or Emperors who to heighten the moral and hope of their armies get ahead of everybody else and demonstratively risk their life to start a crucial attack and fundamentally change the course of the fight. The image of the miserable self-interested and cynical RATS, whose only task is getting rid of all kind of responsibilities, staying in power  as long as possible thanks to political prostitution and appearing even before their own public only in the presence of heavy security and behind the bullet-prof glass of their tank-like automobiles, doesn't easily fit into my old fashioned conception of leaders).

Sunday, December 18, 2011

My last tribute to a giant of a man - Vaclav Havel


I am sending my last tribute to the great man Vaclav Havel of the world, great politician and artist, who died today.
Unfortunately now the presence of such GIANTS in politics in the West is absolutely ruled out. The coming of Vaclav Havel into politics could become possible only and only thanks to the realities of the Cold War and the Soviet Occupation. Viewed against the background of such persons like Vaclav, today's political bedbugs in Europe, which dare to call themselves 'leaders', would really seem pathetic Lilliputs.
My heart goes out to the Czechs and those who really understand the human dimensions of Vaclav Havel and his contribution not only to the Czech Republic but to the world.
Thank you Vaclav for all you did, for your ideas and ideals, for your words and deeds.

Friday, December 16, 2011

Arab peoples must get rid of ALL illusions about the West's intentions

Arab peoples must get rid of ALL illusions about the West's intentions: Western powers have NEVER EVER wanted to promote a genuine democracy in the Middle East. They historically either financed dictators (like in Egypt or in Yemen) or created 'sham' democracies (like in Iraq or Bahrain) which in reality under the 'democratic gravy' are kleptocratic oligarchies (clan based or capital based), which steal from and cripple their own nations. The West is not only disinterested in real strong democracy in the Middle East, but does everything in its power to prevent it: WEAK Arab-speaking world is GOOD Arab-speaking world, at least in the view of the US. If Arabs want true democracy, they MUST build it themselves, and they'd better not step on the same 'mine' as India or Eastern European countries, who decided to build American type of capitalism (http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/08/note-about-india-disparity-and.html). American type of capitalism is incompatible with true democracy, cos capital has always more votes than people. Do learn from Finland and Sweden, which are not only much more socially and morally just societies but also are an order of magnitude more democratic than the US (practical control over what the state is up to and the independence of government from lobbying power of capital is incomparably better and unadulterated in Scandinavia which in part explains why the quality of life of the general public there is significantly better now than that in the US). Don't forget, the buzz word of 'democratic capitalism' is a malicious demagogic myth for the undereducated people.
See also on this topic:
http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/america-refused-to-teach-arabs.html
http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-did-west-start-war-against-gaddafi.html
http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/bahrain-just-another-litmus-test-to.html
http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-extra-about-moral-political-crisis.html



Thursday, December 15, 2011

Canada exits Kyoto: oil prostitution has its modest price

Yeess, here I would reluctantly agree with you, my critical justice-seeking reader: Canada is a very active and progressive contributor to the global warming... though it doesn't mean that Canada is a region that feels the most of the consequences of this phenomenon in its 'most warming' manifestations, I am afraid...
Unfortunately Canada (of course here by Canada I mean only and only Canadian STATE), among many different types of 'political and economic prostitution' it has traditionally practiced, has lately taken to OIL prostitution and she's done it so energetically, enthusiastically and in earnest that has almost instantly overtaken her big southern brother in terms of the intensity of state's jolly fellatio - figuratively speaking - of the tar-smelling member of the oil corporations... American oil corporations... What the hell does Canada need this Kyoto protocol for if it digs up Alberta's tar sands (and all of Alberta with it) by the hands of the US oil companies for the good of American ecology and interests of American people?! Maybe for some crazy countries and regions like Germany. Japan. Korea etc, who go by leaps and bounds into the 21th century, developing green post-oil economy, it is important to have some green-house gas protocols, but of course not for Canada which has by right deserved to be exempt from this duty by her stubborn and triumphant march into the 20th century... even though her big southern brother's lately faltered a bit in his assurance on this front... Canada can sometimes remind a time machine.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Iran's nuclear weapon is inevitable: Israel must thank the US!

I am less than happy about Iran's nuclear program in the form it is now, BUT, unfortunately, as a rational man, I have to recognize the overwhelming probability that now nobody can prevent Iran from developing the enrichment process and getting all the ingredients to built its own nuclear explosive device. In my mind it's almost a forgone conclusion, though, I hasten to add, that it's not necessarily the main goal of the Iranian regime to construct an actual bomb. The main thing for them is to reach and demonstrate the absolute ability to built the bomb at will.
Also I have no doubts at all that the turning point in Iran's nuclear program and the huge window of opportunity Iran used for playing this card were created by Bush's government policy and actions (no matter deliberately or not), that's the US. After America got quite predictably bogged down into the unprecedentedly ugly, immoral and stupid war in Iraq while continuing to stay in Afghanistan (for reasons unknown too), there were no more factors left that could restrain Iran from going nuclear. This was rationally absolutely predictable and almost inevitable, and, in my view, therefore, the whole responsibility for any Iran's successes on this front must be FULLY placed on the US. In this sense Israel may say many many 'thanks' to its big friend for this 'help'. Furthermore, the very coming into power of radical Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could have been impossible without this 'performance' given by Bush on the Middle East stage. As is well known, before Ahmadinejad at the helm of Iran stood quite a moderate and incomparably more friendly and cultured Mohammad Khatami (who, by the way, mothballed the nuclear project). Of course the invasion of Iraq radicalized the Iranian society, giving such guys like Ahmadinejad a very good chance - a result, which cannot have been unpredicted (at least as a big possibility) by the White House.
Anyway, for now the technical and scientific potential of Iran at this stage of development and zero levers of the West to out pressure, in my mind, make Iran's becoming a nuclear state almost the inevitability. So one will have to live with that and build relations accordingly. All this fuss about Iran's threat to Israel or the US and, even more ridiculously, to Europe is, I am afraid, again is nothing more than a piece of very cheap, 20th century low standard demagoguery and propaganda.
Oh completely forgot, about DIPLOMATIC ways of preventing Iran from going nuclear and denuclearization of the Middle East : of course, it stands to reason and goes without saying, that Middle East should not have been nuclearized in the first place. In the 21th century, I hope, it is ridiculous even for a school boy to think that all those soulful, dear and 'highly moral' talks about preventing nuclear arms spread in the Middle East are just a kind of trite joke if in one package with it you don't discuss Israel with its illegal 200 nukes and one of the most powerful armies in the world (nonetheless additionally reinforced in the form of alliance by the most powerful army in the world - the US).
On the other hand, any strikes and military aggression against Iran will bring a chance that that country would be further radicalized and consider seriously using its technology for producing a real bomb. All those actions, be it on the part of Israel or the US, would mean really putting at (created) risk many people and many lives, and the responsibility for all the consequences of such, in my opinion CRIMINAL, gambling, would lie with those powers (that would start this harmful almost anti-humane, game).
That being said, there may be serious possibility to solve the 'nuclear' problem in theory: if - just assume for the sake of argument - the US gets serious about discussing Israel's nuclear arsenal and its denuclearization in the broad context together with Iran and all other countries in the Middle East. Such talk would be really an honest and adult attempt to start on the road to peace. But some 'inner voice' tells me (I hope it lies) that, though this fair and practicable way is obvious and workable, neither the US nor Israel will follow it in the foreseeable future, and the 20th century standard warmongering rhetoric will go on, further spoiling the international reputation and image of the US http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-extra-about-moral-political-crisis.html (you can't say anything about Israel's international reputation, if of course you don't place it alongside countries like Russia http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/09/israel-stays-on-in-20th-century-not.html).
In the meantime arguably the most dangerous nuclear country Pakistan - most dangerous not only of Israel, but for the whole of the world -remains among the friends and allies of America - America with whose tacit agreement, if not direct protection, Pakistan made this very nuclear weapon. Never ever did I hear that Israel tried at least to put some pressure on America in relation to its friendship with Pakistan. O no! Israel itself weaponizes Pakistan with great success. Don't tell me after that about Israeli and American governments caring about their peoples... Give me a break! Hah... the world and America's 'spoiled teenager' Israel would be by orders of magnitude more safe if America swapped around Pakistan and Iran, making the latter its strategic friend, and turning Pakistan into the 'bogeyman'. At least Iran has a sound control over all its territory, over its weapon arsenal and don't sponsor directly terrorists (which is such a characteristic feature of Pakistani governmental agencies). Iran in terms of its soundness and safety in comparison with America's beloved Pakistan can be seen as Belgium in comparison with Serbia in the times of Milosevic's rule.

Don't tell me the West cannot put more pressure on Assad!

It is too often that one has had lately to hear all kinds of demagoguery coming from Western leaders and political observers which boil down to the simple formula 'We cannot do anything more about Syria, cos all our non-military arsenal of levers and means of pressure has been exhausted'. To me that sounds like barefaced cheap lies - very cynical too.
There are a lots of things in the arsenal of the US & its Western allies to contribute to democratic revolution in Syria, or, at least, overthrowing Assad's repressive regime. What to do about Syria?
1. First of all, criminal proceedings should have been initiated against Assad in Hague Tribunal quite a time ago. Morally one cannot understand why it hasn't been done many months ago, but, taking into account the sad realities and absolute immorality of the politics of many so called democracies in the West it only stands to reason that Assad is not prosecuted by this 'controlled selective justice tool' - Hague Tribunal: many politicians in the West are still holding out hope that Assad's forces will prevail in the end, no real responsibility for saving Syrians will not have to be taken and Syria will continue to remain blissfully weak and therefore safe country in the eyes if the US - just as is the case with all the rest of the Middle East (about the purposeful policies of the West aimed at creating and keeping bloody dictators in the Middle East see also http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/america-refused-to-teach-arabs.html, http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-did-west-start-war-against-gaddafi.html  and http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-extra-about-moral-political-crisis.html). It goes without saying that not having started prosecuting Assad through the Hague Tribunal just adds to the ruining of the already disfigured image and reputation of those justice institutions and principles.
2. Stop buying oil.
3. Stop all diplomatic relations with Syria, call back all diplomats.
4. FREEZE all bank accounts and transaction of the regime and its officials.
5. Deny entry visa and movement of any Syrian regime officials within (and through) the territory of the Western and countries.
6. Continue information war and moral support (there is huge experience accumulated by the West in this respect in the times of the Cold War, ranging from radio-channels provided for the dissidents of the regime to helping with financing the opposition groups' own press and information campaigns).
7. One the most important things to do: provide free specialist consultation to the opposition groups on more effective political fight tactics and organizations, about leadership formation and the creation of institutions.
8. Last but not least: Western powers must publicly PROMISE that irrespective of the situation in Syria the West's relations won't improve and all the sanctions will stay in force. Veeeery important step, because, obviously, now the Syrian government hopes (just as any other government would do in its place), that if it finally succeeds in suppressing the revolutionary forces, over time the situation will come back to normal, the West as ever, will calm down, and everything will be business as usual.
9. You don't need to be Machiavelli to understand that president Assad and his groups would resist to as long as possible and kill as many people as necessary to support their hope, for one simple reason: they FEAR for their lives. If the West is really interested in promoting democracy and saving as many civilian lives as possible (which I doubt very much on the historical grounds) they can negotiate a form of guaranties for Assad's life - kind of safe 'prison-asylum'. I am all for putting Assad on trial, but, as a man who REALLY wants to stop the blood shed in Syria, I would happily agree to 'imprison' Assad like Napoleon on some island with a life-long pension, servants and safe good conditions, ONLY to STOP the killings and facilitate the regime change. With all my hatred of people like Assad, thousands of innocent lives and a speedy change of regime for me are thousands times more valuable that one life of this butcher.
All theses things are understood and known by Western powers no worse than by me, but they are not done. Hope that new players like Turkey will help Syrian people much faster than Western HYPER-HYPOCRITES!

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Governments' concern with global warming is hard to believe in

Just cannot help but drop a couple of skeptical remarks on this global warming fuss and hype supported by a number of Western countries: I think something needs to be elucidated once and for all about all those noises politicians in the West try to make about greenhouse gases and global warming threats, convening regular summits at the top level, flying there on huge jets, throwing big parties and having collective slick pictures taken of themselves as a memento at the expense of their crisis-stricken nations.
It is really hard for one to believe (if, of course, one is not a 16 year old youth, full of sweet fantasies and hopes about the nature of the modern politics and mechanisms governing it), that governments around the world are really concerned with the global warming and its consequences for the future generations - something looking more of a blueprint for a surrealistic novel or movie.
Global warming is practically a scientific reality (only 'voodoo parties' like Republicans in the US don't recognize the overwhelming base of scientific evidence in favor of the human-induced greenhouse effect taking place), and a dangerous reality too, but so far the history teaches us that politicians and governing elites (classes) not only aren't concerned the least bit about the future of the next generations, but on the contrary ALWAYS ready and willing to BORROW as much as possible from and make as much indebted (in all imaginable senses) as technically feasible generations of their children and grand-children. It is really ridiculous to think that all that global warming drivel originates in a kind of soulful compassion ostensibly cherished by those cynical, intrinsically immoral, political animals, who are ready to sell anything and anyone, including any national interests, only to stay in power during THEIR life-time on this planet - politicians who decide to send to war their kids to be killed and mutilated just at a snap of their fingers, after a private talk with a leader of a foreign nation on his ranch, regardless of opposition to this idea by 80% of their own nation, just because it could give them some assumed advantage. Give me a break. They couldn't care less about what can happen in a matter of 5-10 years, let alone after their death (at least now degeneration of the 'semi-democracies' brought the situation in West to this deplorable state of things).
But what the ruling elites, at least in Europe, have really become concerned is OIL ADDICTION and DEPENDENCE. Because none of them wants to say directly 'We want to move away from using hydrocarbons as the main energy source, stop financing rogue regimes (who are most often the lucky owners of the oil reserves), and stop this malicious over-dependence on the oil corporations wielding enormous lobbying power' they thought up this politically correct and HIGHLY MORAL (as usual) narrative about their care and concern for future generation and third developing countries suffering from the excessive droughts and floods, brought on by Global Warming. When oil prices went up to $100 per brl against the background of the soaring appetites of China and India for hydrocarbons and continuing depletion of easy oil fields, the Europeans started to feel some discomfort, especially seeing as nothing on the horizon bodes any improvement on this front.
Of course there are some other pleasant extras and bonuses that could be potentially derived from this 'MORAL' context, introduced by those 'angelic custodians of the well-being of the future generations': for example, instead of paying 'carbon-fuel' or 'technological' reparations to the developing countries (who only now, 100 years after the West, undergo the phase of industrialization of their economies, like China, India and many others), those Westerners can feel themselves cosmically brazen on the contrary to require some extra payments in return from those poor developing countries (though of course, it goes without saying, the main consumers of those new production bases created in the developing countries are Westerners, who in essence move their production from their 'clean garden' to the dirty shops of the new Asian contractors); or those developing countries could be put in a position where their companies and governments would be more willing (trying to be as MORAL as their big brothers in the West) to BUY new equipment and green technologies from the Western champions of the green future of the human kind (instead of getting them FREE as a partial compensation for those centuries of wild Western industrialization). Many other goodies could be potentially derived from this incredible heavenly MORALITY and RIGHTEOUSNESS of the posed MOTIVES of the Western countries, whose colossal industrialization at any cost with zero regard for anything and anyone live else in the world during the last couple of centuries, became the one and only cause of this very Global Warming. 

Friday, December 9, 2011

Brief comments on hijab and burqa ban in Europe

It is really really hard for anyone, for whom liberal ideals and human rights are not just empty gestures, to find proper words to describe what has been offered and done by France and, then, by other European powers in relation to this miniscule minority of Muslim women, who, more often than not squeezed between a rock and a hard place of their conservative Muslim families, are forced to wear burqas or hijabs under pain of some or other form of punishment.
Sometimes such things make me really doubt whether France and Europe in general really need those enlightenment giants like Volter, Didro, Rousseau etc... What is more painful is that such kind of 'witch hunt of the 21th century' has become possible in Europe and citizens are in no hurry to come to the defense of this small marginalized majority of women. It is not very difficult to imagine how such political demagogues like Sarkozy have turned into emotional and moral eunuchs, which don't hesitate a minute before making popular and political capital on anything, but the level of moral and civil indifference among the general civil public to this issue does remind of the same indifference and callousness which the German public felt towards Jewish persecution and exodus in the 30s. I never thought that I would live to see such ugly things in Europe in the 21th century.
Of course here we talk about a really minute minority of women who wear outdoor those hijabs - about 2000 all in all if one is to believe the social studies. A minority which is associated with a very specific set of circumstances and which is more often than not is a victim of very conservative traditions in the family environment where the rules are dictated by males and where physical violence as a form compulsion and 'persuasion' is method #1.
The intellectual powers of a school graduate are quite sufficient to understand that imposing huge administrative fines on those 2000 women as a PUNISHMENT for wearing a hijab cannot and will not have ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the real solution of the real problem of cultural integration of those families and helping the real victims of this situation. Even less does all this farce have to do with the promotion of so called 'French values' as well as keeping the secular freedoms (indeed, cannibalistic tribes according to this perverse logic must be considered to be good conservationists). You don't have to be Einstein either to guess how much this 'witch hunt' would add to the pain and humiliation of the already victimized, most helpless and unprotected element in this situation - to those poor dependent women. How CRUEL and emotionally OSSIFIED must the French civil society have become to approve such kind of '19th century methods' and, instead of honest reliable solution, make the weakest and already most humiliated minority a scape goat. SHAME! I just sometimes hope that I wake up in a cold sweat to find that all of this was just a terrible dream... I don't blame such cynical monsters like Sarkozy and Co., but the European people, whose ideals were based on the enlightenment sometime in the past, must know better and be able to tell the difference between super cynical populists stunts, and the real process of solving the problem of the cultural integration, which must be done not by political gamblers, but by scientists: sociologists, psychologists, culturologists etc.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Brief comments about Syria, Iran and the West's leverage

Syria.
It is too often that one has had lately to hear all kinds of demagoguery coming from Western leaders and political observers which boil down to the simple formula 'We cannot do anything more about Syria, cos all our non-military arsenal of levers and means of pressure has been exhausted'. To me that sounds like barefaced cheap lies - very cynical too.
There are a lots of things in the arsenal of the US & its Western allies to contribute to democratic revolution in Syria, or, at least, overthrowing Assad's repressive regime. What to do about Syria?
1. First of all, criminal proceedings should have been initiated against Assad in Hague Tribunal quite a time ago. Morally one cannot understand why it hasn't been done many months ago, but, taking into account the sad realities and absolute immorality of the politics of many so called democracies in the West it only stands to reason that Assad is not prosecuted by this 'controlled selective justice tool' - Hague Tribunal: many politicians in the West are still holding out hope that Assad's forces will prevail in the end, no real responsibility for saving Syrians will not have to be taken and Syria will continue to remain blissfully weak and therefore safe country in the eyes if the US - just as is the case with all the rest of the Middle East (about the purposeful policies of the West aimed at creating and keeping bloody dictators in the Middle East see also http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/america-refused-to-teach-arabs.html, http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-did-west-start-war-against-gaddafi.html  and http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-extra-about-moral-political-crisis.html). It goes without saying that not having started prosecuting Assad through the Hague Tribunal just adds to the ruining of the already disfigured image and reputation of those justice institutions and principles.
2. Stop buying oil.
3. Stop all diplomatic relations with Syria, call back all diplomats.
4. FREEZE all bank accounts and transaction of the regime and its officials.
5. Deny entry visa and movement of any Syrian regime officials within (and through) the territory of the Western and countries.
6. Continue information war and moral support (there is huge experience accumulated by the West in this respect in the times of the Cold War, ranging from radio-channels provided for the dissidents of the regime to helping with financing the opposition groups' own press and information campaigns).
7. One the most important things to do: provide free specialist consultation to the opposition groups on more effective political fight tactics and organizations, about leadership formation and the creation of institutions.
8. Last but not least: Western powers must publicly PROMISE that irrespective of the situation in Syria the West's relations won't improve and all the sanctions will stay in force. Veeeery important step, because, obviously, now the Syrian government hopes (just as any other government would do in its place), that if it finally succeeds in suppressing the revolutionary forces, over time the situation will come back to normal, the West as ever, will calm down, and everything will be business as usual.
9. You don't need to be Machiavelli to understand that president Assad and his groups would resist to as long as possible and kill as many people as necessary to support their hope, for one simple reason: they FEAR for their lives. If the West is really interested in promoting democracy and saving as many civilian lives as possible (which I doubt very much on the historical grounds) they can negotiate a form of guaranties for Assad's life - kind of safe 'prison-asylum'. I am all for putting Assad on trial, but, as a man who REALLY wants to stop the blood shed in Syria, I would happily agree to 'imprison' Assad like Napoleon on some island with a life-long pension, servants and safe good conditions, ONLY to STOP the killings and facilitate the regime change. With all my hatred of people like Assad, thousands of innocent lives and a speedy change of regime for me are thousands times more valuable that one life of this butcher.
All theses things are understood and known by Western powers no worse than by me, but they are not done. Hope that new players like Turkey will help Syrian people much faster than Western HYPER-HYPOCRITES!


Iran's nuclear program.
I am less than happy about Iran's nuclear program in the form it is now, BUT, unfortunately, as a rational man, I have to recognize the overwhelming probability that now nobody can prevent Iran from developing the enrichment process and getting all the ingredients to built its own nuclear explosive device. In my mind it's almost a forgone conclusion, though, I hasten to add, that it's not necessarily the main goal of the Iranian regime to construct an actual bomb. The main thing for them is to reach and demonstrate the absolute ability to built the bomb at will.
Also I have no doubts at all that the turning point in Iran's nuclear program and the huge window of opportunity Iran used for playing this card were created by Bush's government policy and actions (no matter deliberately or not), that's the US. After America got quite predictably bogged down into the unprecedentedly ugly, immoral and stupid war in Iraq while continuing to stay in Afghanistan (for reasons unknown too), there were no more factors left that could restrain Iran from going nuclear. This was rationally absolutely predictable and almost inevitable, and, in my view, therefore, the whole responsibility for any Iran's successes on this front must be FULLY placed on the US. In this sense Israel may say many many 'thanks' to its big friend for this 'help'. Furthermore, the very coming into power of radical Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could have been impossible without this 'performance' given by Bush on the Middle East stage. As is well known, before Ahmadinejad at the helm of Iran stood quite a moderate and incomparably more friendly and cultured Mohammad Khatami (who, by the way, mothballed the nuclear project). Of course the invasion of Iraq radicalized the Iranian society, giving such guys like Ahmadinejad a very good chance - a result, which cannot have been unpredicted (at least as a big possibility) by the White House.
Anyway, for now the technical and scientific potential of Iran at this stage of development and zero levers of the West to out pressure, in my mind, make Iran's becoming a nuclear state almost the inevitability. So one will have to live with that and build relations accordingly. All this fuss about Iran's threat to Israel or the US and, even more ridiculously, to Europe is, I am afraid, again is nothing more than a piece of very cheap, 20th century low standard demagoguery and propaganda.
Oh completely forgot, about DIPLOMATIC ways of preventing Iran from going nuclear and denuclearization of the Middle East : of course, it stands to reason and goes without saying, that Middle East should not have been nuclearized in the first place. In the 21th century, I hope, it is ridiculous even for a school boy to think that all those soulful, dear and 'highly moral' talks about preventing nuclear arms spread in the Middle East are just a kind of trite joke if in one package with it you don't discuss Israel with its illegal 200 nukes and one of the most powerful armies in the world (nonetheless additionally reinforced in the form of alliance by the most powerful army in the world - the US).
On the other hand, any strikes and military aggression against Iran will bring a chance that that country would be further radicalized and consider seriously using its technology for producing a real bomb. All those actions, be it on the part of Israel or the US, would mean really putting at (created) risk many people and many lives, and the responsibility for all the consequences of such, in my opinion CRIMINAL, gambling, would lie with those powers (that would start this harmful almost anti-humane, game).
That being said, there may be serious possibility to solve the 'nuclear' problem in theory: if - just assume for the sake of argument - the US gets serious about discussing Israel's nuclear arsenal and its denuclearization in the broad context together with Iran and all other countries in the Middle East. Such talk would be really an honest and adult attempt to start on the road to peace. But some 'inner voice' tells me (I hope it lies) that, though this fair and practicable way is obvious and workable, neither the US nor Israel will follow it in the foreseeable future, and the 20th century standard warmongering rhetoric will go on, further spoiling the international reputation and image of the US http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-extra-about-moral-political-crisis.html (you can't say anything about Israel's international reputation, if of course you don't place it alongside countries like Russia http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/09/israel-stays-on-in-20th-century-not.html).
In the meantime arguably the most dangerous nuclear country Pakistan - most dangerous not only of Israel, but for the whole of the world -remains among the friends and allies of America - America with whose tacit agreement, if not direct protection, Pakistan made this very nuclear weapon. Never ever did I hear that Israel tried at least to put some pressure on America in relation to its friendship with Pakistan. O no! Israel itself weaponizes Pakistan with great success. Don't tell me after that about Israeli and American governments caring about their peoples... Give me a break! Hah... the world and America's 'spoiled teenager' Israel would be by orders of magnitude more safe if America swapped around Pakistan and Iran, making the latter its strategic friend, and turning Pakistan into the 'bogeyman'. At least Iran has a sound control over all its territory, over its weapon arsenal and don't sponsor directly terrorists (which is such a characteristic feature of Pakistani governmental agencies). Iran in terms of its soundness and safety in comparison with America's beloved Pakistan can be seen as Belgium in comparison with Serbia in the times of Milosevic's rule.

Friday, November 4, 2011

Greece will fail without euro? Just another cynical myth?

German fat cats cherished by the German Govt loaned to the Greek fat cats cherished by Greek Govt, now all the cats want the Greek people to COVER those sweet 'deals'.
I understand that the main headache of the so called 'euro leaders' now is to SAVE THEIR COMMERCIAL BANKS and the old financial capitalism model in broader terms, and do it preferably 1. at the expense of the taxpayers - that is PEOPLE 2. preferably at the expense of the Greek people - not the Germans of French. Therefore it stands to reason that the demagogic rhetoric of Sarkozy, Merkel etc offers for free a whole range of insipid and banal bogeyman stories and myths, like 'Greece will fail without euro', 'If euro fails Europe fails' (good that Europe managed to have lived thousands of years thanks to the fact that there were no euro)' or 'Germany was a great beneficiary of eurozone and euro' or 'the main problem is the lack of the leadership' and such like tales for the 5-year-olds for which they take the people of Europe. They - those euro leaders - don't have ANY legitimacy for the Greek people, they were not elected by the Greek people, and they in reality COULDN'T CARE LESS about the Greek people and their welfare. All that they are really now concerned about is the salvation of their 'too big to fail' BANKS and their own terms in office.
Why not to leave the eurozone reintroduce drahma and devalue? Quite possibly it should have been done a year or two before (without amassing extra debt in the form of the bail-out tranches). It seems that eurozone (in reality banks) now depends on Greece much more that Greece does on the eurozone. All those myths about Greek catastrophes in case of leaving eurozone just mask the catastrophe of the eurozone in case of Greece leaving. In practice NOTHING could be ever worse for the Greek economy then what we have already EXCEPT the proposed deal by those 'leaders'. In reality:
1. exports of Greece will be boosted by devaluing through drachma.
2. Tourism will be boosted for the same reason - price decrease through devaluing.
3. Restructuring of the debts in a much more comfortable way for Greece
4. No 'euro tax' burdens on small and medium businesses - there will be all the usual tools in the hands of the government to ease the life of the businesses which now they cannot do because of the 'euroburden' of saving German and French banks (which are too big to fail) (as a matter of fact what has been imposed on Greece so far by those 'euro-rescue crew' from an economic point of view looks like giving laxative for diarrhea; this once more demonstrated that euro-leaders and the very structure of this autocratic bureaucratic structure considers the people(les) not more than a piece of shit)
5. The cessation of this vicious endless dependence of further selling euro bonds to get money (cause Greece doesn't have its own money) and disappearance of the very temptation which had driven before the successive governments of Greece to borrow ever more and more (to finance their terms in office through injections) will lead to a much more responsible and flexible economic policy and attitude on the part of the following governments.
6. External PRIVATE investments into the REAL SECTOR (tourism, food industry, services things which really influence the welfare of 80% of the nation) in Greece will as likely as not RISE (in contrast to what is preached by the 'euro doctors') because of the drop of property prices, special conditions created by the new less 'euro-addictive' government and because the 'malignant investments' in the form of the unending stream of euro channeled by governmental institutions and their close affiliates (and overriding any really natural free-market competitive investments) would be stopped AT LAST. It is very important to remember that the conditions when the stream of 'crazy money' going from outside through the privileged state or state-protected financial institutions is much more significant that the much thinner trickle of consumer demand money going into the real sector, are less than auspicious for the major part of the population, especially in a real-sector underdeveloped economy like Greece (in essence it is a variant of the so called Dutch disease, but where the influx of 'non-working' capital is provided not by the resource exports but by a seemingly bottomless source of debt financing). In such conditions real sector economy becomes weak, unstable, uncompetitive and stops being the master of the situation - its share in the economy and the financial structure is OVERRIDDEN or superseded by parasites who take money from a bottomless pit, increase inflation, consume without giving anything in return, kill the investing power of the real-sector capital. All those problems will be eliminated in Greece just as it was in the case of Russia in 1998 or in case of Argentine in 2002).   
As to the practical examples, there is almost a general consensus among the economists that 'developing' European countries who hadn't done this mistake of entering the eurozone feel themselves economically incomparably better off now. Poland is a glaring example of this.
As for the eurozone in particular and the EU in general, the problem is the same and very old: it is not a democratic formation, hence doesn't have enough legitimacy in the eyes of the nations, and hence tempt the euro-institutions and the governments (using the instruments) to usurp ever more and more powers weakening the national sovereign democracies: http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/01/few-words-about-eu-good-idea-but-in.html



Wednesday, October 26, 2011

How can the eurozone be saved by all these summits in the longer term?

What is the summit of the EC leaders about? Very simple: they're trying to figure out how much money they should 'print' through ECB and what proportion of the amount must be (can be reasonably safely) taken away from the taxpayers.
Just a bit of a recap: during the first decade of the 21th century German, French and British banks loaned trillions of euro to the Greek, Irish, Portugal etc banks and governments; the lion's share of those trillions settled in the pockets of the small capitalist elite who has the access to the money in the first place according to the beautiful system of the financial capitalism. Those countries went bust. And now the main headache of the so called 'leaders' or the EU is to decide who to refill the pockets of the banks-creditors by robbing 1. German and French taxpayer 2. Greek, Italian, Irish etc taxpayer. Their main problem is not Greek or German nation, their problem is the empty banks of course. (it makes perfect sense for the Greek to try to change Government and to get rid of euro as soon as possible, reintroduce and devalue their national currency, neither do I see any ethical problems with this). That's the European socialistic capitalism for you.
I am still very pessimistic about the prospect of the eurozone. I understand that they - those EU 'leaders' - can pump a substantial amount of taxpayers money into the commercial banks (though risking some kind of strike-back on the part of the ordinary people, whose money are used to save those banks but who don't get anything in return from them). They also can print some money. They can save one or more Southern countries from an immediate bankruptcy, BUT I cannot understand how on earth they can save TRUST of the market players in the whole system and in those bankrupt countries? Even with the success of the immediate rescue, who is gonna buy the Greek or Portugal treasuries in future? (except for highly speculative purposes).

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Occupy Wall Street is just the tip of the iceberg: social pact of the US is through


Occupy Wall Street is just the tip of the iceberg, only the start: the start of realization by the American people that 19th century capitalism and democracy have always been in conflict, and now in the 21th become incompatible completely. One voter one vote – one of the main democratic principles and requirements, which could never be further from the main realities and requirements of capitalism. Capitalism kills democracy. Americans realize that their state serves AGAINST their interests, that means against the nation (whether inadvertently or inadvertently – no matter).
All those corporations (especially financial ones and banks) have traditionally been pictured by the capitalism as the main feeding hand providing employment for Americans (who by the whole idea must feel themselves irredeemably indebted morally to those corporations up to the end of their life) and the main driver of the economy, society, science, technology - in one word nearly all of the American civilization. But now after the crisis struck it has transpired that it is the taxpayer - largely American people - who was FORCED by the STATE to save all those corporations (including also production corporations - all the auto-producers, which had been supposed before to be good and resilient because of the famous myth 'capitalism generates competition' and which turned out to be absolutely uncompetitive in the face of their much less 'capitalistic' competitors from Germany, Japan and South Korea). The record historic immorality and abomination of this situation is not only the fact, that those corporations don't take responsibility for their risks (the risks which were the main argument in favor of them having 'special' standing and powers in the society) and are saved at the expense of the ppl (whom they are gonna continue to rob right after coming around after 'near death experience') but because of POLITICAL capitalism, when the 'democratic' state helps those gamblers even in the hardest possible times. State is not even a neutral arbiter - NO! It's interests are dictated by corporations, not by American people, even in crises times and even with so called 'democratic' party at the helm. What is worth this kind of democracy? What is the social pact?! When the White House saved with the Americans' money those corporations at the peak of the crisis, those corporations didn't lift a finger to pay back in kind and save the aforementioned EMPLOYMENT, reduce foreclosures etc – ZERO responsibility, and quite understandably so. Rather on the contrary: they started to minimize the number of the very taxpayers working for them as well as their corporate taxes and got used even more the idea that taxpayer would save them in the last resort. Looks like one saves a bank with his money and then the bank comes and first thing takes away the home from that guy at a crisis time because of the overdue debt.
It is not only governmental, economic and capitalistic crisis, it is an unprecedented MORAL and IDEOLOGICAL crisis in the USA, because now it turns out de-facto that it's the wealthy who are saved and nurtured by the people and who give nothing in return and who are protected by the Government – parasitism in overdrive. The SOCIAL PACT of the American capitalistic model society is coming apart at the seams right before everyone's eyes: history in action. That's the 'too big to fail' problem for you.

Thursday, September 22, 2011

About killing of Troy Davis called in the US 'execution'

Killing Troy Davis is just another excellent example of public useless killings conducted by America INSIDE itself along with the killings conducted outside (be it in wars or secrete prisons). The fundamental cause is the same: the real attitude of the US to the value of human life still answers the standards of 19th century at best. In this sense - human life value - the US in the eyes of Europe looks like BARBARIANS.
In uncertainty you have two moral options: either just in case to leave a human being alive, OR just in case to KILL him. The US elects the latter, and shows the whole world its REAL attitude to human life. If one says that execution of Troy Davis is a shame for the US moral and legal image, it wouldn't be true cos the word shame isn't enough. The very presence of death penalty in the US shows that the mentality of the country in this sense is still in the 19th century, not in the 21th. But this concrete case shows the worth of 'rule of law' and particularly cynical disdain and devaluation of human life in the US.
Death penalty in the US - state authorized murder on behalf of all citizens, always reminds me of Christian origins & legacy of America...

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Israel stays on in the 20th century not noticing the millennial change

Very simple change: in the 20th century Israel's military aggression and occupation was at the expense of Arabs and to the benefit of Israelis, now in the 21th century it is the other way around. But Israel doesn't want even to see this, like an ostrich with its head in the sand. (here meant by Israel is its politically powerful elites, not its people. Ideologically, politically, economically even morally they - Israel political elites - want to remain in in the 20 century, but the reality hastens to disappoint them: this 'old rusty bicycle' of the war-and-xenophobia-based national mendacious ideology, policy-making, parasitic war-subsidy-driven economy from now on will more take (for 'repairs') than allow the nation to ride ahead like it was in the last century.
What changed for Israel at the beginning of the new century? Very simple: during decades of the second half of the 20th century Israel kept all the status-quot - sprawling occupation of Palestine and the endless smouldering war (whether it be war of weapons or threats or words) supporting its militaristic political and economic vital structure - AT THE EXPENSE OF PALESTINIANS and other peoples (including American taxpayers) and to the apparent economic and political benefit of Israel itself. Israel did it through sham peace negotiations and other kinds of political charade without ever bothering to make this charade look very truthful.
But Israel didn't notice one 'small' change: with the beginning of the 21th century the situation diametrically changed to the opposite: now every extra minute which Israel tries to linger in the 20th century goes AT THE EXPENSE of Israelis, their children and their future and TO THE BENEFIT of Palestinians and other Arabs. In this context a great change has come to the US - big brother of Israel - too - the same change: all the policy of American influence in the Middle East through support of Israel and support of dictators in the region brought apparent dividends to the US and was largely at the expense of Arab nations, but now the situation has changed diametrically to the opposite. But the difference is that America - at least starting from Obama's administration - seems, at least partly, to understand this problem and to start the transition and adaptation to the new realities of the 21th century.
But Israel is another story. Election of 'a dinosaur' like Binyamin Netanyahu as PM at a time when the task of belated well overdue reforms and transition even for most progressive and talented politicians posed a huge, painfully difficult challenge, was a real CATASTROPHE. Instead of at least running on the spot, Israel voted in a man not even from the 20th century, but almost from the 19th, just at the moment when for Israel a gulp of 'fresh air', a minimum life-supporting momentum was as necessary as life, just keep the movement ahead or at least not to fall behind too much. It was like taking pills for high blood pressure when actually having low pressure. I couldn't agree more with Mrs Tzipi Livni who flat out pointed out, that Netanyahu Govt brought Israel to a real disaster and to a never-seen-before isolation on the world arena.
Since in the 20th century Israel (with a great participation of the US) made the above status quot an existential feature of its economy and political life (this everlasting war became an absolute political and economic necessity, it became an integral condition for supporting national self-identity, compass of the collective national moral, a part of national ethos and ideology in generations), the above change and the problems ensuing too can be existential.
I hope that Israelis - especially young ones - will soon realize (before it's too late) that the main existential threat to Israel in the 21th century is posed by Israel and Israel itself only! If someone can destroy Israel it is Israel itself. Not guns, or bombs are now the main threat, but bad RELATIONS and lack of critical thinking. Israel can in this sense become a victim of its own guns and bombs - militaristic mentality and way of life. And this threat, unpleasant as it may appear to the younger generation to recognize, has been created, nursed and fostered by their parents and grandparents during the second half of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21th. In this sense, the 20th century generation of Israelis in large measure have lived economically and politically at the expense of their children and grand children borrowing from the future generations.
But now the main thing is to understand and recognize that this 'old comfortable bike', on which Israel teenage state joyfully and self-confidently rode through the 20th century,  stopped working and will never start again as in the past. Now, on the contrary, by the minute this old bike requires more and more for repairs and doesn't give a penny in return - neither economically, nor socially, nor politically etc. Now its Israel and Israelis who PAY for the military nationalism adventures (of the medieval type). Now it is America who pay for its Middle East adventures - the past and present ones. But America seems to have already realized this deplorable fact, whereas its teenager (spoiled rotten by America during decades) doesn't seem to have even begun to suspect that something is not as ever...
Of course, partly the success of Israel, as a quasi-state which cannot be considered a fully independent entity economically and politically even now, depends heavily on the US policy. Big brother US did Israel a terrible disservice in fact. I really hope that Obama or next presidents will be able once and for all openly to put an end to this absolutely obsolete and unjustified type of relationship with Israel - giving it absolute impunity and not letting it to account for its action like any other sovereign country before international community for it's actions. This unconditional friendship policy for the last several decades cost Israeli people, American people and the rest of the world thousands up on thousands of lives (directly and indirectly) and billions upon billions of dollars (in direct and indirect economic losses and expenditures). The human cost is can hardly be estimated. Yes the US must remain friends with Israel but this relationship must be an adult one.

WHAT AWAITS ISRAEL IF IT DOESN'T CHANGE?
In short, nothing good. I'm afraid you don't have to be Cassandra to predict some of the negative things that can be round the corner:
1. Young talented Israelis will continue to drain from Israel in ever increasing quantities. Brain drain - as simple as that (already now non-native Israelis are emigrating in alarming numbers, and the number of native young Israelis emigrating is significantly above the zero mark: see on this topic). This will take place not only because of the fundamentally flawed military-based economic system, but also because of the loss of belief in the future of the country - moral and trust hazard.
2. Demographic balance will continue to tip in favor of the Arab population - again, not only because of the economic factor, but because of the loss of belief in and hope for the future.
These problems could be increasingly exacerbated by a third factor which is not discussed very much, if at all: the Jews beyond Israel will be increasingly reluctant to give their support to Israel (economic as well as political support), because the younger generation of the American Jews (as well as those who live in countries other than the US) is not so ready to UNCONDITIONALLY identify themselves with the Jewish community in Israel and to UNCONDITIONALLY give their support to Israel. This young generation of the American Jews are much more pragmatic, liberal and critical in their ways. Conservatism is no longer in fashion like it was before, and such 'dinosaurs' like Benjamin Netanyahu - their rhetoric and policies - don't add up too much to closing this potentially opening rift between Israeli and Non-Israeli Jews and Israeli emigrants.
Israel will have to chose whether it wants to stay in the 20th century or even go back in time to middle ages with the chosen ethnicity-based model feeding on militaristic nationalism, or it wants a modern civil rights-based democracy, because these two ideologies and models are intrinsically INCOMPATIBLE. You just can't have them both. The sooner Israel recognizes this problem the better chances it has to stop the negative tendency. 

See also on the topic of Israel policy:
On Iran nuclear: http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/09/israel-stays-on-in-20th-century-not.html
On UN legitimization of Palestine: http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/09/palestine-turned-to-un-why-not-long.html
America's policy change towards Israel: http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/obamas-change.html

Friday, September 16, 2011

Palestine turned to UN: why not long before?

It is only surprising why Palestine haven't applied for statehood with the UN long long before with the full right and grounds to do so... Why is UN is here if not for this? To be honest, to grant a recognition to Palestine on the part of UN nation would be a much more legal and legitimate act than recognition of Kosovo or Libyan rebel government. So the procedure should have been initiated long ago and it is not a question weather it will succeed formally at once, it is a very important step to show that independence of Palestine is not a question of STRIKING A DEAL with Israel and that Israel being an AGGRESSOR AND OCCUPANT is a fact regardless of any deals or negotiations. The conflict between rapist and and his victim is not and cannot be a matter of bilateral negotiation between those two, especially with an involvement of a powerful friend of the rapist as a mediator - a friend, who supplies weapons for the rape. Independence and self-determination of Palestinian nation must be business of international community and intl. law ONLY, not one of an interested occupant party and its prejudiced friends like US (the number of those friend actually has dropped to and become limited to the US only till this moment). Likewise the role of Israel in the eyes of international community must be changed from just that of a party of 'civil matter negotiations' - someone like a strict father who is ostensibly to give some property to his bad son if he behaves - to an involved criminal usurper, for which all those negotiations are no more than a set of unrealizable conditions which a blackmailer gives to his victim just to continue the game and keep the victim from full despair and turning to the police. World community too after half a century of the Israeli occupation must come to its senses have the courage to recognize the difference between 'negotiations mistakes' and 'rape', between 'family quarrel' and 'child abuse' etc.
In other words it has become the case very long before now that the Israel-Palestine question has ceased to be an internal question of two parties, just like the question of Serbia and Kosovo or Turks and Greeks on Cyprus, Gaddafi and rebel government or any question of a raper and a victim - it CANNOT BE CONSIDERED ANY MORE and internal bilateral question - its the business of international community to decide. And the application for sovereignty by Palestine to UN must have been done long ago just to fix, to formally REGISTER the state of things, to make a formal statement that Palestine is raped AGAINST her wishes and this cannot be considered a 'usual family quarrel' any more

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

911 anniversary: terrorists celebrate victory

With great sadness one should recognize that the 9/11 attack on America by terrorists brought them a major victory beyond any expectations, if the results are to be judged critically.
Anti-American terrorists achieved their single most important goal: to TERRORIZE the USA, to force America with the power of fear and panic to change her ways, to act irrationally, to dent her own values, to kill even more American people in the form of American boys and girls in uniform, to forfeit her reputation and disfigure her image in the eyes of the whole world, to lose much of her weight and power because of weakening her international standing, to cripple the USA economically through an unprecedented, unbearable burden of war-related costs and lost momentum in the civil reinvestment, reforms and development, to mar her moral image and leadership in the eyes even the closest of her allies in the West.
Hardly ever could Osama and other terrorists have dreamed in their sweetest dreams that the killing of 3000 people at World Trade Center would be 'supplemented' by killing yet another 5000 American girls and boys in uniform; that the US get involved in two major wars at once; that the Americans would give in to panic so much that allow such 'pathological men' like Bush to rule 2 terms and to do the terrorist's work - intimidating people - for them; that Patriotic acts and other 'laws, Guantanamo, anti-Muslim hysteria in the American society would damage the very pillar of American liberal and humane values; that the corruption decay in power would bring such vermin like Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz to the highest positions of power, making the head of state not only the first mentally handicapped president of the USA for the first time in its history, but also bringing the rule of the superpower to the brink of being a puppet state. Hardly ever did the terrorists imagined that the ruling political elites would substitute for them and complete their task of terrorizing of America: they got a multiplier effect of unseen proportions in a case, where American Government happened to be a partner in the crime of terrorism, who just finished the task to an absolute ugly perfection.
Unfortunately its very very hard to assess the true 'cosmic' scale of the damage caused by the attack of 911  - precisely because its main aim of terrorizing of the American population and elites has been achieved, and the great country lost its ability to think RATIONALLY and CRITICALLY. Symbolically the terrorists could hardly have dared to hope that America wouldn't restore the twins to the former splendor, magnificence and beauty, demonstrating her real spiritual resistance, invulnerability and stubbornness: in contrast it was decided to make at this place a kind memorial to perpetuate the festering wound for many years ahead, demonstrating not the resilience, but the scale of damage and tragedy inflicted by those terrorists butchers. 
Having said that, I would also remind of the role of American Government in the incident. While there's no doubt that the terrorists acts were organized and executed by radical fundamentalists, the question of what the American Government KNEW before and whether it really WANTED to do everything in its power to prevent this attack is still a very big and important question. Unlike conspiracy theorists, who always blame governments in direct organization of some crimes against their nations, in reality governments DON'T NEED to do this to satisfy their interests: they just allow something to happen with a higher probability because of the knowledge and delayed reactions - something induced by the 'external' circumstances and forces. There's still a hell of a lot of questions about the role of the American government from this standpoint as well as about the 'selfless' hunt for Bin Laden, who, as everyone knew, had been sitting in Pakistan for many years, but was killed a year before reelection of the US president.
I hope that the American People will finally get to grips with their political Augean stables of their house and clean them. I hope that American people will really start fighting, not breeding, terror; and it will be done not by criminal opportunists like Cheney, not by the bull-headed blood-thirsty generals, but by PROFESSORS and SCIENTISTS in sociology, psychology and other fields.

Friday, August 19, 2011

Note about the US pressure on Assad in Syria

Comment of Washington about necessity for Assad to go is something rather irrelevant and unhelpful, and not because Syria wouldn't be better without Assad (maybe), but because the moral authority of the US over the region where it deliberately had fostered, cherished and weaponized dictators (and continue to do so in Bahrein, Saudi Arabia, Yemen etc, despite the situation there is not so different from Syria) is virtually ZERO! They, Washington, just now trying not to fall behind the actual events and all their comments directed not at actual help to Syrians but to saving their own face, though I don't see what there is left to be saved... http://dr-world.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-extra-about-moral-political-crisis.html
1st stage of enlightenment: I understood that USA never ever in its recent history has been interested in spreading democracy round the world. 2nd stage of enlightenment: I understood that US has always actively been interested in the opposite - containment of democratic development in other parts of the world. What Syria changes? Why not to talk about Bahrein, Azerbaidjan, Uzbekistan, the 'pet' Yement etc etc etc? My foot, the USA talking about Assad bad guy - fancy that! And lecture Europe on how to abstain from... buying oil from Syria!! All comics and satirical writers can retire, they are not needed any more!

Thursday, August 18, 2011

A note about India disparity and corruption problems

The problem is still the same: India like many other countries tried to build its state and country after the very obsolete and semi-democratic capitalistic model of the USA, which belongs to 19th century and gives the Americans themselves a hell of a lot of problems nowadays. But India (and other young democracies, for example in Eastern Europe) would better follow the example of much more advanced and modern democracies like Finland, Sweden etc. Then if India had done so she would have had a chance to avoid all the 'bouquet' of problems which the USA had to go through in the past, and have a true democracy, not a class-based semi-democracy, that has come to a very serious moral, ideological and economic crisis.
The same goes for Egypt: if (and that's a big if) it's revolution should be successful in the foreseeable future, by no means should Egypt step on the same 'mine' and try to mimic American model. Nothing could be more terrible than this. Learn from Scandinavia, or, at least, from Germany and South Korea.