I told y'all a couple of days ago that the tunnel they were digging to extend Line 5, the blue line, from Horta through the Carmelo, collapsed. Nobody was hurt, but a thousand people were evacuated and are going to have to be rehoused, because they're going to have to tear down that entire block. It seems that the soil in that area is not particularly solid and there are a lot of fissures in it. It's such a big deal that Zap came to town to soothe everybody's nerves, promising checks of fifteen thousand euros. Maragall, the prime minister of the Generalitat, compared this mess to the sinking of the tanker Prestige a couple of years ago off Galicia, which resulted in an unpleasant though not disastrous oil slick.
I don't think the comparison is apt at all. What happened with the Prestige was that it was a foreign-owned ship in Spanish waters and it was going to sink. The Aznar government was on the spot; this was an emergency situation and they had to make a quick decision: should they tow the ship to port, which would certainly wreck whatever harbor they towed it into, or should they tow it back out to sea hoping that either the thing would hold together or that no significant damage would be done because the oil slicks could be stopped before they reached the shore?
They had no time to dither and they went with the second choice, towing it out to sea, which sort of worked because none of the national seashores nor the prime fisheries were affected, though an ugly mess was created that cost some time and effort to even partially clean up. The point remains, though, that criticizing the Aznar government over the Prestige affair is second-guessing, armchair-generalling, Monday-morning quarterbacking, looking back with 20/20 hindsight.
Meanwhile, this little mess should have been foreseen by the planners, who should have known what sort of soil they were tunneling through. Years before construction even began on that subway line extension, they should have known what kind of soil there was as part of the most basic planning. This is not a case of making a questionable decision in an emergency situation like the Prestige; this is a case of not doing your homework. It's negligence and somebody's head needs to roll.
Saturday, February 12, 2005
Remember a couple of days ago I promised y'all Mr. James Howard Kunstler's reaction to that sad little story about the kids getting run over while one of the neighbors was teaching his son to drive? Here it is.
What on earth does one make of a story like this? I conclude that the local culture, in effect, accepts the death of little children like Michael Brown as a necessary cost of doing business. Atlanta's economy is based on suburban development for its own sake. That is, suburban development IS the economy. This particular pattern of development requires the continual use of personal transport machines, cars, which tend to be dangerous and require some skill to operate. Teaching these skills is the responsibility of the family. It can be hazardous to bystanders. Sometimes members of other families are present in the area of instruction. Sometimes hazards cannot ba avoided and injuries or death result. Of course, everybody regrets the loss, but all--including the parents--are eager to forgive and get over the unhappy incident and get on with the next order of business: Real estate must be sold, development deals must be signed, the roads have to be widened to accomodate all the extra cars from the new subdivisions and their accessory strip malls. Children will grow up there, and sooner or later virtually all of them who are mentally and physically able must be taught to drive cars so that they can go out and play adult roles in the Sunbelt economy.
What a pile of shit.
1. While people are to some degree motivated by economics, everybody who isn't an utter cynic will agree that economics is not people's ONLY motivation, and that there may be other factors like, I don't know, love, loyalty, kindness, generosity, and such silly Sunbelt Christian things. The Brown family and those who offered to help them seem to be a fine example of these non-economic impulses.
2. Atlanta's economy is quite obviously based on a whole lot of things besides suburban development. Just to name a few: Coca-Cola, CNN, dozens of other corporate headquarters, the airport, the medical centers, Emory, Morehouse, and Georgia Tech (all fine universities), the railroad connections, federal and state employment, banking, insurance, state legislature pork, strip bars, porno vid rentals, escort services...do I need to go on?
3. People have always had accidents with dangerous things. Before cars it was railroads and ships, not to mention horses. An awful lot of people got killed in carriage wrecks or when being thrown. Farm machinery, which kids in the old days had to learn how to work by the time they were twelve, is dangerous now and was a lot more dangerous then. Factory work, which kids in the old days were often doing by the time they were twelve, could be extremely dangerous. Let's not even get into coal mining. Our kids are tremendously better protected today than even fifty years ago.
4. Moron, in the US we have something called "drivers' education", which dopes like a certain relative of mine teach in the public high schools. It's taught in the public schools because it's considered a useful and necessary skill. I personally remember, at age fifteen, drivers ed class. When we passed the course we got provisional licenses, which required us to drive only with another adult in the front seat until we turned sixteen and took the real state drivers' license exam. (This was Texas in 1982.) Probably the guy who did more than anyone else to teach me to drive was our neighbor across the alley, Mr. Grimley.
5. People want to forgive other people because, I don't know, maybe because they believe that forgiveness is the ethical way to behave? And people want to, in the jargon, reach "closure" when a tragedy like this one happens. It is utterly cynical to insinuate that Mr. Brown feels forgiving to his neighbor because he knows that real estate must be sold.
6. Just one little comment. Haussmann (that's the correct spelling of the guy's surname, which I think I managed to spell three different ways in the last post. Two S's, two N's) quite clearly had, among the objects of his plan to beautify and organize and modernize Paris, a) increasing the value of real estate b) making money for Haussmann's own Robert Moses-esque operation c) improving traffic circulation. I don't see much difference between that and "selling real estate, making development deals, and widening the roads". Yet Kunstler praises Haussmann and his patron, Napoleon III. OK, that's fair, those two really did a lot to make Paris the beautiful city we know, but neither of them was at all democratic nor particularly honest, something I'll bet a lot of these Georgia real-estate developers actually are. Oh, yeah, Nap III wound up losing his throne due to the idiot war he started with the Prussians, thereby getting God only knows how many of his countrymen killed, firing up a real revolution that had to be bloodily suppressed, and losing two of his country's richest provinces to the Germans. Some hero. Bet you can't name a cracker fundamentalist with that kind of record for incompetence, stupidity, arrogance, and being the direct cause of thousands of deaths. OK, Jimmy Carter, but that's just one.
What on earth does one make of a story like this? I conclude that the local culture, in effect, accepts the death of little children like Michael Brown as a necessary cost of doing business. Atlanta's economy is based on suburban development for its own sake. That is, suburban development IS the economy. This particular pattern of development requires the continual use of personal transport machines, cars, which tend to be dangerous and require some skill to operate. Teaching these skills is the responsibility of the family. It can be hazardous to bystanders. Sometimes members of other families are present in the area of instruction. Sometimes hazards cannot ba avoided and injuries or death result. Of course, everybody regrets the loss, but all--including the parents--are eager to forgive and get over the unhappy incident and get on with the next order of business: Real estate must be sold, development deals must be signed, the roads have to be widened to accomodate all the extra cars from the new subdivisions and their accessory strip malls. Children will grow up there, and sooner or later virtually all of them who are mentally and physically able must be taught to drive cars so that they can go out and play adult roles in the Sunbelt economy.
What a pile of shit.
1. While people are to some degree motivated by economics, everybody who isn't an utter cynic will agree that economics is not people's ONLY motivation, and that there may be other factors like, I don't know, love, loyalty, kindness, generosity, and such silly Sunbelt Christian things. The Brown family and those who offered to help them seem to be a fine example of these non-economic impulses.
2. Atlanta's economy is quite obviously based on a whole lot of things besides suburban development. Just to name a few: Coca-Cola, CNN, dozens of other corporate headquarters, the airport, the medical centers, Emory, Morehouse, and Georgia Tech (all fine universities), the railroad connections, federal and state employment, banking, insurance, state legislature pork, strip bars, porno vid rentals, escort services...do I need to go on?
3. People have always had accidents with dangerous things. Before cars it was railroads and ships, not to mention horses. An awful lot of people got killed in carriage wrecks or when being thrown. Farm machinery, which kids in the old days had to learn how to work by the time they were twelve, is dangerous now and was a lot more dangerous then. Factory work, which kids in the old days were often doing by the time they were twelve, could be extremely dangerous. Let's not even get into coal mining. Our kids are tremendously better protected today than even fifty years ago.
4. Moron, in the US we have something called "drivers' education", which dopes like a certain relative of mine teach in the public high schools. It's taught in the public schools because it's considered a useful and necessary skill. I personally remember, at age fifteen, drivers ed class. When we passed the course we got provisional licenses, which required us to drive only with another adult in the front seat until we turned sixteen and took the real state drivers' license exam. (This was Texas in 1982.) Probably the guy who did more than anyone else to teach me to drive was our neighbor across the alley, Mr. Grimley.
5. People want to forgive other people because, I don't know, maybe because they believe that forgiveness is the ethical way to behave? And people want to, in the jargon, reach "closure" when a tragedy like this one happens. It is utterly cynical to insinuate that Mr. Brown feels forgiving to his neighbor because he knows that real estate must be sold.
6. Just one little comment. Haussmann (that's the correct spelling of the guy's surname, which I think I managed to spell three different ways in the last post. Two S's, two N's) quite clearly had, among the objects of his plan to beautify and organize and modernize Paris, a) increasing the value of real estate b) making money for Haussmann's own Robert Moses-esque operation c) improving traffic circulation. I don't see much difference between that and "selling real estate, making development deals, and widening the roads". Yet Kunstler praises Haussmann and his patron, Napoleon III. OK, that's fair, those two really did a lot to make Paris the beautiful city we know, but neither of them was at all democratic nor particularly honest, something I'll bet a lot of these Georgia real-estate developers actually are. Oh, yeah, Nap III wound up losing his throne due to the idiot war he started with the Prussians, thereby getting God only knows how many of his countrymen killed, firing up a real revolution that had to be bloodily suppressed, and losing two of his country's richest provinces to the Germans. Some hero. Bet you can't name a cracker fundamentalist with that kind of record for incompetence, stupidity, arrogance, and being the direct cause of thousands of deaths. OK, Jimmy Carter, but that's just one.
Friday, February 11, 2005
Arthur Miller is dead. Well, every man's death diminishes me, but I always thought he was overrated, at least since about the time I was 19. I remember we read Death of a Salesman and The Crucible in ninth-grade English class, and, frankly, Arthur Miller operated on about a ninth-grade mentality. There's just no comparison between him and the real American dramatist of the 1950s, Tennessee Williams.
He did nail Marilyn Monroe. On the other hand, I have always thought Marilyn was way, way overrated as a sex symbol. I just don't get the whole Marilyn thing, though I wouldn't be surprised if it's mostly a gay camp deal. She wasn't at all bad as a comedy actress, though, and she was great in the Misfits. I guess it would be cool to go around saying you'd nailed the same broad as JFK, but then on the other hand, what with all the broads JFK nailed, probably a lot of guys could say that, and from what I've read about Marilyn, she got around too. In my opinion the coolest guy to nail Marilyn was undoubtedly Joe D.
He did nail Marilyn Monroe. On the other hand, I have always thought Marilyn was way, way overrated as a sex symbol. I just don't get the whole Marilyn thing, though I wouldn't be surprised if it's mostly a gay camp deal. She wasn't at all bad as a comedy actress, though, and she was great in the Misfits. I guess it would be cool to go around saying you'd nailed the same broad as JFK, but then on the other hand, what with all the broads JFK nailed, probably a lot of guys could say that, and from what I've read about Marilyn, she got around too. In my opinion the coolest guy to nail Marilyn was undoubtedly Joe D.
Wednesday, February 09, 2005
The news from Spain today is that ETA let off a bomb at the Madrid trade fair / convention center. Over 40 people were injured but none seriously, so it turned out to be just a scare.
There seems to be a growing tone of guarded optimism around here in reaction to the news of the cease-fire agreement made at Sharm el Sheikh and Condi Rice's appearance in Paris. American policy seems to be on a winning streak. I'll bet within a couple or three days we'll start seeing some expressions of real hope out of the Spanish press. We'll keep you posted. I also think it's becoming much more clear to the average José over here that the "resistance" are a bunch of terrorist killers, as they tried to sabotage the elections and then have continued to murder Iraqis.
You know, I think that Iraq Body Count has, despite its obvious partiality, has given us a clear perspective of the cost of the war on Iraq. They say that about 16,000 civilians have been killed since the Anglo-American invasion, according to generally accepted journalistic reports. They do not say, of course, though it's obvious from their case file, that probably 90% of those killed are victims of the terrorists. They add that the number of identified and proven dead civilians is over 3000; that number, to me, is the absolute bottom possible. I'm willing to believe the 16,000 figure as the possible ceiling, though that would require an average death toll of more than 20 a day, which seems high to me. But then I only know what I read in the media.
The question is: is getting rid of Saddam, eliminating his military threats and terrorist activities, and establishing a reasonably free government in Iraq worth between 3000 and 16,000 civilians dead? Not if you're one of those people, and not likely if they're in your family. But I dunno. In World War II we certainly killed hundreds of thousands of enemy civilians, and Germany, Japan, and Italy have all since become civilized places. Was it worth it to kill all those German and Japanese kids and mothers and old people? Well, the world is certainly a much better place than it was in 1945, that's for sure.
I guess for me it comes down to motive. If your motive is to deliberately kill civilian people, like the Anglo-American terror bombings of Germany and Japan, that's evil. Did it have to be done? Well, the war had to be won and we could not be finicky about our methods, but you can justify almost anything with that logic. This time, though, in Iraq, we tried to minimize civilian dead and wounded to as few as possible. The motive wasn't to kill them. The current Western alliance, to my knowledge, is the only one in world history to fight wars while actively trying to kill as few civilians as possible.
There seems to be a growing tone of guarded optimism around here in reaction to the news of the cease-fire agreement made at Sharm el Sheikh and Condi Rice's appearance in Paris. American policy seems to be on a winning streak. I'll bet within a couple or three days we'll start seeing some expressions of real hope out of the Spanish press. We'll keep you posted. I also think it's becoming much more clear to the average José over here that the "resistance" are a bunch of terrorist killers, as they tried to sabotage the elections and then have continued to murder Iraqis.
You know, I think that Iraq Body Count has, despite its obvious partiality, has given us a clear perspective of the cost of the war on Iraq. They say that about 16,000 civilians have been killed since the Anglo-American invasion, according to generally accepted journalistic reports. They do not say, of course, though it's obvious from their case file, that probably 90% of those killed are victims of the terrorists. They add that the number of identified and proven dead civilians is over 3000; that number, to me, is the absolute bottom possible. I'm willing to believe the 16,000 figure as the possible ceiling, though that would require an average death toll of more than 20 a day, which seems high to me. But then I only know what I read in the media.
The question is: is getting rid of Saddam, eliminating his military threats and terrorist activities, and establishing a reasonably free government in Iraq worth between 3000 and 16,000 civilians dead? Not if you're one of those people, and not likely if they're in your family. But I dunno. In World War II we certainly killed hundreds of thousands of enemy civilians, and Germany, Japan, and Italy have all since become civilized places. Was it worth it to kill all those German and Japanese kids and mothers and old people? Well, the world is certainly a much better place than it was in 1945, that's for sure.
I guess for me it comes down to motive. If your motive is to deliberately kill civilian people, like the Anglo-American terror bombings of Germany and Japan, that's evil. Did it have to be done? Well, the war had to be won and we could not be finicky about our methods, but you can justify almost anything with that logic. This time, though, in Iraq, we tried to minimize civilian dead and wounded to as few as possible. The motive wasn't to kill them. The current Western alliance, to my knowledge, is the only one in world history to fight wars while actively trying to kill as few civilians as possible.
Murph lent me this awful book on urban geography by some guy named James Howard Kunstler, who is American and wrote this thing in 2001.
Chapter One of the book is an ode to Hausmann's Paris, which is more than fair enough, Paris is a beautiful place, though of course it wasn't all created by Haussman. Kunstler does debunk the myth that Hausmann designed his plan in order to more easily put down urban uprisings; he has enough evidence to prove the main points were slum clearance, installation of functioning water and sewer systems, improvement of traffic, and increasing real-estate value along the new boulevards. He also points out that Haussmann's plan certainly did not seem to help much in the bloody suppression of the Paris Commune, which did have the long-term effect of eliminating the Paris mob as a political force. So Chapter One isn't bad at all. I actually learned something.
Chapter Two's on Atlanta, though, and boy, Kunstler sets the tone early: "...the system had clogged up like the porkfat-lined vascular system of a baby boom Bubba behind the wheel of his beloved suburban utility vehicle (SUV), and Lordy, the entire fretful coastal plain had become a united parking lot". And this: "pathogenic characters who fed off the metastatizing tumors of suburban sprawl". Or this: "It went against their current politics, their whole belief system, really, which boiled down to the notion that Atlanta was the ideal expression of democracy, free enterprise, and Christian destiny." Or this: "the people of the Sunbelt, U.S.A., a regional group who, culturally speaking, had crawled out of the mud about twenty-three years ago." Or this: "Saying there was anything wrong with Atlanta was like being against America". Or this: "...it was unlikely that everyone in the Sunbelt (formerly the Bible Belt) who subscribed to the fundamentalist Christian idea of heaven as a sort of eternal theme park was necessarily a genius. What it actually prompted one to think was how childishly incoherent Sunbelt theology was...".
The contempt drips off every word. Note to assorted American leftists: You are going to continue losing every election from here to eternity unless you stop treating everything from Sacramento to Newark as "the flyover". Scorn and disdain are not the best techniques for convincing people of your beliefs. I find it interesting that Kunstler does not bother to investigate why the people in suburban Atlanta more or less like it more or less the way it is. After all, if people didn't like it, they wouldn't move there, and there sure seem to be a lot more people moving into Atlanta than moving out of it. But Kunstler takes the easy out, chalking up the people's (most likely logical) preferences to their childish Bible Belt theology. Oh, yeah, note to assorted Europeans: You make a mistake when you take such examples of the bicoastal self-appointed cultural elite's opinions as anything resembling the actual state of events. Let me add, by the way, that Atlanta is probably America's largest metropolitan area in which blacks are powerfully influential.
Kunstler then offers up this story from the Saturday, September 9, 1999, Atlanta Journal-Record, which I've summarized below. Your job is, while reading through this, to think about what this news story means in the larger scheme of things, and then to guess what Mr. Kunstler's interpretation of the story is.
"Comfort and hopeful news are pouring in for the Brown family. Days after their son Michael, 3, was killed after a 14-year-old neighbor practicing driving with his father hit the toddler and his six-year-old brother Brandon, the Gwinnett County family has been deluged with offers of sympathy. "We've been showered with unconditional love and support," said Richard Brown on Friday...On Friday doctors removed (Brandon's) neck brace and hope to take him off an intravenous feeding tube soon. "He's doing very well," Brown said. "It's steady progress." The family has received encouragement and offers from family, friends, and business around the country, all anxious to help the family, whose van overheated on the way to the hospital and was still in the shop Friday...The Brown family has continued to maintain an attitude of forgiveness toward their neighbor, Dimitras Iliadis, and his 14-year-old son. Gwinnett County police say Iliadis was attempting to teach his son to drive when the teen pressed the accelerator and the car took off, striking the Brown children who were playing in their yard."
Take your best guess below; tomorrow I'll post Mr. Kunstler's interpretation. Whoever comes closest receives an eloquent testimonial he can put on his resumé; just don't tell anyone you got it from me.
Chapter One of the book is an ode to Hausmann's Paris, which is more than fair enough, Paris is a beautiful place, though of course it wasn't all created by Haussman. Kunstler does debunk the myth that Hausmann designed his plan in order to more easily put down urban uprisings; he has enough evidence to prove the main points were slum clearance, installation of functioning water and sewer systems, improvement of traffic, and increasing real-estate value along the new boulevards. He also points out that Haussmann's plan certainly did not seem to help much in the bloody suppression of the Paris Commune, which did have the long-term effect of eliminating the Paris mob as a political force. So Chapter One isn't bad at all. I actually learned something.
Chapter Two's on Atlanta, though, and boy, Kunstler sets the tone early: "...the system had clogged up like the porkfat-lined vascular system of a baby boom Bubba behind the wheel of his beloved suburban utility vehicle (SUV), and Lordy, the entire fretful coastal plain had become a united parking lot". And this: "pathogenic characters who fed off the metastatizing tumors of suburban sprawl". Or this: "It went against their current politics, their whole belief system, really, which boiled down to the notion that Atlanta was the ideal expression of democracy, free enterprise, and Christian destiny." Or this: "the people of the Sunbelt, U.S.A., a regional group who, culturally speaking, had crawled out of the mud about twenty-three years ago." Or this: "Saying there was anything wrong with Atlanta was like being against America". Or this: "...it was unlikely that everyone in the Sunbelt (formerly the Bible Belt) who subscribed to the fundamentalist Christian idea of heaven as a sort of eternal theme park was necessarily a genius. What it actually prompted one to think was how childishly incoherent Sunbelt theology was...".
The contempt drips off every word. Note to assorted American leftists: You are going to continue losing every election from here to eternity unless you stop treating everything from Sacramento to Newark as "the flyover". Scorn and disdain are not the best techniques for convincing people of your beliefs. I find it interesting that Kunstler does not bother to investigate why the people in suburban Atlanta more or less like it more or less the way it is. After all, if people didn't like it, they wouldn't move there, and there sure seem to be a lot more people moving into Atlanta than moving out of it. But Kunstler takes the easy out, chalking up the people's (most likely logical) preferences to their childish Bible Belt theology. Oh, yeah, note to assorted Europeans: You make a mistake when you take such examples of the bicoastal self-appointed cultural elite's opinions as anything resembling the actual state of events. Let me add, by the way, that Atlanta is probably America's largest metropolitan area in which blacks are powerfully influential.
Kunstler then offers up this story from the Saturday, September 9, 1999, Atlanta Journal-Record, which I've summarized below. Your job is, while reading through this, to think about what this news story means in the larger scheme of things, and then to guess what Mr. Kunstler's interpretation of the story is.
"Comfort and hopeful news are pouring in for the Brown family. Days after their son Michael, 3, was killed after a 14-year-old neighbor practicing driving with his father hit the toddler and his six-year-old brother Brandon, the Gwinnett County family has been deluged with offers of sympathy. "We've been showered with unconditional love and support," said Richard Brown on Friday...On Friday doctors removed (Brandon's) neck brace and hope to take him off an intravenous feeding tube soon. "He's doing very well," Brown said. "It's steady progress." The family has received encouragement and offers from family, friends, and business around the country, all anxious to help the family, whose van overheated on the way to the hospital and was still in the shop Friday...The Brown family has continued to maintain an attitude of forgiveness toward their neighbor, Dimitras Iliadis, and his 14-year-old son. Gwinnett County police say Iliadis was attempting to teach his son to drive when the teen pressed the accelerator and the car took off, striking the Brown children who were playing in their yard."
Take your best guess below; tomorrow I'll post Mr. Kunstler's interpretation. Whoever comes closest receives an eloquent testimonial he can put on his resumé; just don't tell anyone you got it from me.
Monday, February 07, 2005
James Taranto runs this note on his Best of the Web column today:
Three cheers for the Czech government, which has quashed a plan by Spain's Socialist government aimed at quashing dissent in communist Cuba, as the Prague Post reports:
"In their first foreign-policy victory since joining the EU, Czech officials in Brussels have blocked a proposed ban on inviting Cuban dissidents to receptions at European embassies in Havana.
The ban would have suspended a 2003 resolution that called on EU countries to support anti-Castro dissidents by inviting them to parties celebrating national holidays.
Spain proposed the ban as part of a package of measures--including the resumption of EU missions to Cuba--designed to ease tensions with Havana. It became a sticking point when the Czechs threatened to use their veto in the 25-member Council of Foreign Ministers, where unanimity is required on policy decisions."
Having actually lived under communist domination for more than 40 years makes the Czechs less accepting of Castro's depredations than some of their Western European counterparts. As the Post puts it, "Debate over the ban touched a nerve here, where many former dissidents entered politics after communism fell in 1989."
You gotta love the country that produced Vaclav Havel, and be embarrassed that clowns like Zap and Moratinos are running this one. Look on the bright side; three more years of Zap means that the PP will win the next four or five general elections in a row, while the fact that Zap's term is limited and will thankfully come to an end at the next election means that he won't have time to screw things up real bad before his term expires.
Let's see you guys add a few verses to this one.
How many times must Moratinos screw up
Before we can call him a jerk
And how many times will Zap make plans
That in practice aren't going to work
And how many times will the Pope get mad
And tell Zap he should go more to church
The answer, meus amics, is not in El País
The answer is not in El País
Three cheers for the Czech government, which has quashed a plan by Spain's Socialist government aimed at quashing dissent in communist Cuba, as the Prague Post reports:
"In their first foreign-policy victory since joining the EU, Czech officials in Brussels have blocked a proposed ban on inviting Cuban dissidents to receptions at European embassies in Havana.
The ban would have suspended a 2003 resolution that called on EU countries to support anti-Castro dissidents by inviting them to parties celebrating national holidays.
Spain proposed the ban as part of a package of measures--including the resumption of EU missions to Cuba--designed to ease tensions with Havana. It became a sticking point when the Czechs threatened to use their veto in the 25-member Council of Foreign Ministers, where unanimity is required on policy decisions."
Having actually lived under communist domination for more than 40 years makes the Czechs less accepting of Castro's depredations than some of their Western European counterparts. As the Post puts it, "Debate over the ban touched a nerve here, where many former dissidents entered politics after communism fell in 1989."
You gotta love the country that produced Vaclav Havel, and be embarrassed that clowns like Zap and Moratinos are running this one. Look on the bright side; three more years of Zap means that the PP will win the next four or five general elections in a row, while the fact that Zap's term is limited and will thankfully come to an end at the next election means that he won't have time to screw things up real bad before his term expires.
Let's see you guys add a few verses to this one.
How many times must Moratinos screw up
Before we can call him a jerk
And how many times will Zap make plans
That in practice aren't going to work
And how many times will the Pope get mad
And tell Zap he should go more to church
The answer, meus amics, is not in El País
The answer is not in El País
FC Barcelona got beat fair and square at home last night, 0-2, by Atlético de Madrid. It was a fairly rough game, since Atlético is notorious as another team that deals in "leña" and Barça is perfectly capable of passing it out as well as taking it (keep an eye on Puyol, Belletti, Márquez, and now Albertini). I am guessing, though, that teams are finding that the way to challenge the Barça is to play rough, since they don't have a lot of men on the bench to sub the regulars. The arrival of Albertini and López and the return of Gerard should do something to relieve this problem, but right now the Barça players are getting banged up every week by teams willing to play a physical game, and nobody gets much of a rest. Another thing is that teams are discovering that by putting relentless pressure on the midfield they can at least partially shut down Barça's passing game.
Atlético scored on a very nice goal in the very first minute. Somebody centered into the area and Ibagaza volleyed the ball off his heel (let's be frank, this was a bit lucky, but it was very pretty) to Fernando Torres, who knocked it in for 0-1. Atlético proceeded to retreat to its own half of the field and let Barça take the game to them, but they defended aggressively at the midfield stripe, not back around the area, and they shut down Barça's midfield and cut off Ronaldinho and Etoo from the ball. Both teams had several opportunities that they bungled. The ref was lousy; he didn't favor either team, his calls were equally bad for both sides. He failed to call a couple of real penalties, and he erred in calling one in favor of the Barça in the first half, which Ronaldinho muffed, and then calling another in favor of the Atlético in extra time (Valdés seemed to take down Torres in the area) that Torres sent home. Neither was a legitimate penalty. Barcelona had not lost at home for more than a year. They are still in first place, four points ahead of Real Madrid, who stomped Espanyol at home 4-0. Next week Barça plays at Zaragoza and Madrid plays at Osasuna; these are both midtable teams who do well when playing at home, and there might be more than one little surprise.
As everyone knows, New England beat Philadelphia in the Super Bowl. They were showing it at several of the local bars that cater largely to expats, but there was no way I was going out at midnight and stay up until 3 AM on Sunday night. That's three Super Bowls in four years for the no-longer Patsies, and this year in the playoffs they beat all three of the teams that were a legitimate challenge for them, Peyton Manning's Colts--Manning just had the best regular season a quarterback has ever had--, Big Ben's Steelers, and then Donovan McNabb's Eagles. They can start talking dynasty; I believe that the last team that was so dominant were the Cowboys of the early Nineties.
Atlético scored on a very nice goal in the very first minute. Somebody centered into the area and Ibagaza volleyed the ball off his heel (let's be frank, this was a bit lucky, but it was very pretty) to Fernando Torres, who knocked it in for 0-1. Atlético proceeded to retreat to its own half of the field and let Barça take the game to them, but they defended aggressively at the midfield stripe, not back around the area, and they shut down Barça's midfield and cut off Ronaldinho and Etoo from the ball. Both teams had several opportunities that they bungled. The ref was lousy; he didn't favor either team, his calls were equally bad for both sides. He failed to call a couple of real penalties, and he erred in calling one in favor of the Barça in the first half, which Ronaldinho muffed, and then calling another in favor of the Atlético in extra time (Valdés seemed to take down Torres in the area) that Torres sent home. Neither was a legitimate penalty. Barcelona had not lost at home for more than a year. They are still in first place, four points ahead of Real Madrid, who stomped Espanyol at home 4-0. Next week Barça plays at Zaragoza and Madrid plays at Osasuna; these are both midtable teams who do well when playing at home, and there might be more than one little surprise.
As everyone knows, New England beat Philadelphia in the Super Bowl. They were showing it at several of the local bars that cater largely to expats, but there was no way I was going out at midnight and stay up until 3 AM on Sunday night. That's three Super Bowls in four years for the no-longer Patsies, and this year in the playoffs they beat all three of the teams that were a legitimate challenge for them, Peyton Manning's Colts--Manning just had the best regular season a quarterback has ever had--, Big Ben's Steelers, and then Donovan McNabb's Eagles. They can start talking dynasty; I believe that the last team that was so dominant were the Cowboys of the early Nineties.
My feelings on the upcoming referendum on the European Union Constitution are rather mixed and slightly confused. Part of the reason is that I'm an American citizen (a legal resident of Spain), and I view this from rather an outside perspective.
If I were British or Irish, I'd be very suspicious of the EU, and I would support some kind of associate membership in both the EU and NAFTA. I would vote no on the treaty.
If I were Spanish, I would hope I would be honest enough to admit that Spain has a very poor record at self-government, and that membership in international institutions--first the UN and then NATO and the EU--has been key in making Spain part of the international community. I would actually figure that full 100% membership in the EU would be a guarantee on Spain never sliding back to the old ways; you have to remember that Spain was a dictatorship until the old SOB died in bed in 1975 and that the Army tried to pull a coup as late as 1981. Democracy in Spain was established as recently as 1978. Eastern Europe wasn't free until 1989. That's only an eleven-year difference. Spain has also received lots of dough from the EU over the years, and it would be sort of selfish to pull out now that the people who are going to get the big subsidies are Slavs and Magyars.
I know that's kind of superficial, but if I were Spanish I would vote yes.
If I were Catalanista I would figure that the stronger the EU bonds are, the looser identification with the state there will be, and that therefore there will be more of an opportunity to hype regional identification. I would vote yes.
As an American I figure anything that binds democratic governments closer together is a good thing, and I think it is very positive that places like Poland and Slovakia and Hungary are already part of the West. I do not believe that a more united Europe will be a challenge to America; we are similar peoples, both part of the great Western civilization of the Greeks, Romans, Jews, and Christians. (This does not exclude Muslims or anyone else, by the way, since our tradition should allow other religions to freely express their ideas in our countries, of course.) Our interests are similar and our goals are similar, and in the long run things will work out with a lot of jaw-jawing and no war-waring, because there is no way a bunch of democracies are going to go to war, not even if the French somehow get hold of the central apparatus. As an American I urge you Continental Europeans to vote yes.
The best argument I have heard against the EU constitution is that it adds another useless layer of bureaucracy. Fine, I say. Let's vote for the party that promises to cut down our state bureaucracy and hand over its responsibilities to the EU.
If I were British or Irish, I'd be very suspicious of the EU, and I would support some kind of associate membership in both the EU and NAFTA. I would vote no on the treaty.
If I were Spanish, I would hope I would be honest enough to admit that Spain has a very poor record at self-government, and that membership in international institutions--first the UN and then NATO and the EU--has been key in making Spain part of the international community. I would actually figure that full 100% membership in the EU would be a guarantee on Spain never sliding back to the old ways; you have to remember that Spain was a dictatorship until the old SOB died in bed in 1975 and that the Army tried to pull a coup as late as 1981. Democracy in Spain was established as recently as 1978. Eastern Europe wasn't free until 1989. That's only an eleven-year difference. Spain has also received lots of dough from the EU over the years, and it would be sort of selfish to pull out now that the people who are going to get the big subsidies are Slavs and Magyars.
I know that's kind of superficial, but if I were Spanish I would vote yes.
If I were Catalanista I would figure that the stronger the EU bonds are, the looser identification with the state there will be, and that therefore there will be more of an opportunity to hype regional identification. I would vote yes.
As an American I figure anything that binds democratic governments closer together is a good thing, and I think it is very positive that places like Poland and Slovakia and Hungary are already part of the West. I do not believe that a more united Europe will be a challenge to America; we are similar peoples, both part of the great Western civilization of the Greeks, Romans, Jews, and Christians. (This does not exclude Muslims or anyone else, by the way, since our tradition should allow other religions to freely express their ideas in our countries, of course.) Our interests are similar and our goals are similar, and in the long run things will work out with a lot of jaw-jawing and no war-waring, because there is no way a bunch of democracies are going to go to war, not even if the French somehow get hold of the central apparatus. As an American I urge you Continental Europeans to vote yes.
The best argument I have heard against the EU constitution is that it adds another useless layer of bureaucracy. Fine, I say. Let's vote for the party that promises to cut down our state bureaucracy and hand over its responsibilities to the EU.
Saturday, February 05, 2005
I haven't complained about the Cataloonies for a while, so here goes. To my knowledge, in Catalonia, right now, it is legal to label your product either in Spanish, in Catalan, or both. This, right here, is dangerous, because the problem is that EVERYONE in Catalonia can read Spanish, including all of the many visitors from other parts of Spain and quite a few of the visitors from foreign countries, but my guess is that one-quarter of locals and 99% of visitors from other parts of Spain and foreign countries can't read Catalan.
Now, most of the time Catalan and Spanish are quite similar, but occasionally there might be a major problem. Take, for example, my mom (in real life). She's both diabetic and allergic to gluten. Let's imagine my mom is a working-class immigrant from Andalusia who's been here in Barcelona for 25 years but isn't well-educated and can barely read Spanish, much less Catalan. Fair enough? There are quite a few people like that. Now, my mom can figure out that "trigo" means "wheat" and that "azúcar" means sugar, and she knows enough to read the labels on food products to check if they contain those things. But will she be able to figure out that "blat", not "trigo", is Catalan for wheat, and that "sucre", not "azúcar", is Catalan for sugar? This is why all product labels should be in Spanish because EVERYONE understands it. If companies want to label in Catalan as well, that's just fine, but they should be required to label in Spanish.
Another example is highway signs. Now, most of the time Spanish and Catalan are pretty much the same. "Centre Ciutat" is pretty much the same as "Centro Ciudad". But all highway signs should be in Spanish because it's the language everybody can read, including all drivers from other parts of Spain and many from foreign countries; for example, every trucker who covers the Alicante-Copenhagen route, knows how to read Spanish, no matter if he's Danish or German or French. But would a guy from Cuenca driving to Gerona, or a working-class van driver from El Prat, know how to figure out this temporary sign that was up for a couple of years in the very early '90s while they were working on the N-II, the main Barcelona-Zaragoza-Madrid highway: "Perill. Pont tancat." Which, in Spanish, would be "Peligro. Puente cerrado." or in English, "Danger. Bridge closed."?
Again, if the Catalan government wants to require the use of Catalan on road signs in Catalonia, that seems fair enough, but it makes absolutely no sense not to put them up in Spanish as well.
Now, most of the time Catalan and Spanish are quite similar, but occasionally there might be a major problem. Take, for example, my mom (in real life). She's both diabetic and allergic to gluten. Let's imagine my mom is a working-class immigrant from Andalusia who's been here in Barcelona for 25 years but isn't well-educated and can barely read Spanish, much less Catalan. Fair enough? There are quite a few people like that. Now, my mom can figure out that "trigo" means "wheat" and that "azúcar" means sugar, and she knows enough to read the labels on food products to check if they contain those things. But will she be able to figure out that "blat", not "trigo", is Catalan for wheat, and that "sucre", not "azúcar", is Catalan for sugar? This is why all product labels should be in Spanish because EVERYONE understands it. If companies want to label in Catalan as well, that's just fine, but they should be required to label in Spanish.
Another example is highway signs. Now, most of the time Spanish and Catalan are pretty much the same. "Centre Ciutat" is pretty much the same as "Centro Ciudad". But all highway signs should be in Spanish because it's the language everybody can read, including all drivers from other parts of Spain and many from foreign countries; for example, every trucker who covers the Alicante-Copenhagen route, knows how to read Spanish, no matter if he's Danish or German or French. But would a guy from Cuenca driving to Gerona, or a working-class van driver from El Prat, know how to figure out this temporary sign that was up for a couple of years in the very early '90s while they were working on the N-II, the main Barcelona-Zaragoza-Madrid highway: "Perill. Pont tancat." Which, in Spanish, would be "Peligro. Puente cerrado." or in English, "Danger. Bridge closed."?
Again, if the Catalan government wants to require the use of Catalan on road signs in Catalonia, that seems fair enough, but it makes absolutely no sense not to put them up in Spanish as well.
Here's some poetry by the Jedman; it should be set to music and sung by someone like Emmylou Harris.
Chadwell says that Jean has a big butt and fat ankles
Chadwell says that Jean eats too many desserts at the Golden Corral
Cheesecake, pie and fudge, fudge, fudge.
But, Jean is beautiful, no matter what Chadwell says.
Chadwell's words can't bring Jean down. Oh no.
Jean is beautiful in each and every way.
So, Chadwell, don't you bring Jean down today.
Chadwell says that Jean drinks too much beer
and hits the bacon and gravy buffet too often.
Chadwell says that Jean has hag hair
and a big mouth. She asks too many questions
But Jean is beautiful no matter what Chadwell says.
Chadwell's words can't bring Jean down. Oh no.
Jean is beautiful in each and every way.
So, Chadwell, don't you bring Jean down today.
I am just guessing that "Jean" is a friend of ours who lives out in Oakland, and that "Chadwell" is a composite character of me and this woman's loser boyfriend, who is also a friend of ours. The Jedman got the name "Chadwell" from his roommate the first year at the dormitory. As Jed said, "Chadwell has a loud stereo. It's not a good stereo, but it's a loud stereo". John Chadwell was a Neanderthal-looking big thick guy with a mullet--he looked something like Barcelona player Carles Puyol. who used to do crazy shit like getting drunk and crawling out on the ledge below the fifth-floor windows. He was kind of a jock; we used to play tackle football on weekend afternoons and Chadwell was a beast, damn near impossible to take down in the open field. He'd just run over you. He used to be pals with Mike the Marine, who was, of course, going into the Marines. Once it rained like hell for like a week and Chadwell and Mike the Marine climbed up on the concrete awning above the dorm's front door and jumped off into the flowerbed beside the entrance. It was like twenty feet high, but the mud in the flowerbed was like six feet thick, so they didn't get hurt. A couple of other idiots then tried it, and the whole thing ended up in the Great Hashinger Mud Fight of 1986. Another time those dopes went down to this pond across Iowa Street from the dorms, which is on university land, and caught a snapping turtle. They got it to bite onto the middle of this eight-foot-long stick and brought it back to the dorm. It was a monster, like two feet long, and it had hold of that stick in its super-strong beak and it was not going to let go, and each one of them was carrying one end of the stick with the damn thing hanging off it. They brought it back and everyone went down and got a look at it. Then somebody said, "Well, what are you going to do with it?", and they didn't know. I imagine a couple of the Chinese students would have known how to turn it into turtle soup, but they just finally took it back to the pond and tossed it back in. Chadwell had a very impressive collection of soft-core porno mags, and he used to practice drawing and painting the chicks; he was an art major, but his tastes in subject matter ran toward what a girlfriend of mine once labeled "heavy-metal bimboes from Mars".
Chadwell says that Jean has a big butt and fat ankles
Chadwell says that Jean eats too many desserts at the Golden Corral
Cheesecake, pie and fudge, fudge, fudge.
But, Jean is beautiful, no matter what Chadwell says.
Chadwell's words can't bring Jean down. Oh no.
Jean is beautiful in each and every way.
So, Chadwell, don't you bring Jean down today.
Chadwell says that Jean drinks too much beer
and hits the bacon and gravy buffet too often.
Chadwell says that Jean has hag hair
and a big mouth. She asks too many questions
But Jean is beautiful no matter what Chadwell says.
Chadwell's words can't bring Jean down. Oh no.
Jean is beautiful in each and every way.
So, Chadwell, don't you bring Jean down today.
I am just guessing that "Jean" is a friend of ours who lives out in Oakland, and that "Chadwell" is a composite character of me and this woman's loser boyfriend, who is also a friend of ours. The Jedman got the name "Chadwell" from his roommate the first year at the dormitory. As Jed said, "Chadwell has a loud stereo. It's not a good stereo, but it's a loud stereo". John Chadwell was a Neanderthal-looking big thick guy with a mullet--he looked something like Barcelona player Carles Puyol. who used to do crazy shit like getting drunk and crawling out on the ledge below the fifth-floor windows. He was kind of a jock; we used to play tackle football on weekend afternoons and Chadwell was a beast, damn near impossible to take down in the open field. He'd just run over you. He used to be pals with Mike the Marine, who was, of course, going into the Marines. Once it rained like hell for like a week and Chadwell and Mike the Marine climbed up on the concrete awning above the dorm's front door and jumped off into the flowerbed beside the entrance. It was like twenty feet high, but the mud in the flowerbed was like six feet thick, so they didn't get hurt. A couple of other idiots then tried it, and the whole thing ended up in the Great Hashinger Mud Fight of 1986. Another time those dopes went down to this pond across Iowa Street from the dorms, which is on university land, and caught a snapping turtle. They got it to bite onto the middle of this eight-foot-long stick and brought it back to the dorm. It was a monster, like two feet long, and it had hold of that stick in its super-strong beak and it was not going to let go, and each one of them was carrying one end of the stick with the damn thing hanging off it. They brought it back and everyone went down and got a look at it. Then somebody said, "Well, what are you going to do with it?", and they didn't know. I imagine a couple of the Chinese students would have known how to turn it into turtle soup, but they just finally took it back to the pond and tossed it back in. Chadwell had a very impressive collection of soft-core porno mags, and he used to practice drawing and painting the chicks; he was an art major, but his tastes in subject matter ran toward what a girlfriend of mine once labeled "heavy-metal bimboes from Mars".
Here's Luis Racionero in yesterday's La Vanguardia. The piece is titled "American culture". These are just a few excerpts rather than a full translation, since it's a long article.
...Eurocentric intellectuals despise what they know nothing of*, egged on by the persistent anti-American campaign over Bush's wars, and also the inferiority complex of the Europeans themselves...My working hypothesis is that during the 20th century, the United States developed a culture--that is, art, literature, science, standard of living, rule of law--that, during the century, eclipsed and replaced the European in world hegemony...In the 20th century's own art form, film, the hegemony of the United States is total. Regarding science, it is enough to look down the list of Nobel Prize winners, universities, and scientific journals...
At the end of the 20th century, the heritage of all the European brains recruited by the United States--after 1945, with high salaries and good laboratories--had created cultural conditions considerably above the already high European level. Given these objective conditions, does it make sense that the Europeans--badly advised by some of their intellectuals, especially French ones--should scorn American culture and accuse it of cultural imperialism?...Why not adimt that, like the European grapevines transported to California and then returned to France after the deadly phylloxera**, European culture has been transplanted to the United States, from which it can return, brought back by those who bother to study in its universities and inquire without prejudices, openly, into that culture which has been that of the 20th century?
Notes: * is a well-known quotation from the early 20th century by the poet Antonio Machado, of the "Generation of 1898", a group of authors who lamented the decline of Spanish culture during the decadent 1800s and by their work did a great deal to revitalize it. Here's the complete couplet:
Castilla miserable,
ayer dominadora,
envuelta en sus andrajos
desprecia cuanto ignora.
(Poor Castile,
yesterday overlord,
wrapped in its rags
scorns what it ignores.)
**Phylloxera was a plant disease that attacked and destroyed all European grapevines in the late 1800s, with a lot of serious social consequences--it caused a mass emigration from the Catalan countryside into Barcelona and other industrial cities in search of work. The old dead grapevines were replaced by California ones of original European stock that had been transported over and mixed with the genes of native American grapevines, making them immune to phylloxera. To my knowledge 100% of grapevines in the world today originally come from these California hybrids.
...Eurocentric intellectuals despise what they know nothing of*, egged on by the persistent anti-American campaign over Bush's wars, and also the inferiority complex of the Europeans themselves...My working hypothesis is that during the 20th century, the United States developed a culture--that is, art, literature, science, standard of living, rule of law--that, during the century, eclipsed and replaced the European in world hegemony...In the 20th century's own art form, film, the hegemony of the United States is total. Regarding science, it is enough to look down the list of Nobel Prize winners, universities, and scientific journals...
At the end of the 20th century, the heritage of all the European brains recruited by the United States--after 1945, with high salaries and good laboratories--had created cultural conditions considerably above the already high European level. Given these objective conditions, does it make sense that the Europeans--badly advised by some of their intellectuals, especially French ones--should scorn American culture and accuse it of cultural imperialism?...Why not adimt that, like the European grapevines transported to California and then returned to France after the deadly phylloxera**, European culture has been transplanted to the United States, from which it can return, brought back by those who bother to study in its universities and inquire without prejudices, openly, into that culture which has been that of the 20th century?
Notes: * is a well-known quotation from the early 20th century by the poet Antonio Machado, of the "Generation of 1898", a group of authors who lamented the decline of Spanish culture during the decadent 1800s and by their work did a great deal to revitalize it. Here's the complete couplet:
Castilla miserable,
ayer dominadora,
envuelta en sus andrajos
desprecia cuanto ignora.
(Poor Castile,
yesterday overlord,
wrapped in its rags
scorns what it ignores.)
**Phylloxera was a plant disease that attacked and destroyed all European grapevines in the late 1800s, with a lot of serious social consequences--it caused a mass emigration from the Catalan countryside into Barcelona and other industrial cities in search of work. The old dead grapevines were replaced by California ones of original European stock that had been transported over and mixed with the genes of native American grapevines, making them immune to phylloxera. To my knowledge 100% of grapevines in the world today originally come from these California hybrids.
James Taranto links to this Australian Broadcasting Corp. report:
The Iraqi police have investigated a case in the village of al-Mudhariya, which is just south of Baghdad. The villagers there say that before the election insurgents came and warned them that if they voted in last weekend's election, they would pay.
Now the people of this mixed village of Sunni and Shia Muslims, they ignored the threat and they did turn out to vote.
We understand that last night the insurgents came back to punish the people of al-Mudhariya, but instead of metering [sic] out that punishment the villagers fought back and they killed five of the insurgents and wounded eight. They then burnt the insurgents' car. So the people of that village have certainly had enough of the insurgents.
Sounds like these people are ready to fight for freedom.
The Iraqi police have investigated a case in the village of al-Mudhariya, which is just south of Baghdad. The villagers there say that before the election insurgents came and warned them that if they voted in last weekend's election, they would pay.
Now the people of this mixed village of Sunni and Shia Muslims, they ignored the threat and they did turn out to vote.
We understand that last night the insurgents came back to punish the people of al-Mudhariya, but instead of metering [sic] out that punishment the villagers fought back and they killed five of the insurgents and wounded eight. They then burnt the insurgents' car. So the people of that village have certainly had enough of the insurgents.
Sounds like these people are ready to fight for freedom.
My only comments about Bush's State of the Union address are that, first, I don't generally put a lot of stock in speeches, but, second, Bush is spending an awful lot of political capital on this democracy and freedom stuff, and he sure keeps talking about it a lot, so he just might mean what he says.
The pro-freedom forces have certainly won their share of victories lately. There's Bush's reelection and John Howard's reelection and Tony Blair's holding firm. There are the elections in Afghanistan and Iraq and Palestine. Abu Mazen is actually going to meet with Sharon at Sharm el Sheikh, and Mubarak and the King of Jordan and Condi Rice are going to be there and some kind of deal is going to get cut. There's the fact that dozens of Third World nations, from the world's brightest hope, India, to the Philippines to Thailand to Nigeria to Brazil to South Africa, are improving despite all their troubles. And Mexico. If you want to see a country that's gone from a hellhole to a functioning nation, take one look at the revolution south of the border that NAFTA has created.
The next challenge for us is the election in the Basque Country. Vote PP. If you can't stand to vote PP, vote PSOE. But go out and vote and we'll beat them.
The pro-freedom forces have certainly won their share of victories lately. There's Bush's reelection and John Howard's reelection and Tony Blair's holding firm. There are the elections in Afghanistan and Iraq and Palestine. Abu Mazen is actually going to meet with Sharon at Sharm el Sheikh, and Mubarak and the King of Jordan and Condi Rice are going to be there and some kind of deal is going to get cut. There's the fact that dozens of Third World nations, from the world's brightest hope, India, to the Philippines to Thailand to Nigeria to Brazil to South Africa, are improving despite all their troubles. And Mexico. If you want to see a country that's gone from a hellhole to a functioning nation, take one look at the revolution south of the border that NAFTA has created.
The next challenge for us is the election in the Basque Country. Vote PP. If you can't stand to vote PP, vote PSOE. But go out and vote and we'll beat them.
Here's a letter to the editor from today's El Periódico signed Aladdin Maruf Alwali of Barcelona.
The elections in Iraq have shown what the people wants in its future: democracy and freedom; all of us united in civilized elections in order to build the new Iraq. The poor perspecitve offered by the media of communication about Iraqi affairs has also been demonstrated. The few of us Iraqis who live here have rarely heard or read anyone who understands the legitimate hopes of the people to put an end to dictatorship and terror. For a long time they have talked about a civil war--which we have not seen, nor will we see--, they talk about the "Iraqi resistance as if it were the French against the Nazis, and not as they are, the ex-executioners of the people supported by foreign extremists. And, also, now they talk about the Sunnis, as if they did not know they (the Sunnis) had also suffered from the dictatorship. I hope that free people will help enslaved peoples. If they cannot support us materially, at least they can encourage us. We will never forget the help that the free peoples have offered us, especially the Americans and the British.
Mr. Alwali, that was very eloquent. About all I can do from here is send you, and the people of Iraq, all my best wishes. Together we will change things.
The elections in Iraq have shown what the people wants in its future: democracy and freedom; all of us united in civilized elections in order to build the new Iraq. The poor perspecitve offered by the media of communication about Iraqi affairs has also been demonstrated. The few of us Iraqis who live here have rarely heard or read anyone who understands the legitimate hopes of the people to put an end to dictatorship and terror. For a long time they have talked about a civil war--which we have not seen, nor will we see--, they talk about the "Iraqi resistance as if it were the French against the Nazis, and not as they are, the ex-executioners of the people supported by foreign extremists. And, also, now they talk about the Sunnis, as if they did not know they (the Sunnis) had also suffered from the dictatorship. I hope that free people will help enslaved peoples. If they cannot support us materially, at least they can encourage us. We will never forget the help that the free peoples have offered us, especially the Americans and the British.
Mr. Alwali, that was very eloquent. About all I can do from here is send you, and the people of Iraq, all my best wishes. Together we will change things.
Friday, February 04, 2005
IBERIAN NOTES DENOUNCES A SPAINIAC or From now on you goddamn Cataloonies can't call me a Spanish nationalist any more
Here's a letter to the editor from today's La Vanguardia.
Don't break up Spain
Spain is a nation that is formed by a people, the Spaniards, which grants itself, in virtue of its own sovereignty, a state.
We defend our positions through our representatives in the Congress of Deputies or through citizens' platforms, all of them registered within the legal bounds of the Constitution and of democracy which all of us Spaniards have granted ourselves, independently of our geographical origin. Spain is a historical, legal, political, and cultural reality which we are proud to belong to, despite the problems that today beset our nation.
Attempting to break up such a reality based on illegal and biased proposals does not at all contribute to the peaceful, plural, and progressive coexistence that the great majority of we Spanish people work for every day.
I'll bet I can completely change the meaning of this letter to the editor in fewer than 100 keystrokes. My changes are in capital letters.
Don't OPPRESS CATALONIA
CATALONIA is a nation that is formed by a people, the CATALANS, which SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO grant itself, in virtue of its own sovereignty, a state.
We defend our positions through our representatives in the PARLAMENT DE CATALUNYA or through citizens' platforms, all of them registered within the legal bounds of the Constitution and of democracy which all of us CATALANS have granted ourselves, independently of our geographical origin. CATALONIA is a historical, legal, political, and cultural reality which we are proud to belong to, despite the problems that today beset our nation.
Attempting to break up such a reality based on illegal and biased proposals does not at all contribute to the peaceful, plural, and progressive coexistence that the great majority of we CATALAN people work for every day.
I think that's fewer than 100 characters changed. But it's the same rhetoric.
Don't break up Spain
Spain is a nation that is formed by a people, the Spaniards, which grants itself, in virtue of its own sovereignty, a state.
We defend our positions through our representatives in the Congress of Deputies or through citizens' platforms, all of them registered within the legal bounds of the Constitution and of democracy which all of us Spaniards have granted ourselves, independently of our geographical origin. Spain is a historical, legal, political, and cultural reality which we are proud to belong to, despite the problems that today beset our nation.
Attempting to break up such a reality based on illegal and biased proposals does not at all contribute to the peaceful, plural, and progressive coexistence that the great majority of we Spanish people work for every day.
I'll bet I can completely change the meaning of this letter to the editor in fewer than 100 keystrokes. My changes are in capital letters.
Don't OPPRESS CATALONIA
CATALONIA is a nation that is formed by a people, the CATALANS, which SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO grant itself, in virtue of its own sovereignty, a state.
We defend our positions through our representatives in the PARLAMENT DE CATALUNYA or through citizens' platforms, all of them registered within the legal bounds of the Constitution and of democracy which all of us CATALANS have granted ourselves, independently of our geographical origin. CATALONIA is a historical, legal, political, and cultural reality which we are proud to belong to, despite the problems that today beset our nation.
Attempting to break up such a reality based on illegal and biased proposals does not at all contribute to the peaceful, plural, and progressive coexistence that the great majority of we CATALAN people work for every day.
I think that's fewer than 100 characters changed. But it's the same rhetoric.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
The big news from over here is that Basque Country prime minister Juan José Ibarretxe of the PNV has called regional elections for April 17, as he had said he would do. This announcement comes right on the heels of the nationally televised debate over the "Ibarretxe plan" that was held in the Spanish Parliament in Madrid. Everybody talked a lot and then, of course, the Socialists and the PP voted the plan down massively. For more information, enter "plan Ibarretxe" or suchlike in the Search box above, because we've already covered this in great detail.
Here's my guess. Ibarretxe is figuring that, on the basis of his performance before Parliament and the sheer nerve of his openly defiant attitude, his party will do well in the upcoming elections. If he can get reelected, he'll have a much stronger platform on which to base taking further steps in his plan. If he somehow pulls off a big win, which I don't think is likely, so much the better.
In most of Spain regional elections are not taken particularly seriously by many people, which I think is goddamn stupid of them, but that's just me. Turnout for a regional election is always lower than for a general, and especially in Catalonia and the Basque Country. In Catalonia, the Catalan nationalist parties do much better in the regionals because all their voters think Catalan elections are important, while only some of the non-Catalanista voters do. The same is true of Basque nationalists up there. So what you're going to have on April 17 is a motivated heavy turnout of Basque nationalist voters, for sure. Even the ETA supporters, many of whom usually boycott elections, are going to turn out for this one.
What the opposition, the PP and the Socialists, needs to do is take this one seriously and get out the vote. They need the turnout for this election that they normally get only in a general election, and it would be better if they can beat even that. IF they can get out their supporters who normally probably wouldn't vote they should be able to hurt Ibarretxe, but I don't know if they can stop him from winning re-election or not.
My battle plan, for the PP, is to copy the Republicans in the States, based on the supposition that the Republicans in the States are probably the smartest political operators in the world. What the Republicans would do is first look at what you got right now. You got three political parties up there, the PP, the Socialists, and the Communists, against the Retch Plan. Problem: the PP and Socialists don't like or trust one another, and communication between the two is lousy. Meanwhile, you got two political parties, the PNV and pro-terrorist Herri Batasuna, in favor of it. Screw them, they're the enemy.
What you have to do if you're the PP is think about what the Socialists are going to do. They're probably going to go all Zap-happy and talk about dialogue and shit and all the people who always vote Socialist, like the state bureaucrats and public school teachers and progressive feminists and such, will come out and vote for them. They're going to be the good cop. So you be the bad cop. The most important thing, remember, is not beating the Socialists, but beating Retch and the boys.
(If anything, it would actually help your cause if you could manage to Michael Mooreishly piss off Socialist voters enough to turn out huge to vote against you because they hate you even more than the Retch plan. So you should send your biggest right-wing Spanish nationalists up there, like Jiménez Losantos and Manuel Fraga and El Fary, just to irritate the Socialists.)
That means you try to turn this into a referendum on terrorism. Play as dirty as you can. Constantly wave the bloody shirt of ETA. Tar the slightly more moderate but still racist and near-fascist PNV with the open murderous fascism of ETA, because the two are comrades on this issue. And bring out the anti-nationalist vote. The nationalist vote is closed off to you anyway; there's no reason for you to try to attract them, they wouldn't vote for you if you gave them each a hundred bucks. (Ten thousand, I'm not so sure. That might be approaching some of their prices.) So talk a whole lot about Spain and how you can be a proud Basque and a good Spaniard at the same time just like Ignacio de Loyola or whoever. Don't worry about the lefties and the peaceniks; the SocioCommunists will get those people. Don't worry about pushing up enemy voter turnout, all the enemy voters are going to turn out no matter what. Go hardcore anti-terrorist and Spanish nationalist, and we'll win this one.
Mr. Rajoy, that took me about an hour to think up. My bill is in the mail.
Here's my guess. Ibarretxe is figuring that, on the basis of his performance before Parliament and the sheer nerve of his openly defiant attitude, his party will do well in the upcoming elections. If he can get reelected, he'll have a much stronger platform on which to base taking further steps in his plan. If he somehow pulls off a big win, which I don't think is likely, so much the better.
In most of Spain regional elections are not taken particularly seriously by many people, which I think is goddamn stupid of them, but that's just me. Turnout for a regional election is always lower than for a general, and especially in Catalonia and the Basque Country. In Catalonia, the Catalan nationalist parties do much better in the regionals because all their voters think Catalan elections are important, while only some of the non-Catalanista voters do. The same is true of Basque nationalists up there. So what you're going to have on April 17 is a motivated heavy turnout of Basque nationalist voters, for sure. Even the ETA supporters, many of whom usually boycott elections, are going to turn out for this one.
What the opposition, the PP and the Socialists, needs to do is take this one seriously and get out the vote. They need the turnout for this election that they normally get only in a general election, and it would be better if they can beat even that. IF they can get out their supporters who normally probably wouldn't vote they should be able to hurt Ibarretxe, but I don't know if they can stop him from winning re-election or not.
My battle plan, for the PP, is to copy the Republicans in the States, based on the supposition that the Republicans in the States are probably the smartest political operators in the world. What the Republicans would do is first look at what you got right now. You got three political parties up there, the PP, the Socialists, and the Communists, against the Retch Plan. Problem: the PP and Socialists don't like or trust one another, and communication between the two is lousy. Meanwhile, you got two political parties, the PNV and pro-terrorist Herri Batasuna, in favor of it. Screw them, they're the enemy.
What you have to do if you're the PP is think about what the Socialists are going to do. They're probably going to go all Zap-happy and talk about dialogue and shit and all the people who always vote Socialist, like the state bureaucrats and public school teachers and progressive feminists and such, will come out and vote for them. They're going to be the good cop. So you be the bad cop. The most important thing, remember, is not beating the Socialists, but beating Retch and the boys.
(If anything, it would actually help your cause if you could manage to Michael Mooreishly piss off Socialist voters enough to turn out huge to vote against you because they hate you even more than the Retch plan. So you should send your biggest right-wing Spanish nationalists up there, like Jiménez Losantos and Manuel Fraga and El Fary, just to irritate the Socialists.)
That means you try to turn this into a referendum on terrorism. Play as dirty as you can. Constantly wave the bloody shirt of ETA. Tar the slightly more moderate but still racist and near-fascist PNV with the open murderous fascism of ETA, because the two are comrades on this issue. And bring out the anti-nationalist vote. The nationalist vote is closed off to you anyway; there's no reason for you to try to attract them, they wouldn't vote for you if you gave them each a hundred bucks. (Ten thousand, I'm not so sure. That might be approaching some of their prices.) So talk a whole lot about Spain and how you can be a proud Basque and a good Spaniard at the same time just like Ignacio de Loyola or whoever. Don't worry about the lefties and the peaceniks; the SocioCommunists will get those people. Don't worry about pushing up enemy voter turnout, all the enemy voters are going to turn out no matter what. Go hardcore anti-terrorist and Spanish nationalist, and we'll win this one.
Mr. Rajoy, that took me about an hour to think up. My bill is in the mail.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
National Review's Jay Nordlinger is in Davos for the big hoo-haw wing-ding they're having; here's his take on our man Lula da Silva, who talks doctrinaire left and occasionally says something profoundly dumb, but has been behaving surprisingly sensibly regarding economic policy. I've always liked the theory that it took a guy who was seen by the Commies and by the American people as a real hardhead, Nixon, to get us out of Vietnam and open up relations with China. Some softy George McGovern type wouldn't be taken seriously by anyone, just as Jimmy Carter wasn't. Similarly, it took tough old Charles de Gaulle to get France out of Algeria. My guess is that it's going to be tough mean Ariel Sharon who makes the Palestinians an offer they can't refuse. Well, maybe a country like Brazil needs exactly the opposite approach. Lula is seen as a man of the people, and it may take a guy with his humanitarian lefty image to give Brazil's economy the "neoliberal" bitter medicine it needs more of.
Anyway, here's Nordlinger.
The president of Brazil, Lula da Silva, is back in Davos, two years after his debut, shortly after his election. He is wildly popular, but he's less popular at the World Social Forum — held in Porto Alegre — from which he has just come.
The World Social Forum, remember, is the convocation set up to counter Davos, because Davos is seen as capitalist — if only they knew! — whereas the Social Forum is "progressive."
Anyway, Lula used to be a darling of the WSF folks, but his name is muddier now, because he has adopted some liberal economic policies. (In America, we would call these conservative, if not right-wing. But then, our terms are eternally screwed up.)
Here in Davos, Lula speaks to a large audience in the Congress Center. He is introduced by our founder and host, Klaus Schwab, who calls him "a champion of fairness and equality." Referring to da Silva's progress over the last two years, Schwab declares, "Brazil is back."
It is da Silva's purpose to "reclaim the missing link between fairness and strategic development." Under his leadership, Brazil "achieved stability," and then economic growth. Two years ago, "I was greeted [in Davos] with a mixture of fear and uncertainty — what could a former lathe operator do in a country like Brazil?" That is not true. Lula was received rhapsodically — like Pele in a soccer stadium. I remember well.
The president touts two major reforms: of the tax code and of social security. And he boasts of beating back inflation, from 12.5 percent in 2002, to 7.2 percent last year.
In all, Lula comes off as a sober, responsible leader, not a rabble-rouser.
At one point, he says, "[We have done such and such,] and if God permits, [we will do such and such]." If God permits! If he said that in our country, he would be denounced as a dangerous "theocrat." The New York Times would have a fit.
Da Silva is trolling for investments, and he has picked a good pond, for Davos is stuffed with investors. Several times, he mentions that he will be available at the Belvedere Hotel "tomorrow morning," to discuss opportunities. This is almost touching.
After the president's formal remarks, Klaus Schwab has a question for him: Two years from now, what would he like to have happened? Brazil's admission to the U.N. Security Council? Lula answers, "If all Brazilians can have breakfast, lunch, and dinner, I can die in peace." Huge applause.
He also speaks of "lessons I learned in the labor movement." Can you think of another world leader who learned lessons in the labor movement? How about Ronald Reagan? I think he and Lula would have had much to talk about. Of course, Reagan learned how to stand up to Communists.
Da Silva stresses the need to "democratize the United Nations," meaning that we must put more countries on the Security Council: "We would not have had the Iraq war, a unilateral decision of a single country," with a better United Nations.
And the people of Iraq would still live in what one great man — Kanan Makiya — dubbed "the Republic of Fear."
Nordlinger's last point is of course correct. I dunno, though, I think Lula has to live up to his man-of-the-people image and throw the lefties a few bones every now and again, and an easy and cheap way to do so is by making some meaningless comments at Davos that get picked up by your local press. The fun part is that nobody's going to complain. The Left loves Lula's rhetoric and he can shut up the Right by saying, look, I'm takin' care of business here, and besides, are you against Social Justice? It's kind of like the way Bush has to throw the Christian Right a few bones every now and then and so he says something about Jesus. The Right loves the rhetoric and he can shut up the Left by saying, hey, look, it's not like we're teaching the kids the Ave Maria in math class, and besides, are you against Jesus? It's hard to go wrong in America if you talk about Jesus, just like it's hard to go wrong in international circles (especially Latin international circles) if you get in a dig at the damn Yankees.
Anyway, here's Nordlinger.
The president of Brazil, Lula da Silva, is back in Davos, two years after his debut, shortly after his election. He is wildly popular, but he's less popular at the World Social Forum — held in Porto Alegre — from which he has just come.
The World Social Forum, remember, is the convocation set up to counter Davos, because Davos is seen as capitalist — if only they knew! — whereas the Social Forum is "progressive."
Anyway, Lula used to be a darling of the WSF folks, but his name is muddier now, because he has adopted some liberal economic policies. (In America, we would call these conservative, if not right-wing. But then, our terms are eternally screwed up.)
Here in Davos, Lula speaks to a large audience in the Congress Center. He is introduced by our founder and host, Klaus Schwab, who calls him "a champion of fairness and equality." Referring to da Silva's progress over the last two years, Schwab declares, "Brazil is back."
It is da Silva's purpose to "reclaim the missing link between fairness and strategic development." Under his leadership, Brazil "achieved stability," and then economic growth. Two years ago, "I was greeted [in Davos] with a mixture of fear and uncertainty — what could a former lathe operator do in a country like Brazil?" That is not true. Lula was received rhapsodically — like Pele in a soccer stadium. I remember well.
The president touts two major reforms: of the tax code and of social security. And he boasts of beating back inflation, from 12.5 percent in 2002, to 7.2 percent last year.
In all, Lula comes off as a sober, responsible leader, not a rabble-rouser.
At one point, he says, "[We have done such and such,] and if God permits, [we will do such and such]." If God permits! If he said that in our country, he would be denounced as a dangerous "theocrat." The New York Times would have a fit.
Da Silva is trolling for investments, and he has picked a good pond, for Davos is stuffed with investors. Several times, he mentions that he will be available at the Belvedere Hotel "tomorrow morning," to discuss opportunities. This is almost touching.
After the president's formal remarks, Klaus Schwab has a question for him: Two years from now, what would he like to have happened? Brazil's admission to the U.N. Security Council? Lula answers, "If all Brazilians can have breakfast, lunch, and dinner, I can die in peace." Huge applause.
He also speaks of "lessons I learned in the labor movement." Can you think of another world leader who learned lessons in the labor movement? How about Ronald Reagan? I think he and Lula would have had much to talk about. Of course, Reagan learned how to stand up to Communists.
Da Silva stresses the need to "democratize the United Nations," meaning that we must put more countries on the Security Council: "We would not have had the Iraq war, a unilateral decision of a single country," with a better United Nations.
And the people of Iraq would still live in what one great man — Kanan Makiya — dubbed "the Republic of Fear."
Nordlinger's last point is of course correct. I dunno, though, I think Lula has to live up to his man-of-the-people image and throw the lefties a few bones every now and again, and an easy and cheap way to do so is by making some meaningless comments at Davos that get picked up by your local press. The fun part is that nobody's going to complain. The Left loves Lula's rhetoric and he can shut up the Right by saying, look, I'm takin' care of business here, and besides, are you against Social Justice? It's kind of like the way Bush has to throw the Christian Right a few bones every now and then and so he says something about Jesus. The Right loves the rhetoric and he can shut up the Left by saying, hey, look, it's not like we're teaching the kids the Ave Maria in math class, and besides, are you against Jesus? It's hard to go wrong in America if you talk about Jesus, just like it's hard to go wrong in international circles (especially Latin international circles) if you get in a dig at the damn Yankees.
Monday, January 31, 2005
I get to be on television again. Cuní's producer called me and asked if I can show up tomorrow for the TV3 morning debate program, so I will. We'll be on sometime after 10 AM. If you go to TV Catalunya's website you can at the very least listen to it live. After this one (it'll be the fourth time on that program) I'm going to positively demand a spot on "Gran Hermano VIP". I figure I've already had my fifteen minutes. Everybody else on that program has already had his fifteen minutes, too, so I'll fit right in.
La Vanguardia's headline today is "Iraqis vote en masse despite suicide attacks". The subheads are "High turnout on day with 40 dead caused by violence" and "Bush states elections are success of his policy and defeat of terrorism". I guess that's fair enough.
Tikrit Tommy Alcoverro has to admit that even the NGOs and international commissioners agreed that the elections were legitimate, that voter turnout was at least 60%, and that it was very high in the Kurdish and Shiite zones. He does lay heavy emphasis on low turnout in Sunni Arab areas, though I read somewhere that none of the 18 Iraqi provinces had a turnout under 50%. T.T. even says that Adnan Pachachi and Carlos Valenzuela from the UN agreed that turnout in Sunni areas had been higher than expected. He's still reporting from Beirut, though.
Alfredo Abián turns loose in the signed page two editorial.
...The future of Iraq is not predictable, but its conversion into an Islamic republic appears more and more likely, over which Iran will have a certain influence. The sarcasm of history is that this ends up happening by Bush's hand. But the great tragedy would be if neither yesterday's nor future elections served for anything, and if the Sunni minority became stuck in a civil war with the Shiites, to the great satisfaction of Bin Ladenism.
Why so negative, Alf? Seems to me the Iraqis done had themselves an election. Why does that mean they're going to become an Islamic republic, and why does that mean the Iranian government, which IS increasingly disliked by the Iranian people (if you don't believe me go read the Iranian bloggers) is going to influence the new democratic Iraq? Wouldn't you figure that, say, the Americans, Brits, and Aussies are most likely to be influential over the new government, for extremely logical reasons, since it was those countries that made it possible for the new democracy to exist?
La Vanguardia actually has a guy on the ground in Baghdad, Gervasio Sánchez (who I think is a free-lance), who says he actually went out and walked through Baghdad yesterday. He's got a photo of security guards patting down a voter outside the Nadamia elementary school in the Sadun neighborhood, which he says is mixed. He quotes a local voter as saying "We Iraqis are very strong and aren't afraid of bombs," and he comments, "That seems to be true." Someone else said, "We came to vote to put an end to our tragedy and bombs will not stop us." Another said, "I'm seventy years old and I've never seen a day like this," and his wife said, "I'm only afraid of God." A woman said, "I have ink all over my finger but I'm not afraid of the insurgents' reprisals." An 84-year-old woman, who came to the polling place pushed by her family in a street cart, said, "All my life I've had to vote for the dictator Saddam Hussein and now I can vote for my people...I'm voting so that the sun can come out in this beaten-down country." Sánchez calls her statement "pure poetry", and he's not being ironic. The guy in charge of the polling station said, "90% will come out to vote and if the other 10% are scared, we don't need them...actually, we'll be happy if half those registered vote." According to Sánchez, the polling station closed down at 5 PM local time. 1433 people had voted, nearly 50% of the census. Nice reporting work, though he does include his opinion a few times and this is a news piece. Fire some of those other dopes like Tikrit Tommy and give this guy a steady job. Hey, Trevor, out there at Barcelona Reporter, offer him a weekly column.
Meanwhile, everyone over here from Kofi Annan to the French government is at the very least pretending to be all thrilled, including the German government, the Vatican, Javier Solana, and the Zaptists.
Then on page 6 there's Beirut Bob Fisk. What a pathetic windbag. Does anyone pay attention to this guy except a bunch of ex-hippies now in government service and the less prestigious universities?
ETA left a backpack bomb outside a hotel in Dénia down near Alicante; it did minor damage and slightly wounded one person. They called it in first and the cops got the place evacuated; the guests were all British retired people.
It's winter food time in Catalonia, and that means xató and calçots. Xató is a salad that includes three obligatory ingredients, escarole, salt cod, and romesco sauce. It often contains olives, tuna, or onion, and it's often served with an omelet. Romesco sauce is spicy and reddish; it's usually got roast peppers and roast tomatoes in it, and may have chopped nuts, too. You're supposed to drink a bunch of cheap red Penedés wine, too. Calçots are these long leeklike onions that you roast over an open fire until they're almost burned on the outside; then you pull down on the bottom of the calçot and if you know how to do it, the skin slides right off and you then dip the roasted leeklike thing in romesco sauce. And you drink the cheap red Penedés wine. The sauce for calçots is usually nuttier and not as spicy as the sauce for xató, though they're pretty much the same thing. Calçots are generally thought to originate in Valls and xató is claimed by several coastal towns, including El Vendrell, Sitges, and Vilanova i el Geltrú. The calçot-xató heartland, between Barcelona and Tarragona, is also curiously the heartland of the castellers, those guys who build thirty-foot human towers, and not infrequently the whole thing comes crashing down.
My wife Remei is from the inland edge of this region, and her family does both calçots and xató at home when they're in season. That area of Catalonia where she's from, right on the edge between the Lérida and Tarragona zones of influence, is probably not coincidentally the part of Catalonia I like the best. I also think the castellers and the calçots are just about the coolest local customs, along with listening to habaneras and drinking queimada, eating roasted chestnuts and nut cakes (panellets) and drinking moscatel, eating turrón (like almond brittle) and drinking cava, and watching soccer and drinking beer. There's also that old standby, hanging around the local bar and trying to get in the dominoes game.
I just noticed that all my favorite local activities except the castellers involve drinking, and I'll bet some of the casteller guys have had a few shots off the porrón, too.
Dumb supposedly traditional Catalan activities: Sardanas. Boring and the bands hurt my ears. Parades of giants (these huge ancient papier-mache figures). Boring. Correfocs. Phony (a newly-invented alleged tradition) and dangerous, besides being noisy. Burning suspected Jews and heretics at the stake. No, hey, wait, that's actually pretty cool, at least if you were King Martí the Humanist. The populace generally approved of an occasional Jew-flambeéing and on occasion demonstrated great enthusiasm.
Tikrit Tommy Alcoverro has to admit that even the NGOs and international commissioners agreed that the elections were legitimate, that voter turnout was at least 60%, and that it was very high in the Kurdish and Shiite zones. He does lay heavy emphasis on low turnout in Sunni Arab areas, though I read somewhere that none of the 18 Iraqi provinces had a turnout under 50%. T.T. even says that Adnan Pachachi and Carlos Valenzuela from the UN agreed that turnout in Sunni areas had been higher than expected. He's still reporting from Beirut, though.
Alfredo Abián turns loose in the signed page two editorial.
...The future of Iraq is not predictable, but its conversion into an Islamic republic appears more and more likely, over which Iran will have a certain influence. The sarcasm of history is that this ends up happening by Bush's hand. But the great tragedy would be if neither yesterday's nor future elections served for anything, and if the Sunni minority became stuck in a civil war with the Shiites, to the great satisfaction of Bin Ladenism.
Why so negative, Alf? Seems to me the Iraqis done had themselves an election. Why does that mean they're going to become an Islamic republic, and why does that mean the Iranian government, which IS increasingly disliked by the Iranian people (if you don't believe me go read the Iranian bloggers) is going to influence the new democratic Iraq? Wouldn't you figure that, say, the Americans, Brits, and Aussies are most likely to be influential over the new government, for extremely logical reasons, since it was those countries that made it possible for the new democracy to exist?
La Vanguardia actually has a guy on the ground in Baghdad, Gervasio Sánchez (who I think is a free-lance), who says he actually went out and walked through Baghdad yesterday. He's got a photo of security guards patting down a voter outside the Nadamia elementary school in the Sadun neighborhood, which he says is mixed. He quotes a local voter as saying "We Iraqis are very strong and aren't afraid of bombs," and he comments, "That seems to be true." Someone else said, "We came to vote to put an end to our tragedy and bombs will not stop us." Another said, "I'm seventy years old and I've never seen a day like this," and his wife said, "I'm only afraid of God." A woman said, "I have ink all over my finger but I'm not afraid of the insurgents' reprisals." An 84-year-old woman, who came to the polling place pushed by her family in a street cart, said, "All my life I've had to vote for the dictator Saddam Hussein and now I can vote for my people...I'm voting so that the sun can come out in this beaten-down country." Sánchez calls her statement "pure poetry", and he's not being ironic. The guy in charge of the polling station said, "90% will come out to vote and if the other 10% are scared, we don't need them...actually, we'll be happy if half those registered vote." According to Sánchez, the polling station closed down at 5 PM local time. 1433 people had voted, nearly 50% of the census. Nice reporting work, though he does include his opinion a few times and this is a news piece. Fire some of those other dopes like Tikrit Tommy and give this guy a steady job. Hey, Trevor, out there at Barcelona Reporter, offer him a weekly column.
Meanwhile, everyone over here from Kofi Annan to the French government is at the very least pretending to be all thrilled, including the German government, the Vatican, Javier Solana, and the Zaptists.
Then on page 6 there's Beirut Bob Fisk. What a pathetic windbag. Does anyone pay attention to this guy except a bunch of ex-hippies now in government service and the less prestigious universities?
ETA left a backpack bomb outside a hotel in Dénia down near Alicante; it did minor damage and slightly wounded one person. They called it in first and the cops got the place evacuated; the guests were all British retired people.
It's winter food time in Catalonia, and that means xató and calçots. Xató is a salad that includes three obligatory ingredients, escarole, salt cod, and romesco sauce. It often contains olives, tuna, or onion, and it's often served with an omelet. Romesco sauce is spicy and reddish; it's usually got roast peppers and roast tomatoes in it, and may have chopped nuts, too. You're supposed to drink a bunch of cheap red Penedés wine, too. Calçots are these long leeklike onions that you roast over an open fire until they're almost burned on the outside; then you pull down on the bottom of the calçot and if you know how to do it, the skin slides right off and you then dip the roasted leeklike thing in romesco sauce. And you drink the cheap red Penedés wine. The sauce for calçots is usually nuttier and not as spicy as the sauce for xató, though they're pretty much the same thing. Calçots are generally thought to originate in Valls and xató is claimed by several coastal towns, including El Vendrell, Sitges, and Vilanova i el Geltrú. The calçot-xató heartland, between Barcelona and Tarragona, is also curiously the heartland of the castellers, those guys who build thirty-foot human towers, and not infrequently the whole thing comes crashing down.
My wife Remei is from the inland edge of this region, and her family does both calçots and xató at home when they're in season. That area of Catalonia where she's from, right on the edge between the Lérida and Tarragona zones of influence, is probably not coincidentally the part of Catalonia I like the best. I also think the castellers and the calçots are just about the coolest local customs, along with listening to habaneras and drinking queimada, eating roasted chestnuts and nut cakes (panellets) and drinking moscatel, eating turrón (like almond brittle) and drinking cava, and watching soccer and drinking beer. There's also that old standby, hanging around the local bar and trying to get in the dominoes game.
I just noticed that all my favorite local activities except the castellers involve drinking, and I'll bet some of the casteller guys have had a few shots off the porrón, too.
Dumb supposedly traditional Catalan activities: Sardanas. Boring and the bands hurt my ears. Parades of giants (these huge ancient papier-mache figures). Boring. Correfocs. Phony (a newly-invented alleged tradition) and dangerous, besides being noisy. Burning suspected Jews and heretics at the stake. No, hey, wait, that's actually pretty cool, at least if you were King Martí the Humanist. The populace generally approved of an occasional Jew-flambeéing and on occasion demonstrated great enthusiasm.
Sunday, January 30, 2005
Get this story from Televisió de Catalunya's website today.
World Social Forum calls two days of demonstrations against the American occupation of Iraq
The World Social Forum has called out to social movements around the world to demonstrate on March 19 and 20 against the American occupation of Iraq. This call was made from Porto Alegre, in Brazil, at the summit of the social movements, where for the last five days representatives from those movements from around the world have been meeting. The World Social Forum will close this Monday with a summary of this convention.
Emir Sadr, an intellectual from the movement against globalization, recalled the strength of the demonstrations of March 15 last year.
Pakistani Tariq Ali, one of the best-known contemporary Marxist ideologues, was also present at this fifth edition of the Porto Alegre Social Forum, and celebbrated the resistance that the Iraqi people is showing against the United States military occupation.
For five days dense ideological debates have been held in order to define how "another possible world" can be constructed, and tomorrow the organizers will sum up the convention.
What a bunch of dopes, starting with the idiot who filed this story and including the idiot who posted it on the TV3 website and all the other idiots who wasted a lot of time, money, and energy at the Porto Alegre wankfest. These dopes spend five days holding dense ideological debates about Marxist hydro-anal stimulation techniques when there is actually work to be done. Oh, sorry, the US Navy is busy doing that. And the Iraqi police and every Iraqi voter went out and did that today. And, despite all the bitching we do about the Catholic Church, they will be busy doing that too. Unlike the dopes in Porto Alegre.
World Social Forum calls two days of demonstrations against the American occupation of Iraq
The World Social Forum has called out to social movements around the world to demonstrate on March 19 and 20 against the American occupation of Iraq. This call was made from Porto Alegre, in Brazil, at the summit of the social movements, where for the last five days representatives from those movements from around the world have been meeting. The World Social Forum will close this Monday with a summary of this convention.
Emir Sadr, an intellectual from the movement against globalization, recalled the strength of the demonstrations of March 15 last year.
Pakistani Tariq Ali, one of the best-known contemporary Marxist ideologues, was also present at this fifth edition of the Porto Alegre Social Forum, and celebbrated the resistance that the Iraqi people is showing against the United States military occupation.
For five days dense ideological debates have been held in order to define how "another possible world" can be constructed, and tomorrow the organizers will sum up the convention.
What a bunch of dopes, starting with the idiot who filed this story and including the idiot who posted it on the TV3 website and all the other idiots who wasted a lot of time, money, and energy at the Porto Alegre wankfest. These dopes spend five days holding dense ideological debates about Marxist hydro-anal stimulation techniques when there is actually work to be done. Oh, sorry, the US Navy is busy doing that. And the Iraqi police and every Iraqi voter went out and did that today. And, despite all the bitching we do about the Catholic Church, they will be busy doing that too. Unlike the dopes in Porto Alegre.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
