Brussels 2011: The First Battle of New-Democracy, or "New-Speak"?

It seems like 17 or 23 countries will follow Germany into a second floor in the EU as expected. Britain vetoed the regular EU deal. Indeed, this is an interesting situation for an Anglo-American. On the one hand saving the Eurozone is good for the economy in the short run. On the other, this makes Germany powerful and can harm the economy by V1s and V2s towards the City of London later.

I must say I have a problem with this development of the democracy concept that has taken place the last 40 years or so. I don’t know if it is an improvement or something that has the potential of authoritarianize the whole situation. My experience with the new democracy, or “new speak”, is rather awful. Dehumanization, violence, threats, property right violations, loss of integrity! It smells communism and totalitarianism. With the risk of making a fool out of myself, I’m inclined to ask the question if the cultures of Germany, Japan, Russia and China will revert to fascism of a socialist kind? I’m posing the question to myself, which culture will prove most resistant to “new speak” in the body?

Beginning in the Middle East we found out that people want change. It is understandable that the quest for a new world began where the pressure was hardest. It seems to have moved to Russia now following this gradient, discounting the Occupy movement which is a little different in character. That we are talking about a global problem is clear from the words of a Tunisian poet Abou el-Kacem al Chebbi “If, one day, a people decides to live, fate will answer their call.” Sounds quite Western to me actually. There is no life under “new speak”. The American Independence Declaration is under severe pressure at the moment.

The problem is that you can't talk about the problem?

Yesterday Italy ended up in real trouble. Some said its economy is dead other meant that it still has a chance. After all it a country based on knowledge and it has significant assets to back it debt. But it seems like this was the straw that broke the camel's back. There is talk today on Huffington Post of a two-speed Europe solution. There is talk about a budget czar for the Eurozone in the Financial Times.

A budget czar that takes control over the budgets of member states would mean that it is clear that they can’t do this on their own. Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal have failed to match expenses with income and can’t sustain welfare states on the same level as states in northern Europe. We have technocracy delegitimizing democracy in such states and would need a panel of judges to decide which countries are in and which are out.

Nicolas Sarkozy has been advocating for a two speed Europe whereas Angela Merkel has spoken for a more homogenous variety. Merkel is of course right as far as the EU motto is concerned but if technocracy with economic steering, a Eurozone economic government, will make countries like Greece balk at this prospect, they will have to split the Eurozone somehow. A solution with debt redemption over 20-25 years via a fund is a more probable proposition which is also discussed in the Financial Times today.

So, what people are beginning to talk about is that democracy does not work everywhere. Still you have politicians who stand tall and say they wish democracy for Libya’s people soon, when there are problems in southern Europe already. The question today is whether or not southern Europe will accept technocracy or if they will cut themselves loose and stay democracies. Greece is an interesting example because 70% poll favorably for the Euro at the same time as they poll 60% against the bail-out from the Eurozone.

Democracy and Religion?

I realized yesterday that we have half a year left to spring now in Sweden. First week of April is a common spring initiation around here. Took a walk today in the early fall with fresh leaves fallen on the ground. The smell of fall was evident in the air. The lawn has slowed down.

Reading a book about Religion in America by a French author, Denis Lacorne from 2011. It is originally written in French in 2007 but contains an afterword that comments on Obama’s “Faith-friendly Secularism”. Lacorne talks about the American civilization and makes some corrections on Tocqueville’s Democracy in America from 1835. He does not think, like Tocqueville, that democracy took off from the Puritans in New England but rather had a secular origin from the Founding Fathers.

Lacorne thinks evangelism was the religious origin of the national walls of America and suspected atheist Jefferson was elected 1800 with the help of evangelical votes that objected to the bullying of the then established churches. The romantic American historian George Bancroft did however also point at the Puritans as a source of democracy and religion in the US like Tocqueville.

What I think is interesting in this context is that Thomas Jefferson, the drafter of the Independence Declaration and the third President of the US, had three favorite historic persons in mind when he acted namely: Francis Bacon, John Locke, and Isaac Newton. Maybe he pictured a future country in the name of science more than he pictured it religious even if he probably was realistic enough to feature a religious context for his country. Jefferson was a lawyer like Bacon.

The question then is if Americans have become, or always been, so different from the Europeans that we can’t keep Atlanticism going? The relative success so far on the Libya mission of NATO will of course help for a while. Economically France and Germany have started a battle against Anglo-America. They, for some reason, don’t think you should make money on money. A Tobin tax is the latest aim in suppressing the City of London.

The US is more religious than Europe currently. It has been possible to assume that this could give the US its higher growth rate, although I have not ever seen that in writing. However, the non-religious China is doing fine on growth even if this growth to a large extent so far is a proof of the success of Western globalism. Some Chinese academics say that the lack of Christianity was what made the West stronger and there are attempts right now to restore Confucianism, a new Confucianism, as a moral precept for the masses. Marx would probably turn in his grave. Marxism is still the official dogma of the Chinese communist party.

Tocqueville thought democracy needed religion to function. Contrary to his contemporary American historians he advocated Catholicism as the optimal form of Christianity. He viewed the multitude of more “enthusiastic” Protestant sects as having a divisive effect on government. In other words he thought of religion as a societal stabilizer just like China is searching for right now. Without democracy, however, religion is a competing organization and with Poland in mind Catholicism probably has a hard time in China. I understand that the Party is appointing bishops.

Today I read about the Swedish Church in Svenska Dagbladet. They have to start getting rid of church buildings for economic reasons. Many are standing empty and demand heating and maintenance. The Christian Democrat party in Sweden is in jeopardy not to make the 4% level needed for entry into Parliament in the next election and their larger brother in Germany is also losing votes. I can’t help asking Tocqueville’s question: is democracy in trouble in Europe? Angela  Merkel is losing power being the most important person to hold the EU together. The obvious follow up question is if it is good for democracy if the Euro and thereby, as Merkel is fond of pointing out, the EU will fall?

Where is the next interesting thing happening?

Is it going to be the most efficient economies that take the lead or is it going to be the most legitimate and therefore probably the most stable, albeit slower growing. China, South Korea and Japan represents a highly efficient area that is very competitive relative each other. Boston, Washington-Philadelphia, Texas, California and Chicago is another conglomerate that is in the legitimate category. In Europe we have London, Paris, Brussels and Berlin.

Although I have heard comments against this idea, I believe that we have entered a new era where rule-systems group into those utilizing pain, those who fool with pain and/or use subliminal stimulations of various kind and psychological terror, and normal ones that treat people like human beings with dignity.

Another favorite theory of mine is that the democracy wave that occurred during the 1970s and 1980s where dictatorships gave up power, so to speak, because they kept it behind the scenes with the technology, in reality was the transfer to a new order of so called democracy according to the second principle above.

There is good hope that the principle where people are fooled to believe that pain is going to be used against them will move in a more dignified direction as people try out to breach the orders and take the consequences that are not too severe. The dictatorships that use pain might very well go down hill on developments in the general direction of Libya and Syria. People just begin to go out and die in the streets when life has become bad enough.

There is a risk that the second category, fooling with pain, revert to using pain. Let us for the sake of mankind hope that this is not going to happen. Let us also hope that life in category two above is not too supressive. It was noteworthy that there were no leaders in the Egyptian revolt, just non-connected grassroots.

Political Creeds?

Column One: A prayer for 5771: "A reporter there asked him, “[Do] you subscribe, as many of your predecessors have, to the school of ‘American exceptionalism’ that sees America as uniquely qualified to lead the world, or do you have a slightly different philosophy?” Obama replied, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” That is, the US president said, no, he does not believe in American exceptionalism. He rejects the American creed."

Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post discusses political creeds in an emotional article. Lexington, the columnist in The Economist, rejected writing about American exceptionalism the other week. Is this true? Is the magic of the beacon for the world gone?

In Sweden people are very optimistic right now on the performance of the nation and on the excellent governance by the center-right coalition. In the US they are more gloomy. David Brooks writes today in his column that 65% of Americans think that the US is in decline. The economic downturn is structural not cyclical. Like Brooks, however, I am optimistic over the future of America.

President Obama has shown that he has a bad conscious since he has apologized for the behavior of America. Now it seems he does not think Americans are better than other people but the question is rather if the American system is better or not. If the American idea is better. If freedom for more people in the world is better. With the rise of China, freedom has almost become a bad word unfortunately. I think I know why and I have earlier written in my blog about what I think might be American exceptionalism. It is the degree to which society can withstand the onslaught of new management technologies. Time will tell.

Olof Palme, the Swedish prime minister that was assassinated in 1986, probably thought that the US should emulate Sweden. During his reign the diplomatic relation between Sweden and the US was almost severed. The crisis in Georgia demonstrates what happens if you even blink with regimes like present day Russia. In Palme's time the Soviet Union was probably worse. What I think is important is to recognize the difference in the roles of Sweden and the US. The US can lead but Sweden remains an opposition party.

Will the World Become a New Europe?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali writes in the Wall Street Journal about Samuel P Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. She claims it describes the world as it is, not as President Obama wishes it to become. She says we have to win the clash of civilizations. But is she not speaking against herself then, by assuming the fusion of civilizations to a One World scenario?

The US chose not to rule the world. I was under the assumption that this is a futile approach. I think Obama has a point in facilitating the cohabitation of Earth. We have to get along with the other civilizations rather than to win out somehow. After all, Fukuyama's idea about liberal democratic capitalism remaining as the ideology of choice is not that bad. I think he still might be right. I don't think this means that we have reached the "end of history" though.

Unfortunately then we are heading for a new Europe scenario on a world scale. The multipolar world everyone have been talking about. Someone recently wrote that we are now historically positioned again before World War I. I am not necessarily that pessimistic but I have a feeling we have retracted maturity wise due to the use of new technology, unfortunately. In some areas of the world they might just drive people a little too hard?

Ms Ali brings up China and Islam as the main competitors on the stage. I would say that Islam as a threat has been over rated. There is not, nor has it been, a risk that Islam would conquer the infidel West. We have terrorism yes, but that is down almost to a police level. I don't think it will disappear. It is rather a built-in problem with current management systems.

China, however, seems to become a real competitor. Mostly because of its state capitalism which is an economic system that entices many authoritarian governments around the globe.

Vacation IV

Gunnar Hökmark is writing on his blog lately on how to make Europe competitive in science and innovation. The question is if there is something in Europe that could make a difference. The smart money seems to be on a non-federal Europe which would mean that we will be different from the US and China in that respect. The motto of EU is "United in Diversity" and I guess we would have to use this concept somehow.

To me it is obvious that the Anglo-American philosophy that gave rise to capitalism and relative freedom for people also gave rise to the most prestigious universities and the best scientific crews. If you recognize the fact that biologic diversity must play out in political systems you are on the right path. There is in other words no reason for wavering on this concept despite collectivistic assaults. This means removing the socialism gradient in Europe.

How this can be possible while maintaining the EU motto is a difficult question. Because we would have to learn what diversity is healthy and which is not. In this context it is good to remember the East German experiment in a language compatible setting. The "ossies" are still not up to speed after investing €1.3tn. They only perform up to 70% of the West Germans. The societal texture has to change. Since a lot of people live outside of the traditional Western Europe this is a problem but perhaps a problem that if it can be solved would eventually make Europe competitive.

Now, if you ask me how politicians should motivate people to change it seems like laborating with Europe as a global player in competition with the US, China and India might not work. It might be easier to use the motto. Start national competitions for excellence? Europeans are good internationally in soccer. This is unfortunately counter productive for creating centers for excellence like they have in the US. Propinquity is very important in science. But who knows, perhaps a unique way of localization of science could be fruitful?

How does one remove socialism? This is of course as easy as winning the election in Sweden that is due in September.

Vacation III

Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) was beheaded during the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution. The judge apparently said while delivering his verdict that the revolution did not need scientists and chemists. Nevertheless, Lavoisier was a very accomplished person that found out, among other things, after having co-discovered oxygen 1773, that biological organisms where driven by combustion.

This discovery is one of the great ones of the scientific revolution. It was now possible to ask the question how and start working. It gave rise to a tremendous amount of important work. No "vital principle" was needed for life. Life had become demystified and people where emancipated. The ironic question to pose was if not Lavoisier's idea helped propel the revolution by this liberalism from divine influence, evil spirits and the like.

Lavoisier's idea, however, came late in the enlightenment of the 18th century and perhaps disappeared in the turmoil of revolution and war followed by the cultural reaction romanticism. Enzymes, the engines of biologic combustion, where not discovered until the end of the 19th century in France by Pasteur and Germany by Buchner. People were seemingly lost in the more spiritual electromagnetism that arrived from Italy in the 1780s by Galvani and Volta and Denmark 1820 by Oerstedt.

The last decades have featured a development where people gradually have lost the control of their bodies. Thus in a time which could be called a new enlightenment, with the neo-Gutenberg event of the invention of the personal computer and its operative system, Google and Wikipedia, loss of personal integrity and the contraption of the soul and the body runs counter to this development. Will their effects cancel out or do we find that enlightenment wins out?

Vacation II

Was not very lucky with the weather. Three consecutive days of rain. Studied On Liberty of John Stuart Mill from 1859 instead. Darwin published his book Origin of Species 1859 and it is interesting to examine whether the 'survival of the fittest' that was in the air influenced Mill in his book with his idea of 'freedom to the people unless it means harm to other people'. After all evolution of society via eccentricity is along the same lines as the development of more successful species.

So far I found out that Mill knew about Darwin but he did not think time had proven his thesis just yet. That would indicate that he was not influenced by Darwin's idea directly. I don't know if Mill's ideas made the same splash as Darwin's on the discussion of the era but it is less probable that Darwin was influenced by Mill. However, at this time it had become established beyond doubt that societal development was driven by great individuals of science that broke intellectual ground which would mean that the influence that stimulated Mill was of a more general character.

“The modern regime of public opinion is, in an unorganized form, what the Chinese educational and political systems are in an organized; and unless individuality shall be able successfully to assert itself against this yoke, Europe, notwithstanding its noble antecedents and its professed Christianity, will tend to become another China.” This a conclusion of Mill's from On Liberty. Apparently Mill did not want to see a development of Europe in the direction of collectivist China. One can see the same discussion in the New York Times today where the US, wary of the relative decline of the Western civilization, worries that Asia will take over.

Mill did not discuss the relationship between the US and Britain but Ralph Waldo Emerson, who lived across the pond during exactly the same time, was more upbeat in his estimate. He vouched for self-reliance. Don't read too many books. Create instead! We still hear the echoes of this in the current "innovate away from the competition". In Mill's time it was the British Empire that was in decline. Now it is the Western civilization. Will Asia become the next United States in world development? In other words, will collectivism take over? Collectivism on crowded areas vs. individualism on an expanse?

Make the world safe for democracy?

EUobserver / EU-Chinese 'misunderstanding' on the rise, senior Beijing official warns: "'Europe believes it has the best and that the whole world should copy it, although after a long period of time, many countries that did copy it are not so successful,' said Ms Fu. 'But Europe does not lose its confidence, you keep on lecturing.'"

Ms Fu Ying was Ambassador to the UK for three years and now is deputy foreign minister of China. Does she have a point? Perhaps races have sufficient different genetics to differ in their behaviors so that politics becomes different. Many genes are involved in the difference of skin color and facial characteristics. There is evidence that a single gene mutation in a prairie rat can make them promiscuous. A single gene difference that creates a very different seemingly complex behavioral pattern of forming a couple for life or living promiscuous.

Democracy is just not the thing, perhaps, for the Chinese. They have a collectivistic bent and the individualistic Westerners organize differently. Wilson was wrong when he thought the whole world was susceptible to the democratic way? He did not even manage to convince the US that a world government was due. It is, in other words, significant when Mao could transform the Chinese into a communistic society thus sacrificing some 70m lives in the prospect.

Well, perhaps now when people start sequencing the full genomes of people and can start making comparisons it is time to question the idea that the world could unite under one flag. After all, the EU has significant problems doing so. Again science has progressed and provided new clues as to how politics is played out. The first full genome was sequenced in 2003 so things have just started to move. The prize for a full genome sequence is soon down to a $1,000 per person. Interestingly they have also found differences between the genomes of different tissues of a single person. Exciting things are happening in the embryology of the nervous system involving genetic differences.

Liberalism and the Western way were formed in the 17th century of Europe by Hobbes, Spinoza and Locke and forged on the basis of scientific pursuit. Science might now be back taunting us to reconsider what the holocaust warned for. We then have to realize that different races might provide different talents to mankind's development. We have to look for the benefits of each race and try to get along. There are problems like the revolutionary tendency of Iran. There must be an end to the notion of introducing one organizing principle on Earth.

Well, I don't know yet if I'm right in my assumptions but Ms Fu Ying seems to ask something like this from us. The Chinese themselves are trying to guess where they will land in their break-neck speed development. John Locke told us approximately where we would land over the ages and he was second guessed by the forefathers of the US. I have this fear, however, that the Chinese might not be all that different from us. They too would want the pursuit of happiness. However, happiness might mean something different to them. They might be more intuned to the freedom definition of Rousseau that was wrong in the West.

The Swedish role in the world?

Tallyho! Hunting for a British role - The Globe and Mail: "It’s been nearly 50 years since U.S. secretary of state Dean Acheson whipped up a storm by saying Britain had lost an empire but not yet found a role. Role hunting has been a British sport ever since. Tallyho! goes up the cry, every time they have a new government, and off they gallop, led by the prime minister and the foreign secretary. The fox usually gets away in the end – and Britain sinks back into doing whatever it does."

Timothy Garton Ash complains in his way on the problem for a 60m country to have a say here on Earth as we speak. What does Sweden then have to say in the world with its 9m people, 2% of the population of the EU? Some people in Sweden talks nostalgically about "Stormakts Sverige", the time when Swedish kings like Gustavus Adolphus foraged around in Europe for fame and glory while ruining their country. The king in question died the same year as Baruch Spinoza and John Locke were born, by the way. The Social Democrats in Sweden introduced a pacifistic bent where Sweden represented the World Conscience.

The Social Democrat Ulf Bjereld made his dissertation on something as esoteric as a Swedish Middle East Policy and interestingly the current foreign minister Carl Bildt is fairly in line with the Social Democrats on these issues where he is more American on others as the Turkish question. It is interesting to note, by the way, that Germany's energy company RWE has shown interest in the Russian Turkey avoiding South Stream pipeline negotiated by Gerhard Schröder over the Nabucco ditto, despite a double cost estimate.

Considering Garton Ash's role search above, is it possible for Sweden to find a new path from the World Conscience one of the Social Democrats? I personally find the World Conscience one very unsatisfactory because it disregards power. If you want democracy to reign supreme it's wise to, like Britain, play a role as a firm supporter of the US. I'm surprised Garton Ash is not referring to this role? Carl Bildt is trying a new way in between Britain and Old Sweden: having relationships with powers you might not dislike and still work for democracy in other ways. I guess the power Poles and Swedes don't like is Russia, but as we just discussed, keep a relationship--and let Germany do the power thing.

Stand by your Man, Garton Ash!

Are we kidding ourselves in Sweden?

The disintegration of the welfare state - The Globe and Mail: "Democracies produced Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, fulfilling the expectation of Socrates and Machiavelli that democracies end in tyranny. Now democracies are fulfilling the complementary expectation of Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman that democracies end in bankruptcy."

I was not impressed by Socrates' political philosophy and I did not like Machiavelli either. It is of course interesting that Friedman said what he said these days of the European debt crisis but I belong to those thinking that governments should intervene in the economy. The New York Times Friedman is very self-depreciating these days. From his articles it seems like the days of the US are over.

It is of course OK that Greece is in trouble but when people start to say that Italy is in for a bankruptcy, like Neil Reynolds above, perhaps it is time to react and wonder if the Western civilization is about to end? If you currently live in Sweden, however, things are just fine. According to the government Sweden is "föregångslandet", ie a country that others follow. The economy of Sweden is the best in Europe and there will be plenty of money for our pensions if we just work a little longer. The problem with that one might be that we have the greatest youth unemployment in Europe so there are many in line for the jobs we are going to stay onto longer.

Part of the lack of gloom might be that we are in for an election of government soon. The debate of how Europe is going to escape the imminent doom is simply absent from the election campaigns. There is not even the talk about austerity that the British heard prior to their recent election. It is interesting though, because what I find politically on my screen reading around on the internet for information on what goes on in the world is argumentation that seems to aim at convincing me that China's new path is the way to go.

Personally I don't think China has an idea of what they are getting themselves into with the speed that they are developing. The West, on the contrary, has had their problems. I'm a firm believer of democracy. To operate a country with an opposition. If you don't, things will catch up on you.

Ecologism?

The Big Green Lie Exposed - Walter Russell Mead's Blog - The American Interest: "The Big Green Lie (or Delusion, to be charitable) isn’t so much that climate change is happening and that it is very likely caused or at least exacerbated by human activity. The Big Lie is that the green movement is a source of coherent or responsible counsel about what to do."

"The ideas that get us out of this mess will be ideas that work for specific countries and that make the economy work better, produce more wealth and use energy and raw materials more efficiently."

Walter Russell Mead compares the ecology movement with an alarm clock. Once we have waked up it should be turned off. I have myself said earlier in the blog that I'm not sure I believe that ecologism has relevance as a political doctrine. In political philosophy it only boils down to don't waste and pollute less. As a proponent for Religious Humanism I should perhaps be more of a romantic for Nature. It is just that Man is also part of Nature and his well being should also be taken into consideration. Perhaps with priority over the environment.

Johan Norberg discusses the situation in Sweden between liberalism and environmentalism in his resumé from a debate with the porte parole of the Greens, Maria Wetterstrand. Johan Norberg brings up the disdain for technology development and life style morality as important differences. Walter Russell Mead brings up the problems of prohibition as an example on what life style moralism might do.

The question is what happened to the environmental media debate? I had warned Europe for using the environmental morality weapon against China and the US. Did they tell Europe to be quiet at the COP15 meeting? A conspiracy theorist would relish thinking that the debt crisis is punishment by the "markets".

Independents?

With only 38% of Independent voters now approving Obama how much lower will his overall support go next month? - Yahoo! Answers: "Thirty-eight percent of independents approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, the first time independent approval of Obama has dropped below 40% in a Gallup Daily tracking weekly aggregate. Meanwhile, Obama maintains the support of 81% of Democrats, and his job approval among Republicans remains low, at 12%."

According to social psychologists democrats value care and fairness over loyalty, respect for authorities and purity which is what republicans value most. As the data show above the US is fairly polarized among the two major parties. RealClearPolitics.com shows that the current trend for the US is that Obama is slowly losing overall support he is now at 46% and that the number of people that think the US is on the wrong track is slowly increasing and now at 62%.

When you, like myself, end up as an independent in a highly polarized environment, you get angry looks from both sides. It would be my guess that independents might often be interested in foreign policy. Except for the Libertarians in the US that are isolationist. However, as the article in SpiegelOnline that I cited earlier today showed two-thirds of Germans are against the Afghanistan mission. The author argues that in the representative system it is still up to the government to rule as it sees fit between the elections and that it therefore is a legitimate mission.

Can't help thinking that such a discordance between the people and the ruling elite is troublesome. The German people, according to the Eurobarometer, does not want to share a foreign policy with the US. Thus this is probably the more important reason for the discontent rather than the casualties, 46 so far. Robert D. Blackwill, a former US Ambassador to India, suggests that it is time for partitioning Afghanistan into a northern and a southern region. That would mean that the peacekeepers, like Sweden and Germany, might help out in the north-west and that the US and the Commonwealth would fight the Pashtuns in the south. I thought it already looked like such a partition was in place?

So, what kind of prediction could be made from the falling and rising discontent of Obama and his mission, respectively? It is soon midterm elections and Obama even smiled when meeting Netanyahu recently. General Petraeus conveniently fell asleep when he was to answer if the July 2011 deadline in Afghanistan was reasonable. Obama has to keep this wording because he wants to maintain his leftish Democrat support. The last figures I saw on the amount of people negative on Afghanistan was around 50% so there is a similar situation to that in Germany.

The reason I wrote all this is to note the important thing that it seems like the elites and the people live and judge matters with different information in different worlds. This is a threat to democracy! We need more transparency.

The Modern Soldier?

Afghanistan and the West: The Difficult Relationship between Democracy and War - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International: "And because the German public is particularly sensitive, as a result of the two world wars, the Bundeswehr has even tried to create a new type of soldier: the good, good-natured warrior, a man with a rose in his gun barrel, friendly, helpful and devoid of the inner beast."

The COIN wielding General McChrystal was sacked. One reason could have been that the new aid worker like soldier did not function as expected. It is about winning hearts and minds but if the Taliban runs a full scale terror against this approach the question is if this does not require harder resistance? Someone on the Swedish radio proudly said that the Swedish soldiers were much better than the Americans on peace keeping. I guess the problem is that if there is no peace to keep this might represent a problem rather than an asset.

I'd like to continue from my last post and ask if the Talibans are an equivalent of the Indians? I don't think so myself. They are rather gangsters in the drug trade. Most Afghans probably see what their society could become if peace reined and if their economy could be boosted. They want to integrate with a world economy and live more comfortable lives, albeit with their own religion. The eternal question then is what kind of soldier is in need for fighting the Afghan battle? This is apparently a matter of intense debate. The Taliban's tactics, like Hamas', is to hide out among civilians and to use gangster methods to coerce these people. Is it possible to fight such battles without civilian casualties. I don't think so but politicians must face a debate on how high the losses can be before the mission is to be cancelled. The article above is asking the German politicians to do this.

Is the soldier depicted above a fictive construct or is it possible to generate such individuals? After all, when people start shooting at each other survival becomes paramount and stipulating examples is part of war fare. It is of course a great difference of coming in from outside and fight in somebody's else's war than to be engaged in a local conflict with age old internal problems and animosities that elicit demand for revenge that then would ignite the soldier's "inner beast" mentioned. The article is important because it brings up the current juggling of responsibility and judgment between the politicians and the military.

Indians, does an equivalent exist today?

I have been called an Indian, ie an American Indian, from the unfortunate culture that was decimated extensively by the Europeans. The Europeans came along with their superior learning and technology and if you look at the United States today, my feeling is that Indians should have been encouraged to integrate into the Western society. It is of course a sensitive issue since both cultures have value. Did they for example have a different morality?

Does this mean that I am an Indian equivalent today when I was excluded from certain aspects of learning and technology of today during my upbringing? The school failed to teach me the new ways. There ought to be a lot of Indians in this case. Following the reasoning above, the new culture could have a new morality that would be superior to mine from the old world. However, if the new ways would be using the same morality, I would not have any problems integrating.

I don't know about you but I have a feeling that I am too similar to be the equivalent of an Indian that has been pushed to the reservation, or the outsideship. I would also pose the question if the old morality is not superior to the new rules. Since morality to a large extent is genetically defined, I don't suspect that there should exist a new one. What I fear, as I have detailed elsewhere, is that the new ways are immoral?

I think I mentioned this earlier, but if I'm right in my assumption, the load of the so defined Indians might be what is holding the economy of the West down right now? Increased transparency for the technology might therefore have a beneficial effect on the economy?

Perhaps the World's Most Important Idea?

Locke discussed, some people think, the notion of State of Nature with Hobbes' view of a State of War. Locke did not agree, however, and suggested that Laws of Nature governed the moral of people that behaved. Not all though, so a state was necessary to enforce the laws.

Although Grotius had claimed that the laws come from people and do not need God, Locke believed that God gave the moral to people and were against atheists. No one, however, was divinely given the right to rule over other people.

Spinoza, who was born 1632, as was Locke, then explained that God was Nature and therefore a very modern view that morals are coded genetically was in principle there already in the 17th century.

What Locke said was however in tune with his time and the self-evidentness of mans right to life, liberty and property gave rise to the American Revolution that later returned the grace to Europe and saved the 20th century from ruin twice.

Locke was actually a trained physician and his notion of morals as biological might have been the single most powerful idea of all times? Political Science starts here.

Poland and the EU?

EUobserver / EU's dream candidate wins Polish election: "The 58-year-old historian, aristocrat and former anti-Communist activist is set to be inaugurated in mid-August to become Poland's fifth head of state since the fall of Communism in 1989. The outcome is a victory for the younger, urban class of Poles in northern and western Poland, who have prospered over the past 20 years and who see the country's future in terms of further EU integration, market liberalisation and reconciliation with Germany and Russia."

Bronislaw Komorowski won over Jaroslaw Kaczynski with 53% of the vote against 47%. A close call for EU favorables who happily received the news. This makes it possible for Donald Tusk, the Prime Minister, and his party the Civic Platform to dominate the scene for a while. Tusk and Komorowski are very favorable to the EU and indeed want to join the Euro as soon as possible. The Kaczynskis on the other have had a much more nationalistic bent. The Polish people thus are divided between those that want to integrate in the EU and those who want to maintain Polish integrity. Thus the maturity of the Polish democracy will be tested.

The longing of an integral Poland is understandable. Poland lost 6m people during World War II and have been occupied by the Soviet Union for so many years. However, sandwiched between Russia and Germany, Poland also hopes that the EU will buffer their power and that membership will afford stability and prosperity. Carl Bildt claims that Tusk, Komorowski and Sikorski is more amenable to Swedish collaboration.

The Catholic Church played an important role during the liberation from the Soviet Union, but now with Kaczynski era over due to the Smolensk disaster where Kaczynski friends preferentially were eradicated, perhaps its importance will be less influential. Poland will thus become more of a normal European state. According to the above citation young urban Poles have prospered a lot and many of them are probably connected with the 15 to 20m diaspora, to be compared with a population of 40m, which have been important for the post-communistic growth of Poland. Some 8m Poles live in the US and Chicago is the second largest Polish city in the world. I don't know how symbolic it was of Poland to chose the 4th of July for the Presidential election.

However, Jaroslaw Kaczynskis strong showing in the second round of the election points in a direction were Bronislaw Komorowski might not dare to make necessary reforms due to soon upcoming elections which could be utilized by Kaczynski.

From the "Folkhem" to the Cultural Racism of Tribalism?

They used to worship the social democratic God and all stood equal under the Northern Lights. Then the body snatchers arrived, made a fortune on selling small pills, and divided the kingdom up into many tribes clandestinely held together by a "chef".

When the tribes evolved and gathered various amounts of knowledge and richness a distinct difference between them appeared. A new cultural racism developed with a new supremacy concept replacing the equality imposed by the state bearing party.

Tribal members learned new behaviors for interacting between members of different tribes. It was possible for more powerful tribes to listen to the thoughts of a lesser person to win out in conversations. Plan conversations with knowledge of the memories of a given person. Criminal persons tended to interact with a person via others to not expose themselves.

Criminality, like the just mentioned, and other types could not be adjusted because of the secrecy involved. Rule of Law was a mere memory. There was no longer justice for the individual.

Well, Nelson Mandela managed to remove the apartheid system of South Africa by forgiving the rulers. Something similar ought to be possible in order to introduce transparency and restore the Rule of Law.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." (from the Declaration of Independence of the US from 1776)

4th of July 2010

Dick Erixon — I hjärtat rebell: "Någonstans slutar människor att vara fria och blir istället statens förslavade undersåtar."

Erixon brings up the difference in being a citizen and a subject something apparently Jefferson chose between when he drafted the Declaration of Independence in 1776. However, is the notion of the state as the only villain not a little simplified? Economical differences between the left and the right still exist, especially in taxation, but the old separation in Conservative, Liberal and Socialist provides a for the times more important discriminator. Because there is bondage both to the left and to the right and freedom of the individual only in the middle. In Sweden though the liberals are for some reason called "night stick" liberals.

The civil society, or Big Society as David Cameron, the British PM calls it, is not a conglomerate of free individuals. Today people voluntarily apparently joins systems of people where they knowingly, or unknowingly, sell their soul to some form of community leader. Some of these systems are very conservative and have ideas on how people should behave in some detail. And they have means of enforcing this behavior.

According to Cameron we then have the unfortuante in the outsideship, without work, and dependent on either the state or on organisations in the civil society. Here life is even more of a subject and the "capos'", or "krösamajornas", enforcement reach torture chamber levels (own experience).

The "block politics" in Sweden unfortunately leave the free zone in between them and we have bondage both to the right and to the left. Freedom will continue to erode as long as people do not talk about TTDE. According to my understanding, the Tea Party movement in the US concerns the existence without a fürer.