Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

The unholy trinity causing the growth of antisemitism in Europe

February 21, 2019
  1. Socialists generally see all Jews as part of the Capitalist Enemy. That history goes back to the very beginnings of the Socialist movements in Europe. (It is not to be forgotten that the National Socialists – Nazis – had their socialist connections. They were primarily triggered by their form of anti-communistic socialism where personal interests were to be subordinated to the common good). Radical socialists are so eager to be seen to be pro-Palestine and pro-Hezbollah that they are rabid in their hatred of Israel. With both Jews and Israel being on their hate list it is a simple step to antisemitism.
  2. All Muslims are intrinsically anti-Israel (even if not necessarily anti-Jews). For the not insignificant proportion of radical Muslims, antisemitism is their own article of faith and can be manifested either against Jews or Israel or both. With the increase of Muslims of all sorts in Europe – including the radical kind – it is inevitable that the level of antisemitism is on the rise.
  3. The neo-Nazi descendants of the Nazis. now find themselves on the far right of the political spectrum. They cannot forget their antisemitic roots which lie deep in their souls. However, they are now energised primarily by their opposition to the immigration of “lesser” races and religions (blacks and Muslims). The growth of  these parties as a backlash against Europe’s rather stupidly naive “multiculturalism” carries the strain of antisemitism along with it.

Socialists, neo-Nazis and Muslims make up the unholy trinity now fueling the growth of antisemitism whether in France or Germany or Sweden or in the UK. For the more extreme socialists or Muslims or neo-Nazis, to be antisemitic is a badge of membership. But it is not really very surprising.


 

Advertisements

Islamic terror attack probably secures Modi a second term

February 15, 2019

The Indian General Election is due in April/May 2019.

Indian politics are never straightforward.

Whereas the Indian National Congress has lost its clout as a truly national party, the concept of the INC allying itself with different regional parties seemed to be a pragmatic way for them to begin to challenge the BJP and PM Modi. Of course the ideological convolutions of allying with a variety of regional parties, ranging from communists in some states and muslim fanatics to the parochially nationalistic in others, were more than a little intellectually challenging for Rahul Gandhi. Which has, of course, led to a sort of Egyptian solution, where his sister, Priyanka Gandhi, has been brought to stand beside/before/behind him.

The idea of Priyanka & Rahul Gandhi ensuring the security of India does not fly.

There are still 3 months to go but if security is a matter of concern at the time of the election, the Priyanka effect will not compensate for the INC’s perceived policy of appeasement of Muslims.  Security will override any other issues of the time and PM Modi would then be returned with some ease.


 

Devolution of democracy

December 28, 2018

A modern politician’s priorities:

  1. Me
  2. The party
  3. The party’s leadership
  4. My voters
  5. My party’s voters
  6. The country
  7. My constituency

Other parties’ voters do not enter the picture.


 

Elementary but often forgotten: Multilateral depends upon the unilateral

December 2, 2018

Maybe some day geographical boundaries will give way to some other way of clustering and organising and administering human societies. Maybe some day the nation state will become obsolete. But not yet. The sovereign nation state is still the basic unit of organising human societies. Without sovereignty within its geographical boundaries, a nation state cannot exist. (A nation state which cannot protect its geographic boundaries and its sovereignty cannot survive).

Without nationalism as the foundation stone, internationalism falls down.

Without the brick of unilateralism as the fundamental building block, no multilateral structure can exist except as a castle in the imagination of mindlessness.

What is often conveniently forgotten with the multinational or multilateral organisations (UN, EU, IMF, WTO, WHO, …..) is that the multilateral (or multinational) is meaningless without maintaining the integrity of the unilateral (or the national). Undermining the unilateral leaves the multilateral floating aimlessly. Multilateral is a service provider to the unilateral. Without a customer a multilateral service is of no consequence.

It is an existential question of identity.

What the EU does not like to accept that its citizens are Germans or French or Swedes first and only Europeans second.


 

Why the false god of liberalism is failing

October 29, 2018

Brazil has turned sharply right.

There is now a global move away from the sanctimonious form of “liberalism” which has prevailed since the late 60s. After more than half a century of pursuing a mirage a correction is taking place.  In the Philippines and Brazil it is a “law and order” label. In the US it is in addition the “illegal immigration” issue. For EU countries such as Austria and Poland and Hungary and the Czech Republic it is also the “sovereignty” battle. Brexit and the unholy alliance in Italy are further examples. While it is being manifested in different countries under different labels, the shift is actually about values.

Long before humans had speech, we had established the concepts of good and bad. It is not difficult to see how these fundamental values developed. Anything which helped survival was good and all that didn’t was bad. Every system of values starts here, with the distinction between good and bad. Every other value gets categorised into good and bad. With speech and language came the ability to describe the past and the future and more abstract concepts. But every concept carries with it a valuation of good and bad. Every individual has a fundamental and unique understanding of the difference between good and bad. It is part of his identity. What I consider good is what distinguishes me from others. Every collection of individuals develops a common understanding of the difference. An attack on an individual’s basic understanding of good and bad is an existential attack. It attacks his core identity.

The liberalism mirage is one where the most fundamental value of distinguishing between good and bad is ignored or has been forgotten. The most corrosive and corrupting notion of this liberalism has been the labeling of privileges as “human rights” and where such privileges are decoupled from behaviour. There is no “human right” which is not actually a privilege. It is inherent in the liberalism mirage that behaviour not be a qualifying factor for the privilege, yet there is no individual who does not moderate the privileges he grants to others based on their behaviour. Ther is no State or society which does not withhold privileges based on behaviour. To decouple privileges (rights) from behaviour tries to establish and legitimise a fantasy. The supposed “rights” to life and free speech and religion (which are all privileges) are severely curtailed everywhere. But it is perfectly logical and moral and correct that they be so restricted based on behaviour. It is the propagation of the fantasy that behaviour can be decoupled which is so corrosive. It is the fantasy that an individual’s core judgement of what is good and what is bad can be overridden by diktat which makes “liberalism” a mirage. There is now a reaction to the arrogance of the liberalism elite trying to force people to reverse their own judgements of good and bad.

This mirage is now becoming unsustainable in many parts of the world. That is not so surprising since it attacks the core identity of many people and of their notion of what is good and what is bad.


 

Could the Democrats win California without the illegal voters?

October 20, 2018

Saturday trivia.

It is utterly inexplicable that the US must be the only country where in an election, open only to citizens, voters are not required to have proof of eligibility to vote (citizenship). However it is perfectly understandable that the Democrats who are the primary beneficiaries of illegal votes are against the idea of any voter having to have any proof of identity or citizenship.

I reckon that in the 2016 election the Democrats (Hillary Clinton) had the benefit of about 3 million illegal votes by non-citizens (mainly in California and New York).

 


 

Swedish voting procedure – An illusion of secrecy

September 11, 2018

Sweden has a population of just under 10 million and 7.49 million were registered to vote in the general election last Sunday. There were 6005 polling stations so each polling station would deal, on average, with less than 1300 voters. As a comparison, an Indian General Election has 814 million voters and 930,000 polling stations giving an average of less than 900 voters per polling station.

On average a Swedish polling station has 50% more voters than an average Indian polling station. Yet the Swedish voting procedure is almost entirely manual with very little use of electronic devices. Surprisingly, it is also prone to human error in the recording of who has voted.

The voting process has five key steps.

  1. Select a ballot paper from the party of your choice (NOT IN SECRET)
  2. Mark your preference for a particular person on the party list. (IN SECRET).
  3. Put your ballot paper in an envelope. (IN SECRET).
  4. Identify yourself to polling official who crosses you off the electoral list and
  5. places your envelope in the ballot box (NOT IN SECRET).

The voters choice of party is made in Step 1 but there is no pretense of secrecy around this step. The secrecy surrounding Step 3 adds no value. In Step 4 there is no cross check that the name being crossed of the electoral roll is actually the person who has voted.

Considering the voting process as a whole, it is remarkably old-fashioned but steps 1 and 4 are not fit for purpose for even an old-fashioned process.

 

This year the Swedish election has had international observers. I would be surprised if they did not comment on Steps 1 and 4.


 

Sweden election 2018: Too many parties spoil the governance

September 9, 2018

We are about to go and vote.

Red/green or Blue or Blue/Brown.

But the simple reality is that Sweden is actually a politically fractured country with 8 significant parties (9 including the Feminist Initiative) who could cross the 4% barrier and get into parliament. There is zero possibility of getting a majority government. Back room deals and the undue influence of minority parties is a foregone conclusion. We have had the undue influence of the Green party in the last Red/Green government. Instead of 2 major parties we will now have 3. The Sweden Democrats is the Joker in the pack.

Whatever transpires we have a politically messy period ahead of us.

There are just too many parties.


 

Election time in Sweden and stupidity is in the air

August 26, 2018

The Swedish general election takes place in about 2 weeks and it is almost impossible to avoid stupid pronouncements by politicians of all colours and all parties.

There is not a single media outlet which does not have its own agenda. Some openly support a particular party. Others are more sophisticated and oppose particular parties. The most intelligent keep their preferences hidden but support or attack particular policies which, on balance and by a strange coincidence, just happen to be those of a particular party. But there is not a single one which does not have its own agenda. But the worst thing is the oozing, sickly sweet stench of political correctness.

Stupidity is in the air.

 


 

As a second class immigrant, who should I vote for in the Swedish election?

August 18, 2018

I have observed that in a Red/Green Sweden I am now a second class immigrant. I did not ask for or get “political asylum”. I came to Sweden – horror of horrors – to work. I did not seek, and I did not get, social welfare payments.

I am of Indian origin and I was working in England in R & D when I was “recruited” to Sweden 34 years ago. At that time it was still the old Stal Laval which became ASEA Stal and then ABB Stal and then later Alstom and then Siemens. In due course we became Swedish citizens.

Now as we approach the 2018 general election I must decide who to vote for this time. There are actually many parties not worthy of consideration. The Environmental Party is made up of children trying to be adults. They are so sanctimonious they make me ill. The Left party is just another Communist party masquerading as socialists. The Liberals and the Centre and the Christian Democrat parties have no idea what they really stand for and are “dead men walking”.  The Greens, the Left, the Liberals, the Christian Democrats and the Centre are excluded from any further consideration. That leaves three.

  1. For the Social Democrats, I am a second class immigrant because I came to Sweden to work and not for “political asylum”. Moreover they have not understood the difference between multi-ethnic and multicultural. Parallel cultures always give a fractured society. They want to tax me even more for very questionable projects. They have confused sameness with equality. They have made a false God of “equality” without understanding that fairness and justice demands unequal treatment. I find Stefan Löfven uninspiring. They may well win the election but they are probably not for me.
  2. The Sweden Democrats would prefer that I am not here. Jimmy Åkesson has actually developed more over the last 10 years than any of the other political “leaders”. He has more charisma than any of the others. On many issues, except the treatment of immigrants, I am actually closer to the Sweden Democrats than to many of the other parties. But they don’t like any immigrants of any kind and therefore I am not for them.
  3. The Moderate Party should be where I can naturally find a home. Generally, but mainly in theory, they are closer to my views on labour and the economy and free enterprise. But they lack courage and they lack leadership. They are so enslaved by political correctness that they are prepared to go against their own principles whenever the wind blows against them. Ulf Kristersson is solid enough but quite bland. He could grow up but he hasn’t done so yet.

I don’t have any good choices – only less bad ones.  I think the Social Democrats are unlikely to get my vote for just being too unintelligent. The Moderate party is possible as being the best of a poor lot but it could be a wasted vote. Or I could vote for the Sweden Democrats in the hope that an earthquake will result and that out of chaos can come order.

 


 


%d bloggers like this: