outsidein

  • Swine flu

    April 30, 2009 @ 4:32 pm | by Bryan

    I don’t mean to trivialise a very serious problem, or to appear insensitive to the families of those who are ill and those who have died. That said, I don’t understand the hysteria around swine flu that is emanating from a lot of media outlets.

    All potentially fatal illnesses must be taken seriously. Communicable diseases should also raise public concern. But outside of Mexico, swine flu has resulted in one mortality. I understand the need for monitoring, the need to keep the public informed, and the need for a public awareness campaign to limit the risks of further transmission. But hospital acquired MRSA is far more significant in Ireland than swine flu. In fact, even in Ireland, the spread of HIV between heterosexual, white non-i.v. drug users is a growing problem that isn’t given the time of day outside of the medical community.

    So why all the panic about swine flu? Is it a reflection of modern culture? Maybe we have all watched so many episodes of shows like 24 that we have been conditioned to expect global disasters that have the potential to wipe out the whole race. Or maybe, we just like ‘excitement’ and a developing story. That 3000 people die each day of malaria in Africa, while lamentable, is something we have come to expect. It’s no longer news. And it’s something that is happening far away. Swine flu on the other hand is exciting! There have probably been less than 3000 cases in total (and that probably becomes definitely once you exclude Mexico), but it could happen to you! Swine flu might be coming after you! If it does, statistics show you’ll probably be fine after a few days’ treatment. But the fact that it might land on your doorstep is enough for this virus to be a top story.

    I never cease to be amazed by how the world works.

  • ESRI

    April 29, 2009 @ 2:40 pm | by Bryan

    Listening to the radio this morning, the headline was the new ESRI (Economic and Social Research Institute) report. While the panellists were debating public sector pay, the government’s handling of the economy and other related matters, I was struck by the power of the ESRI.

    Not too long ago, they announced that the country was in recession and lo and behold, all the arguments fell away and Ireland was in a recession. If you think about it, that’s a pretty impressive feat. It’s not every think tank that can get an entire country singing from the same economic hymn sheet. But today’s reaction is even more impressive. It’s one thing to come out with data and convince everyone that the recession they suspected was lurking behind a corner had indeed arrived. To get all of mainstream society thinking along the same lines … wow!

    When the ESRI speak, the country listens. But they don’t just dish out bland figures. On this morning’s Breakfast Show on Newstalk, trade unionist David Begg angrily declared that the ESRI represents just one view of the world. Ger Gilroy, one of the show’s hosts, responded with a reminder that the think tank is a highly respected body. None of the other panellists questioned the ESRI’s worldview or dignified Begg’s outburst with a response.

    I’m not a huge fan of trade unions in their current form, and less so of trade union leaders, but David Begg was right. First of all, very few people in the public sphere criticise the fact that both the ESRI and Irish officialdom tend to see the world through a predominantly economic lens. But having chosen that economic lens, there is this view of economics as a homogenous field and a belief that it is either all voodoo, or worse, that economics is similar to high school mathematics - in both cases, there is the expectation of a right answer. What astounds me about the ESRI is the fact that they are so powerful, only the David Beggs of the world dare question their economic paradigm and their view of the world.

    Consequently, there were people this morning’s show competing to see who would slash salaries the fastest and get rid of more public services were they in power. It was all so overwhelming that all Begg could do was growl here and there and say the kind of thing that, though true (in my opinion), made him sound like a dinosaur without a clue.

    I think one of the classical philosophers suggested that the people who look like they are in charge are largely there for show. Those with the real power aren’t so visible. If that’s universally true, I wonder if the people who run the ESRI are the ones really running the country.

  • Playing the ‘race card’

    April 28, 2009 @ 4:44 pm | by Bryan

    My high school French teacher, Mr Muparutsa, used to tell me that I would make a terrible lawyer if I decided to go down that career path. His reasoning? That I got too emotionally involved in an argument and I just didn’t know when to let things go. He was absolutely right.

    From my last post, someone suggested that I was playing ‘the race card’. Normally I would just laugh that off. Seriously, what does that phrase even mean? Its very existence almost destroys any chance of such a thing being possible. It’s such an easy line of attack that anything uncomfortable raised by a person of colour, that has to do with race, is diminished before the words are even spoken. It creates a kind of perimeter fence around the area of acceptable race discourse. I don’t think I could ‘play the race card’ even if I wanted to.

    So why won’t I just let it go? Because I resent the allegation, given how hard I work at maintaining a ‘reasonable’ stance and tone. So much so, that I laughed, then felt a little convicted, when I came across this in Obama’s Dreams from my Father:

    …[white] people were satisfied as long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied; they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.

    If you’re an immigrant in Ireland, especially if you’re not from within the EU, the US, Australia or New Zealand, it pays to heed Obama’s advice. The only problem with that is when you do question something like racial profiling, you create a picture that is totally unrecogizable to all but those who have experienced it, who also work hard at not making ‘sudden moves’, and those who chose to see what’s really there.

    Ireland is not the United States. A nurse from the Phillipines or engineer from Nigeria don’t have the same history with Ireland that an African American would, but the following story is still applicable. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s experiences are not very different to those of many non-EU immigrants in Ireland.

    I was annoyed the first time an African American man called me “sister.” It was in a Brooklyn store, and I had recently arrived from Nigeria, a country where, thanks to the mosquitoes that kept British colonizers from settling, my skin color did not determine my identity, did not limit my dreams or my confidence. And so, although I grew up reading books about the baffling places where black people were treated badly for being black, race remained an exotic abstraction: It was Kunta Kinte… Read the rest of this article.

  • Racial profiling in Ireland?

    April 27, 2009 @ 3:17 pm | by Bryan

    By all accounts, this video is worrying. No, it’s disturbing. Even more disturbing are some of the comments that follow it. Perhaps they are unrelated, but I can’t help but think that the new realities of life in Ireland, as demonstrated in this video, have something to do with what happened to my friend last week.

    She was driving in the West of Ireland, when she was stopped at a roadblock. After the garda had checked that the car’s documents were in order, my friend was asked whether or not she was born in Ireland. She wasn’t. She was then asked what she was doing in the country, whereupon she explained that she works as a doctor in a regional hospital. Before she was allowed to drive off, the garda asked to see her GNIB (Guarda National Immigration Bureau) card. Under proposed legislation currently before the Dáil, non-EU citizens in Ireland will be required to carry their GNIB cards on them at all times. Although this currently isn’t the case, my friend was admonished for not having hers at the time and told to have it on her at all times in future. This friend of mine is a black, African woman. In addition, this was the first time I had ever heard of traffic police asking about someone’s immigration status.

    So what’s the problem? Well, she doesn’t know if she was randomly stopped (not every car was being stopped at the roadblock), or if it had to do with her race. And if she was racially profiled, is there an unofficial exercise in place to weed out illegal immigrants? And if such an exercise exists, is the plan to stop all non-white people in case they are ‘illegals’?

    I don’t like the idea of racial profiling. That probably has to do with the fact that in Ireland, I would be hard pressed to come up with ways to increase my chances of having such a policy apply to me. From experience, racial profiling is not a nice thing to be subjected to. If the new immigration bill is passed into law with the ‘carry your GNIB card at all times’ clause intact, how will it be enforced? How will the authorities decide who to stop and ask for that card? A couple of my friends are Irish citizens of African descent, but I also have American friends who are white. Should both sets of friends walk or drive past the gardaí, who is more likely to be stopped and asked about their nationality?

    In an economic climate that lends itself to social unrest, I hate to think how the anger that was expressed in response to the video above will manifest itself should visible minorities begin to be singled out by the authorities.

  • Picture of the week

    April 25, 2009 @ 4:31 pm | by Bryan

    Tara Kulczykowska, 7, plays in the fountains at Somerset House, London, as the warm weather continues April 24. Photo: Katie Collins/PA

    Tara Kulczykowska, 7, plays in the fountains at Somerset House, London, as the warm weather continues April 24. Photo: Katie Collins/PA

  • President Jacob Zuma?

    April 24, 2009 @ 8:00 am | by Bryan

    A friend asked me yesterday about my views on South Africa’s future. She wasn’t the first. From the time it became clear that Jacob Zuma was on his way to the presidency of Africa’s largest economy, there has been all manner of speculation and fear.

    Generally, the fears surrounding Zuma are as follows:

    1. He was accused of, and tried for, the rape of a family friend. Though he was acquitted in what most honest commentators would call a fair trial, his admission that he thought a shower would protect him from the risk of contracting HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) has haunted Zuma since.

    2. Zuma’s friend and financial advisor was jailed for financial impropriety and Zuma himself was accused of corruption. His trial on that matter was thrown out on a technicality. Again, most honest commentators agree that South Africa’s legal system is still intact and that the acquittal was within the law. Still, even though Zuma maintains that the whole affair was a politically motivated trap, many see him as being corruptible.

    3. Zuma has been spotted in traditional leopard skin garb, is a polygamist with five wives (or thereabouts) and is shockingly unashamed of his culture. This irks some. So much so, an Irish radio news program spent some time discussing the notion that at future global meetings, other leaders will have to dumb down the conversation for Zuma to be able to keep up.

    4. Mr Zuma’s theme song has the words ‘My Machine Gun’ in its title. There are various interpretations and explanations for this. At the end of the day though, the fact that this is his song and that he has no qualms about getting it going and leading the singing himself has left him open to the scorn of those who feel that a president should have more airs and graces.

    In short, a lot of the criticism of Jacob Zuma, in my opinion, stems from the fact that he does not fit the mould. He is no more corrupt that Silvio Berlusconi, who changed Italian law so that he couldn’t be prosecuted. Zuma just happens to be a traditional Zulu man who doesn’t feel the need to pretend to be anything but himself. Though some think him stupid, he is, of course, no such thing. Stupid people don’t rise to the top of the ANC - the organisation that produced Mandela, Mbeki et. al.

    In the late 90s, as Mbeki’s inauguration approached, there were plenty of people in South Africa and beyond who were convinced that war would break out; that there would be mayhem; that the economy would collapse; that the result of the departure of the only able black leader in South Africa would be disastrous. There was no disaster, and plenty of capable leaders came to the fore. For all his faults, Mbeki did a heroic job as South Africa’s president.

    The same sort of thing happened a few years later when ‘Lula’ was elected Brazil’s president. It was feared that the ‘radical’ trade unionist would destroy the country. Guess what? Brazil is still in one piece.

    I am sure President Zuma will provide many talking points for anyone who is after that sort of thing. But I am also pretty sure that he will be accountable to the vast majority of the country that has elected him and looks to him as one of their own. And like Mbeki, I think he’ll surprise his critics.

  • A thought

    April 21, 2009 @ 4:08 pm | by Bryan

    “Economic reductionism has always dominated the social thought of the Right, in a form, moreover, of self-perpetuating optimism regarding the system. The resulting imperfections, or indeed social disasters, are therefore simply the product of a refusal to adjust or transitional hitches which will eventually be left behind (the word ‘trickledown’ perfectly expresses this forced optimism which dispenses with critical analysis of the system).” - Samir Amin, 1996 (translated by David Luckin)

  • You will be assimilated … Resistance is futile

    @ 2:55 pm | by Bryan

    Not too long ago, Brazil’s president made headlines when he said the following, in relation to the global economic downturn, at a press conference:

    This crisis was caused by no black man or woman or by no indigenous person or by no poor person … This crisis was fostered and boosted by irrational behaviour of some people that are white, blue-eyed. Before the crisis they looked like they knew everything about economics, and they have demonstrated they know nothing about economics.

    At the time, most of the reaction was based on the quasi-racist (plain racist, in the eyes of many) element of that statement. Walter Russell Mead, in the April 20 edition of Newsweek has decided to take on the suggestion that ‘paleface capitalism’ is a bad thing. In an excellent article, he writes:

    Liberal capitalism is risky, unequal and destabilizing. Worse, over time, the countries that embrace it tend to grow powerful and rich. Those nations that embrace the chilly logic and brave the rough seas of capitalist development end up developing and exploiting new technologies, creating new industries and gaining more power. Societies that respond with more reserve don’t prosper as much in the good times and often pay a higher price when things go wrong. Just ask the Argentines. Or the Russians.

    …Lula [Brazil’s president] is right: the global crisis emerged from a system built, with all its many flaws, by blue-eyed palefaces. But if countries like Brazil can stick with their own versions of Dutch finance, the future of the system will increasingly be shaped by people who look more like Lula—and the palefaces are going to have to run hard to keep up.

    Though I fundamentally disagree with him, I’m an admirer of Mead. I’ve even started reading his book, God and Gold: Britain, America and the Making of the Modern World. Its central thesis, I understand, is that the Anglo-Saxon economic and social order is an all consuming good which will rightly take over all others.

    Both in his retort to Lula and in God and Gold, Mead is so convinced of the merits of the ‘white Anglo-Saxon protestant’ (WASP) way of life, everyone else should embrace it and aspire to become like WASPs themselves. While I have no problems with imitating what works, I am weary of such drives towards universal, homogenous systems, especially since Mead himself acknowledges that liberal capitalism is imperfect. That being the case, rather than urging the likes of Lula to adopt it regardless of social consequence, wouldn’t it be better to enourage the Lula’s of the world to use their imagination, and through trial and error, come up with a system that meets their needs and is in keeping with their values?

    I can’t read a Mead-like argument without being reminded of the Borg in Star Trek. I feel like I’m being chased by someone saying, “You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.”

  • Listening

    April 20, 2009 @ 1:49 pm | by Bryan

    Open veins of Latin America

    Some time ago, I watched a political scientist, whose name I don’t remember, being interviewed. I will probably never forget what she said though. The take home message was that there is a growing trend, especially in the US but increasingly everywhere else, for people to only pay attention to those who reinforce their ideas. In her view, in times gone by, people were more willing to listen to dissenting, or just plain different views, even if they didn’t like them. If I remember correctly, the idea then was that no-one had a monopoly on insight.

    The tendency to live in spaces that offer no other perspective but your own is the only explanation that I can come up with to understand Newt Gingrich’s take on the ‘Chavez handshake’ and his understanding of the new American foreign policy in general.

    Having lived in a place where access to information was a privilege, I’m often astounded at how little people chose to know despite their 3G mobile handsets, home broadband and access to more newspapers, magazines and books than anyone could go through in a lifetime.

  • Picture of the week

    April 18, 2009 @ 8:53 am | by Bryan

    A devotee has his face covered with mud in Chamliyal, south of Jammu, Kashmir April 17, as people gathered to receive

    A devotee has his face covered with mud in Chamliyal, south of Jammu, Kashmir April 17, as people gathered to receive “Shakkar and Sherbet” (sacred clay and water) which is said to have the miracle power of curing skin diseases. Photo: Amit Gupta/REUTERS

  • Spooks

    April 17, 2009 @ 3:39 pm | by Bryan

    Not too long ago, I sat in a human rights law class and argued that the Nuremberg trials were nothing more than a kangaroo court held for propaganda and publicity’s sake. I don’t really remember what happened next, but I don’t think that went down too well. Having read about the CIA torture memos, I feel vindicated in a perverse sort of way.

    I totally get the fact that the new president has to keep on the good side of his spooks. And I understand the thinking that went behind the amnesty granted to the agents who did the torturing. They were just following orders.

    Here’s the problem. That was the defence that was put forward, and subsequently rejected, at Nuremberg. I thought the lesson from that episode was that you couldn’t use the ‘I was just following orders’ argument.

    I actually don’t think those who performed the acts of torture should be punished. But some consistency would be nice. At what point is there a need to hold someone accountable? Is it when the number of victims becomes greater than x? If so, what is x? And who is held responsible, the people who carry out the order, or the source of the command?

    I admire Obama’s desire to not look back and focus on the future. But as some point, doesn’t that just become an excuse for covering up things his administration would rather not deal with? What does that do to human rights law? Torture is permissible provided it is done with good intentions, goes only so far, and after it is uncovered, the leader of the nation responsible decides to look to the future rather than dwell on the past?

    If this story ends here, a bunch of leaders will be thinking of President Obama the next time they have to answer hard questions from an Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch report.

  • Foreign workers

    April 16, 2009 @ 1:05 pm | by Bryan

    Not too long ago, someone asked me if there had been a perceptible change in the way migrants are treated in Ireland since the onset of the recession. I live in Galway, one of the the friendliest and most accommodating parts of the country, and I haven’t noticed a significant shift in attitudes. That’s not to say that there are no problems. But, as far as I can tell, nothing has escalated with the worsening economic environment.

    There is some anecdotal evidence that in other parts of the country, there may be growing hostility or resentment towards immigrants. Frankly, that doesn’t surprise me. Human nature is such that the only thing worse than enduring hardship is watching someone else benefit at what you perceive as being your expense. In the recent past, only those in the lower income bracket felt threatened, rightly or wrongly, by migrant workers. What happens when formerly well paid professional begin to lose their jobs?

    Yesterday, the government announced that it was tightening the requirements for foreign workers to get work permits. Very reasonably, the Tánaiste said,
    Ireland has benefited greatly from immigration, particularly so over the past decade. Our immigrant population have and continue to make a significant contribution to our economy and to society as a whole here in Ireland. We need to ensure however that for our flexible migration policies to remain as a successful tool of Irish economic policy, that they are adapted on an ongoing basis to reflect the changing realities of the Irish labour market. Those realities have altered dramatically over recent months. As a result, it is essential that we now take steps to ensure that every possible effort is made by employers to find a suitably skilled employee from within the existing labour market.

    I’m torn. On the one hand, I respect the need for the government to protect its citizens from unemployment. That said, work permit holders only make up 1.5% of the workforce. In addition, the hoops one has to jump through in order to get that permit are so high, frustratingly complicated and numerous that the existing rules were probably adequate deterrents. The fact that the number of work permit applications has been in free fall is testimony to that. Worst of all, making it harder for the spouse and dependents of a work permit holder to work means that those who are married and/or have children are much less likely to apply for the permit in the first place. That may seem to some as a good thing, but isn’t there an inescapable contradiction between an open economy on the one hand, and a closed labour market on the other?

    All of which begs the question, are these changes really about protecting the work force from foreign workers? If they are, whoever decided that refusing to grant non-EU midwives Irish work permits would protect Irish midwives needs to have a chat with members of the immigrant community and hospital administrators. By the time a non-EU professional gets a job offer, more often than not, a suitable EU candidate could not be found.

  • NAMA

    April 14, 2009 @ 3:39 pm | by Bryan

    Martyn Turner's Cartoon on 14/04/2009

    Martyn Turner’s Cartoon on 14/04/2009

    I confess that I have never been a fan of the ‘bad bank’ idea. Anything that is touted that passionately by The Economist makes me suspicious (though that newspaper is one of my favourite, their ideology is a little too far to the right on economic matters for my liking).

    My instinctive distrust of the ‘bad bank’ approach was confirmed when it’s name came out. NAMA. That can only spell trouble.

    I come from a country with a troubled history when it comes to acronyms. A few that come to mind are:

    • ESAP - the Economic Structural Adjustment Program. This IMF brainchild devastated the country and probably set in motion the political crisis that led to Zimbabwe’s economic collapse.
    • POSA - the Public Order and Security Act. This Mugabe brainchild saw Lord knows how many people end up in prison for no good reason.
    • ZESA - the Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority. ZESA is probably best known for the consistency with which it withholds electricity.

    I could add a lot more. At the end of the day, while ‘National Asset Management Agency’ might have sounded like a great name to whoever came up with it, the fact that people have taken to calling the nascent body ‘NAMA’ is an ominous sign.

  • Mandela, elephants, starvation & violence

    April 13, 2009 @ 1:24 pm | by Bryan

      

    I am in no way condoning piracy. In fact, I think the piracy off the horn of Africa needs to be addressed as a matter of utmost urgency. But this video raises important questions that demand serious thought.

    Like most other ‘conflicts’, the Somali piracy issue is already being discussed in almost exclusively military terms. Some commentators have raised the possibility of an ‘invasion’ of Somalia to wipe out the pirates. The fact that there are no known associations between them and groups like al-Qaeda is often cited, as though they would only become really significant if they posed a ‘terrorist’ threat to the US. The socio-economic aspect of this issue is largely ignored. I suppose it doesn’t make for a story that is nearly as exciting and attention grabbing as a military one. And that makes sense. Most people would rather watch 24 than read a book on the history and political economy of the horn of Africa.

    Nothing changes:

    Through our scientific and technological genius, we have made of this world a neighborhood and yet we have not had the ethical commitment to make of it a brotherhood. But somehow, and in some way, we have got to do this. We must all learn to live together as brothers or we will all perish together as fools. We are tied together in the single garment of destiny, caught in an inescapable network of mutuality. And whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. For some strange reason I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. And you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the way God’s universe is made; this is the way it is structured. - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution,” 31 March 1968, National Cathedral, Washington, D.C.

  • Picture of the week

    April 11, 2009 @ 8:45 am | by Bryan

    Penitents of the Entrada Triunfal brotherhood wait for the beginning of a Palm Sunday procession during the start of Holy Week in Cordoba, southern Spain, April 5. Photo: Javier Barbancho/REUTERS

    Penitents of the Entrada Triunfal brotherhood wait for the beginning of a Palm Sunday procession during the start of Holy Week in Cordoba, southern Spain, April 5. Photo: Javier Barbancho/REUTERS.

    Is it just me, or is this image a little disturbing?

  • The Shock Doctrine

    April 9, 2009 @ 6:43 pm | by Bryan

    “Only a crisis—actual or perceived––produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. . . . Our basic function [is] to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes the politically inevitable.” - Milton Friedman, 1982.

    Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine is an interesting thesis. At the heart of it is the idea that crises are used to impose changes that the populace would otherwise reject. With respect to Ireland and the country’s economic outlook, is the most being made of the crisis?

    Maybe more importantly, what ideas have been lying around prior to this implosion?

  • On the budget

    April 8, 2009 @ 1:35 pm | by Bryan

    Martyn Turner's Cartoon, 8 April, 2009.

    Martyn Turner’s Cartoon, 8 April, 2009.

    I was expecting fireworks from the budget process (the reading and subsequent commentary) and that’s exactly what happened. To be honest, I’m not sure what to make of it all.

    On one hand, it’s true that the Finance Minister did his best to punt the country’s expenditure problems as far into the future as possible. Maybe the Taoiseach should have told his entire cabinet to resign before of the reading of the budget in the Dáil, bar Brian Lenihan. If the reasoning behind the resignation of the junior ministers was to stimulate party loyalty as some have suggested, given the prospect of a job loss, who knows, various cabinet ministers might have offered to take major spending cuts.

    As things turned out, the emphasis was on taxation rather than on curbing spending and initiating significant public sector reform. On that count, I think yesterday was a missed opportunity. Then again, this was a ‘supplementary’ budget and it would have been very difficult for the various ministries to adapt to a sudden loss of income. However, I don’t know how far that thinking goes with when tax payers have had to do that very thing.

    Which brings me onto the establishment of the ‘bad bank’. Here is another instance of tax payers being asked to shoulder more than their fair share. For all the requests within the EU for the establishment of bad banks, I suspect there’s a good reason why Ireland is the first to do so: no-one else wanted to be the guinea pig. As opposed to the good bank idea in which the government would buy assets with a market determined value, tax payers are going to be buying what may be worthless assets for an almost arbitrary sum of money. From what I can tell, investors will benefit at the expense of tax payers. Socialism for the rich, if you’re into populist rhetoric.

    I think the tax burden could have been distributed more ‘progressively’. I also think that taxing people may be easier than restructuring the civil service, but it’s not as good for the economy. And yet, it has to be acknowledged that it was virtually impossible to craft a budget that would both work and win the approval of the majority. The government still deserves some credit for taking active steps in trying to deal with the economy.

  • What’s the plan?

    April 7, 2009 @ 1:04 pm | by Bryan

    I’ve only lived in Ireland for a few years. I remember first arriving here and being blown away by all the construction that was taking place. In my mind, so much construction meant that Ireland was a rich nation. So I started asking people about the source of Ireland’s wealth.

    Though simplistic, I figured that Botswana was rich because it sold lots of diamonds to De Beers, Taiwan and South Korea made electricals, China made everything, India exported smart people to Silicon Valley and also had IT firms, biotech firms and Bollywood. So what was Ireland’s secret? A few years later, my question still hasn’t been answered. I’m not sure if that’s because no-one knows or if the answer is protected because of national security concerns.

    I agree with the Taoiseach. The global recession will pass. As someone who is given to overspending, I understand the value of keeping one’s finances in order. A plan for national recovery sounds like the very thing the country needs. The need for a functioning banking system is obvious. And all over the world, it has become clear that sacrifices must be made and standards of living are dropping to more sustainable levels.

    All of that makes sense and it seems like the right way to deal with the situation. But I still have no idea how the country is going to make money after the recession. In what areas are we planning to be competitive? Does anyone know? If not, isn’t that a little like sitting in the back seat of a car that is driving itself?

    Maybe the answer will be revealed in the budget announcement.

  • European Turks

    April 6, 2009 @ 1:28 pm | by Bryan

    US President, Barack Obama, has called for Turkey’s accession into the European Union. Britain is happy to have the Turks join the club, but the French and Germans don’t seem very enthusiastic about the idea. True to form, French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, shared his opinion on the subject in the most blunt terms: “I have always been opposed to this entry and I remain opposed.”

    My European history is now fuzzy. Still, I vaguely remember being taught about the Ottoman empire and how the Turks were an integral part of what is now Europe. In more recent times, aging European countries like Sweden and Germany have relied on Turkish migrants. It seems to me that, valid arguments about Europe needing to end somewhere not withstanding, were the Turks predominantly Christians, they would already be EU citizens.

    Frankly, that surprises me. I can understand fear that one’s culture will be eroded by an influx of people who hold to different cultural norms. But is there really still such a thing as ‘European culture’? How significantly would Ireland change, for example if it saw an influx of Turks? How would that wave of migrants be any different to that of the Chinese, Africans, or East Europeans? If anything, Turkish culture is more likely to change than that of the rest of Europe.

  • Picture of the week

    April 4, 2009 @ 2:49 pm | by Bryan

    Demonstrators protest in the financial district of New York, U.S. April 3, during a rally calling for more jobs, a moratorium on home foreclosures and a halt to U.S. bailout funds for banks. Photo: Gino Domenico/Bloomberg News

    Demonstrators protest in the financial district of New York, U.S. April 3, during a rally calling for more jobs, a moratorium on home foreclosures and a halt to U.S. bailout funds for banks. Photo: Gino Domenico/Bloomberg News.

  • The US and Europe

    @ 2:35 pm | by Bryan

    There has been as interesting response in the American press to Barack Obama’s ‘town hall’ meeting in Strasbourg, France. I quite enjoyed Bill O’Reilly’s take on it. I’m not sure which planet he lives on, but I still enjoy hearing his views. Especially interesting is his vision of a socialist, pacifist Europe.

    But he raises a good point, one which was raised by the US president himself. What is the nature of the US – Europe relationship, and should it change? I’m not sure I agree with Obama’s take on Europe’s ‘anti-Americanism’. It’s true that the US doesn’t get enough credit for the good they do beyond their borders. The Bush administration did more for Africa than any other power (with the debatable exception of China). But the rise in negative feeling towards the US during that administration’s tenure wasn’t the result of petty issues, immature competitiveness or myopia. It was the result of the unilateralism displayed in invading Iraq, Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, extreme arrogance (which O’Reilly referred to as Bush’s ‘style’) and a whole host of genuine grievances.

    Still, this tour is probably meant to be a time of kissing and making up. All the old grievances will be ascribed to George Bush. As long as Barack Obama can keep the rockstar/Einstein/Jesus image going, the ‘it was all G.W.’ line will probably work.

  • Much ado about nothing

    April 2, 2009 @ 1:22 pm | by Bryan

    German chancellor Angela Merkel greets France's president Nicolas Sarkozy before a bilateral meeting in London April 1, ahead of a G20 summit meeting. Photo: Eric Feferberg/REUTERS

    German chancellor Angela Merkel greets France’s president Nicolas Sarkozy before a bilateral meeting in London April 1, ahead of a G20 summit meeting. Photo: Eric Feferberg/REUTERS.

    Is the G20 summit much ado about nothing? Maybe not quite nothing. There will be lots of photos taken. A lot of leaders get to have their pictures taken with the most popular US president in a very long time. Gordon Brown might come off looking pretty good which could help his political plight. A bunch of politicians and the protestors they attract will get to spend some time in London.

    Great. But in terms of substantive issues? A new global order? I don’t think so. The people who ran the planet before the meeting will leave the summit with it still firmly in their control. The likes of Brazil, India and China have a bigger say than they did ten years ago, but its their pre-recession economic clout, not this summit, that give them their say.

    Regulators, a bigger over-draft from the IMF, the vilification of tax havens and bankers, and promises on protectionism that won’t be kept aren’t worth celebrating, are they? Maybe the statement that will come out at the end of the summit may change my mind. I doubt it.

    An UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) summit that revives the demands of the now old NIEO (New International Economic Order) … now that would be worthy of all this hype!

  • April Fools’ Day

    April 1, 2009 @ 7:00 am | by Bryan

    One of my favourite television shows is a US animated satirical series called The Boondocks. Written by Aaron McGruder, it looks at modern day America from a ‘black perspective’. One of the best and most controversial episodes saw Martin Luther King Jr. come back from the dead and share his opinion on the state of the nation. His opinion of it wasn’t great.

    I don’t do satire. It’s just not me. But had I that gift, this post would have a different title - I’m not sure what. It would have an important Irish historical figure come back from the dead. For good measure, joining my Irish ghost would be the odd French, British and German philosopher, people who wrote on the rights and brotherhood of man. I would have them walk around their former towns and cities. I would then take them to Libya and have them discuss the deaths of those people who were trying to make their way to a new world.

    The dialogue would centre on humanity, law and people’s propensity to forget their own history. I might also throw in some African figures - Nkrumah, Lumumba, Fanon, Biko, Sankara … and have them comment on the fact that their descendants are sometimes willing to risk their all to escape free Africa.

    My April fool’s satirical piece would then end on a discussion on the world’s response to the financial crisis. I’m not sure how it would end though. To berate the most powerful for caring more about the risk to their wealth than the plight of the poor is a little obvious and unoriginal. A scary prophecy based on the unsustainable global order wouldn’t be much better. Maybe a sneak peak into the future with the roles reversed (Europeans on rickety boats trying to get into Africa) could work. But if it’s going to be believable, the preview really should be of the ‘North’ (Britain and the US at the forefront, France and Germany trying to assert themselves right behind them) having used up all of their resources, on the verge of invading the ‘South’. That just might work.

    But like I said, I don’t do satire. Unfortunately. Happy April Fools’.

Search outsidein

 
Close
E-mail It