nice quote

"I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book." - Groucho Marx (1890-1977)

stick to the rules...

...if you plan on studying in the US, be prepared to receive e-mails like this one.

"Dear Rudy,
It has come to my attention from RA ---- ---- that you were at a gathering of more than 20 people in UAP 401 on April 22, 2006. The Standards of Conduct that were violated were:

a. Any gathering in an individual student room where alcohol is present may not exceed a safe and manageable occupancy for that room. The University defines "safe and manageable occupancy" as no more than three (3) times the residential occupancy for that room (page 30, /Selected Policies Manual/).

18. Disorderly conduct (including disorderliness resulting from intoxication), unreasonable noise or behavior which results in material inconvenience, annoyance or alarm (page 15, /Selected Policies Manual/)

Since your interaction was cooperative and your involvement was minor, there is no need for a formal administrative hearing. This letter serves as your formal warning.

Rudy, I would like to remind you that need to be aware our policies in the Selected Policies Manual. Feel free to contact me at or 503.370.6721 if you have questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
----

--
---- ----
Eastside Area Coordinator
Willamette University
900 State Street
Salem, OR 97301
(503) 370- ---- "


yeah, whatever. hmm...of course, I take the warning seriously, so this is my reply:

"hi ----,

thanks for your e-mail. it is true, I was at the gathering and there was alcohol involved as well. I just want you to know that this gathering was somehow "relaxed" which means: people were listening to music, some (including me) were sipping beer. this was NOT a drinking competition or anything like that. I am older than 21 but I was aware that there were minors in the room. at that moment I did not think that I was doing anything wrong. I know about the rules though and I am not going to violate them again.

have a nice weekend!

rudy "

plus: freedom is my anti-gov. thank you.

(may 3rd, 2006: I decided to censor the names. not because someone told me to but because I think it´s polite.)

dealing with friedman (2) - thoughts on the welfare state

To Friedman the redistribution of income through the state is not desirable. It widens the gap between the poor and the rich – and that is the opposite of the original intention of the welfare state. Incompatible with ones freedom to pursuit happiness individually, a positive attitude towards governmental influence in favour of the hapless is to Friedman like believing in “dictatorship, benevolent and maybe majoritarian, but dictatorship none the less.”

Welfare measures such as public housing, minimum wage laws, farm price supports and social security have counter-productive effects. Friedman’s main concern is that the original needs for implementing those measures cannot be satisfied – but once the government takes control over the issue the borders blur and state intervention increases. One example is the need for restrictions on import once you start guaranteeing high prices for farm products and high wages for farmers. The vicious cycle then goes on with individuals being left with fewer choices, fewer companies, higher chances of monopolization and the like. It is simply that “one cannot be both an egalitarian, in this sense, and a liberal.”

Gerald Allen Cohen, author of “Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defense (1978, 2000)“ must get in rage every time he is confronted with Friedman. The existing inequalities he is commenting on have not much to do with Friedman’s version of a nation state that is built on the principles of equal opportunities and rights. Devoted to egalitarian political principles Cohen objects the “misuse” of the “concept of freedom” by libertarians and liberals. He is accusing them of having “highly anarchic imaginations” if they are advocating, and Cohen quotes Flew, “wholehearted political and economic liberalism, opposed to any social and legal constraints on individual freedom”. But this is not Friedman. “My freedom to move my fist must be limited by the proximity of your chin” can be read in his book. Friedman thinks that in order to reduce poverty a program much more effective than government welfare, a program that aims directly at poor people (not old, unemployed… etc), should be implemented, a program based on a negative income tax. Therefore households with higher income would have to pay more taxes, low income households would receive payments, financed by those taxes. People would receive cash, Friedman thinks that’s most effective to save personal freedom. So, there IS awareness for the problem and possible solutions are presented. Cohen’s assumption that liberalism automatically means to create a sphere where all individuals are literally free to do what they want is wrong. Friedman knows that and concentrates on finding the thin lines between acceptable interference by the state and abuse of power. And when Cohen points out that “a capitalist society with no welfare structure would endanger the very lives of those who…are unemployed”, Friedman would argue that the free individual is free to give money to the poor – and in a realm of existing civil liberties everybody is free to convince other people that they should do so. So, liberalism is not automatically opposed to a caring society even though this is a somehow naïve expectation. It would be perfectly possible to give shelter and food to all homeless people in the United States if the wealthy would share some of their funds. It does not happen. Do you need to abolish existing welfare measures to find that out?

But for Cohen, all of Friedman’s arguments rest on an unjust foundation anyway. Contradictive to natural rights, the allowance of “private ownership of means of existence” through the market is out of the question.

Both see the present system in urgent need of reform but the solutions they present point in completely different ways. Once again, it is the “primacy of the free market” versus the “abolition of private property”.

friends

for people who are not on facebook, here are some of my favourite pics - right after the jump.
continue

come on! you can´t study ALL the time...

...every now and then you HAVE to forget about your politics books and dress up as trash cans.

lee miles, reed renfrow and måns ramberg - the world is their playground.

dealing with friedman (1)

What do libertarians (or liberals in a Friedman kind of sense) have to say about social objections related to capitalism, such as racial discrimination or poverty? Milton Friedman deeply believes that a true free market would be able to cope with those objections – for they have their roots in state interference.

Seeing human beings as economic units without characteristics such as color of skin or religion, Friedman argues for the rules of the market to let inequalities disappear. State intervention in form of “pro-integration” or “right-to-work” programs implemented by orders from above do actually harm to minorities – and not just to them but to the whole population. The undermining of the main concern of the free market – the “freedom of individuals to enter into voluntary contracts with one another” (Friedman) – is in large parts not acceptable for Friedman. His normative approach is comprehensible, maybe even essential for his purposes. Friedman plots a perfect capitalist system created by people who understand and appreciate this system. He assumes vital participation, everyone seeing himself as an “economic rational choice actor”. So it is understandable that he assumes that the poor lower class family in a bad neighbourhood has access to (or is willing to access) the information needed in order to understand why privatized schools are better than nationalized ones and how they have to act to share in the advantages. Once people would share Friedman´s views, the “invisible hand” could take care of social and cultural issues as well.

Adam Przeworski cites Stiglitz saying: “Adam Smith´s invisible hand may be more like the Emperor´s new clothes: invisible because it is not there.”

And Przeworski also points out that the neo-liberal promotion of the free market is nothing but “a mixture of evidence, argument from first principles, self-interest, and wishful thinking”. Partly because a “complete set of markets is unfeasible” and “information is inevitably imperfect.” Again, Friedman´s perception reflects a normative rather then a descriptive point of view of the free market. Friedman would not disagree that the present system is far from being “perfect” but he calls for the state to beat a hasty retreat.

For Przeworski it is by no means clear that the reduction of state influence automatically leads to a situation that is more desirable. Even though he admits that there are problems of institutional design he would rather rearrange them than to shut them down. Adapted to the role of government in education it would mean that governmental institutions should not be released from coordinating funds just because the liberal point of view does not guarantee improvement. So if Friedman says that the liberalization of the education sector would elevate school standards because more competition leads to more choices and furthermore to a more just allocation of opportunities, Przeworski could jump in and say: Wait, there is evidence that the drawback of the state leads to unemployment, to a decline in the real income and to more people living below the poverty line. Besides that we know that “complete information” is not available so it is more likely to get a system where people, who today depend on governmental subsidy to be able to attend university, would be in no position to join any university. Furthermore it would not do any good to the reduction of social problems such as discrimination.

It is a struggle between two big schools of thought and both have their virtues. And even though neo-liberalism has its roots, among others, in Friedman, there is still a lot of potential when it comes to the implementation of his ideas.

Milton Friedman: "Capitalism and Freedom". The University of Chicago Press. 2002. (first published 1962).

Adam Przeworski: "The Neoliberal Fallacy" in Diamond and Plattner's "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy Revisited". The John Hopkins University Press. 1993.

alphabeat...wer beatet mehr?

if you have time...check it out: alphabeat. a radioshow I am doing with a bunch of friends from salzburg and vienna. it´s in german so you can actually improve your language skills. that´s pretty awesome, right?

george orwell sagt hallo

am 30 märz dieses jahres hat der niederländische konzern philips in den usa patent auf ein gerät angemeldet, welches zusehern das wechseln von fernsehsendern während der werbung unmöglich machen soll. auch bei aufgezeichneten sendungen kann werbung nur dann vorgespult werden, wenn eine bestimmte gebühr bezahlt wird. nun, solange niemand bei philips auf die idee kommt netzstecker, die beim versuch sie aus der steckdose zu entfernen einen tödlichen stromschlag absondern, zu patentieren gibt es ja noch möglichkeiten sich der werbung zu entziehen. ob konzerne die in diese richtung forschen unterstützung von konsumenten erhalten sollen (grüße an sony) muss jeder für sich selbst entscheiden. aufmerksamkeit ist aber auf jeden fall angebracht.

doing my taxes, part II

all-clear...I wish I were paying more attention to this whole "doing taxes thing". I did not have a 2005 income in the us, I started working too late. so they transfered my 2005 income to the january '06 paycheck. therefore they did not send me the form I was looking for yesterday. so there was no need for turning in anything by april 17th. BUT I have to turn in a form saying that I did not earn anything - by june 15th. but, responsible as I am, I already walked to the post office and sent the letter in question to the IRS in philly.

while I am struggling with all this, I am deeply into milton friedman´s "capitalism and freedom". he talks about taxes a lot and he basically does not like them either.

call me homer...

have you ever seen the simpsons episode where homer tries to finish doing his taxes at the very last second? that´s me right now! I have ´till midnight and I can´t find one of the forms that would be oh so necessary to get this done...

well, I assume they won´t send me to jail. but us government, if you are already trying to track me down and if you are reading this: I earned one hundred bucks while I was working for campus safety last december. send me an e-mail so we can exchange banking information.

I love blogs! they are really convenient for everyday life.

attention please! websites for the open minded (3)

today: www.talkleft.com, defining itself as an "online magazin with liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news".

it is all about checks and balances.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

oh, and for people who think that illegal immigrants in the US are really really bad and dangerous and what not, read this and think again. keep in mind though that this article is not addressing the ethical aspects of hiring illegal immigrants...the question of how to achieve a sustainable development of a domestic economy that is to some extent independent of exploitation and inequalities is a different one.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

the following link can also be found on johannorberg.net. once more, the topic is freedom of speech.

american apparel - a company on a mission

thanks to my buddy måns who made me pay attention to this. I am going to spend more time on this topic soon but for now I just want you to click on the link and read it.

"our government has let us down!" - an evening with joe wilson

now it takes some background information, one can start here for example, to enjoy what I call "the joe wilson show". needless to say, with all his (diplomatic) experience it is hard to find a speaker more eloquent than joe wilson. willamette students and salem townspeople had the pleasure to be witnesses of what it means to "live" freedom of speech.

"Did the Bush administration manipulate intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs to justify an invasion of Iraq?

Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

accusing the us-government of starting war in iraq under false pretenses, wilson´s article "what I didn´t find in africa" (first published by "the new york times" in july 2003) brought him into trouble. his wife´s identity as a cia-agent got revealed in an article by columnist robert novak. since this act of treason, "valerie plame" is a name well known in the united states. anyhow, the traitors have not been called to account for their felony yet. and just click on the novak link to get an idea of the variety of persons involved in this scandal.

for wilson, one thing is clear: the government wanted his wife´s identity to be revealed because of three main reasons: to change the subject towards something more advantageous for the government, pure revenge for not supporting the war in iraq and, most important, to make an example of him. the ordinary us-citizens should know that if they did the same to the government than joe wilson, then the government would do to the citizens what it did to joe wilson and his wife.

so wilson sees it as his mission to speak up against such injustice. "you must hold our government to account". the united states depends on the vigilance of the citizens for its success. in his eyes, the bush administration lied and twisted intelligence to get support for a war that should not have been fought under these circumstances.

it´s his word against the governments. and, as always, one has to be very cautious to take every word that´s said for granted. but joe wilson shows that public dispute is far from being dead in the states. and climbing onto a podium and expressing ones believes is by itself an act essential to every vital democracy.

(the picture shows joe wilson and is taken from "willamette week online")

oh, before I forget: today (friday) "maria full of grace" is shown in smith at 8pm. great movie, so watch it!

ein beispiel warum es sinn macht...

...leute nicht nach ihrem äußeren erscheinungsbild zu beurteilen. würde man das in diesem fall tun, "good night and good luck" wäre wohl der geeignetste kommentar zur neuen führung des ögb. und wie joe wilson, ehemaliger us-botschafter in niger, gestern abend so treffend gesagt hat: "diese botschaft ist für die studentinnen: engagiert euch! denn wenn überaltete, übergewichtige personen, die noch dazu vom anderen geschlecht sind, eure interessen nicht entsprechend vertreten - wundert euch nicht."

can we make "globalization" more just?

this is the slightly adaptet version of a paper I wrote a couple of months ago. I think it provides some important points of discussion. of course, as always, comments are more than welcome.

„If the citizens don’t have any other options to react, then you have to take over responsibility and go beyond legality. Conscience is more important then obedience before the law.” José Bové

This blog entry will take focus on the unbalanced aspects of globalization and how its critics can help to make globalization more just by restructuring their resistance away from an unclear and somewhat confusing protest towards an organized and determined way of calling attention to the disadvantages of today’s globalization.

The term “globalization” is elusive and at the same time the initial point of various controversies. The “globe” in globalization implies that we are facing a mundane development. It does not suppose that there actually IS a “world system” but it does suppose that there is the possibility that this movement leads to a “world state” with its own “world culture”. However, first and foremost one thinks of globalization as the globalization of markets – and with it, the globalization of cultural and social values and behaviour patterns is bound to occur. The creations of international markets, legal systems, actors (or “players”), norms and standards have one thing in common: they exceed national borders. Anthony Giddens defines globalization as an increase of interdependences all over the world.

“Globalization can thus be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.” (Giddens in Held and McGrew 2004, 60)

Furthermore Giddens argues that even though local happenings may have had impact on other parts of the world in earlier times, today’s interdependences have a whole new quality. Even though globalization is seen as the successor of ethnocentrism, it seems to be the western, industrialized world that influences its development the most. Terms like “Westernization” or “McDonaldization” are sometimes used as synonyms for globalization (see Jan Art Scholte in Held and McGrew 2004, 85). Indeed, as Joseph Nye points out, the three main hubs of globalization are the USA, Europe and Japan. Those regions (with US hegemony) build the centre of economic, military, social and environmental trends (Joseph S. Nye Jr. in Held and Mc Grew 2004, 112-15). Presumably, China may be the nation to break up this triumvirate.

Additionally, the discussions about globalization are discussions about a new world order; a world order that remains very confusing. Old national regulations seem to be out-dated and inefficient to face increasing deterritorialization (think of the resettlements of corporations and/or unemployment) - this leads to the demand of a new system of ordering.

I am arguing that the political neo-liberal right of wealthy western industrialized countries is shaping this new system of ordering by influencing the way globalization goes - and it does so with hardly any consideration towards the weak. An African Proverb says that when two elephants are fighting, it is the grass that suffers. As the story goes, if two elephants are making love, it is also the grass that gets trampled .

Examples that verify this strong picture could be trade liberalization policies, which are pushed through on behalf of developing countries. One can blame the establishment of different institutions after WWII (like the GATT/WTO, the IMF, the World Bank) for this course of action. More evidence is provided when, like in the early 1980´s, politicians like Britain’s Margaret Thatcher proclaim that there is no alternative to neo-liberal policies. This narrow-minded sight might fall back on its creators – when side effects of globalization (like the destruction of the environment or the increasing hatred of those who are neglected) will become more and more obvious. Of course, the term “neo-liberal” does not automatically mean “unequal”. Yet, history shows that those who carry neo-liberal policies into effect could need some boost when it comes to the proper treatment of unprivileged.

The French refer to people who are critical towards globalization as “altermondialistes”. This term includes both the earth and the alternative. Therefore I consider it more appropriate than the term “anti-globalist” since this is a somewhat radical, utopian conception for a movement that is partly deeply rooted in the capitalist system of western industrialized countries. “Another world is possible” is a common alter-globalist slogan, among others used at the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Nowadays the alter-globalization movement experiences presentable reception. A vast number of non-profit organizations have called to speak up against globalization – sometimes without giving answers to what should be “fought” exactly and why. The great diversity within the alter-globalization movement is basically positive but it leads to stagnant decision-making and negotiation processes. It seems like everybody walks under the umbrella of “alter-globalization” – but occasionally it’s a silly walk, back and forth, left and right. It’s difficult enough not to fall over one’s own accord although it would be so important to gain pace in order to improve the globalized world according to alter-globalist´s ideals. And gaining pace is what the “enemy” does. Tight organization and treaties that tie it’s signers to certain conditions enable institutions like the WTO to move on while it’s opponents have a hard time to channel their disfavour to constructive paths.
An apposite example is the “Battle of Seattle”, the huge demonstration of anti-globalists, alter-globalists and anarchists against the WTO summit in the Washington state metropolis. Although “[m]ost commentators agree that both the WTO and Washington state officials severely underestimated both the quantitative strength and organizational skill of the protesters” (Steger, 2005. 129), the violent undertone of the demonstrations may circumvent legitimization of serious negotiations for the future. Brute strength of some of its followers is one of the problems alter-globalists have to deal with. Another one is the in various cases anti Semitic undertone of leftist alter-globalists and the in many cases sheer nationalistic and racist way of campaigning on the right. “White supremacist leader Louis Beam praised the demonstrators, emphasizing that the >police state goons< st="on">Seattle were paid by the international capital to protect >the slimy corporate interests of free trade at the expense of free people.>” (Steger, 2005. 129). Basically there is nothing wrong with trying to combine different points of view. But first, racism is not just “a different point of view” it is a violation of human rights. Second, chances are that inconsistencies like this are leading to undifferentiated mass media coverage and to a diffuse disaffection of neutral spectators. This subverts alter-globalists legitimization to take over a main role in the debate of changing globalization.

There is a need for a powerful and efficient organization that is able to accumulate and channel the concerns of alter-globalists so they can actually find their way to the agenda setters.

How can such an organization look like?

It might be surprising that I recommend an institution that has a structure similar to that of the WTO. The World Trade Organization is a member driven organization. To be allowed to apply, one has to be a nation state. According to its website, the WTO now has 149 members. As a matter of fact, the number of alter-globalist groups is much higher than that and it is clear that there has to be a restriction to a certain number of members in order to remain powerful. A possible solution for this problem may be the possibility for each state to send one delegation to the yet fictitious institution. This delegation is not linked to the government and the number of delegates is related to the population. Similar mechanisms for a population-based participation are seen at the European Parliament for example. The advantages of this allocation-method are indicatory: First it is set against existing power structures (for example the economic domination of western industrialized countries) and therefore helps aggrieved countries with large populations to increase their participation in the alter-globalist process. From experience, many of those countries are to be found both on the Latin American and on the African continent. Second, taking the number of citizens as an indicator is an incorruptible and comprehensible approach. Furthermore, each delegation should have various committees to be able to cope with a heavy workload. Three problems are yet unsolved: The composition of each delegation (which organizations and groups are allowed to send advocates), its performance requirements (which policies should be pursued once the delegation is built-up) and the financing.

The selection procedure for the delegates may differ from state to state and considering the great diversity that exists, it is probably a problematic procedure. Since by today the national movements are still the ones most influential, it is possible that the different organizations benefit from structures that are already built on the national level. In the early stage it is predictable that there are a notable number of organizations not included in the process. The election-methods can be chosen by each state and the disadvantage of not being able to participate in the first place does not mean that these organizations or individuals are not allowed to bring their concerns and ideas into the debate. Once the delegation is arranged it is sent to the permanent Alter Globalists Organization’s (AGO) headquarters, based in any city. There, the real process of policy making starts. At first, delegations have to sign a treaty that makes them stick to the rules. It might be a crucial point for alter-globalists to finally step into this bureaucratic system. As in the WTO, those summits can take place every two years and different fields of activity are to be offered. The delegations split up and each delegate chooses the field he thinks he is able to represent the most (for example environmental concerns, concerns about working conditions [“sweatshops”], etc.) The number of committees might vary from summit to summit and each committee has to agree on just one agenda to be followed for each summit. Thinking of the vast number of possible topics it is important to set priorities. I suggest that for the topic’s electoral process simple majority should be used. If the topic is chosen it is the delegate’s duty to address the main problems and to agree on a policy that could solve those problems. With these policies, delegates return to their home alter-globalist organizations, requiring them to assemble those policies.

According to this theory it is possible to put pressure on the government without weakening oneself because of contrary lines of action. Being able to present a clear policy that needs to be followed makes it more convenient to convince citizens of the ideas – and once support increases it will be impossible for governments and corporations to ignore this development. Furthermore the significance of influence is likely to expand from the regional and national level to the continental and even international level. The smaller the group and the lower the level, the more radical seems to be the protest. José Bové and his French organization “Confederation Paysanne” show, that protest with extraordinary means is important up to a certain point. Then, communication of interests has to reach a diplomatic quality that makes it possible to negotiate.

To finance this institution, fundraising will be inevitable. As the example of Greenpeace shows, it is possible to run a large apparatus. Pure idealists might even argue that once there is a tax on all trade of currency (“Tobin tax”; see Robert E. Goodin, 2003) it would be appropriate to spend some of this money on an Alter Globalist Organization.

It is going to be a long and rocky road until an organization like the one described above really is able to exist and there might lurk some unforeseeable problems. And, gatherings and discussion-forums like the World Social Forum are not going to be replaced; they have their significance in the alter-globalist movement. However, it is important to start building the institutional framework of an Alter Globalist Organization for it may help to avert stagnation and it may help to bring well structured concepts of how the globalized world should look like into play.

the graphic shows the wto-structures

books used: held and mcgrew; steger; goodin. if you are interested in the detailed bibliography, feel free to contact me.

attention please! websites for the open minded (2)

for people who are interested in latin american and african politics, I highly recommend the newsletter of the "council on hemispheric affairs" (COHA). the coha is a non-governmental, non-profit organization based in washington, d.c. and provides well researched articles, sent to you via e-mail.

to subscribe to their free press releases, send an e-mail to coha@coha.org with "subscribe" as the subject.

attention please! websites for the open minded (1)

today, a webtip. visit www.johannorberg.net to find out about the swedish author and his ways to promote global capitalism.

paying a visit to alcatraz

just take a quick look at the pictures above and you get the idea of what it´s like to wander around alcatraz island these days. tourists everywhere - and you can buy t-shirts and dvd´s on almost every single corner. "the rock" with nicolas cage and sean connery for 23 bucks - now that´s what I call a bargain! nevertheless, the former state penitentiary is worth a visit. kept in service from august 1934 until march 21st, 1963 it provided food and shelter for villains such as al capone and robert "the birdman" stroud. needless to say, the cells were small and the food was bad (if you plan to go to alcatraz one day I encourage you to pay 5 dollars more for the audio tour - some hilarious anecdotes are waiting for you). and hey, that´s about it. it´s a prison and not disneyland so what do you expect? but there´s more. abandoned after 1963 the buildings on the island began to decay. while the government was not sure what to do with it, alcatraz was considerd to be either a casino, a shopping mall or the ground of a west coast version of the statue of liberty. but before it eventually became part of the golden gate national recreation area and got opened for puplic in 1973, alcatraz was birthplace for a vital native american movement, the United Indians of All Tribes Foundation (UIATF). Indians in San Francisco Bay area started an attempt to occupy the island and to assert their claims for the creation of a native american cultural center on alcatraz. similiar actions were taken in and around seattle at that time. against the background of the vietnam war, us citizens and the media paid a lot of attention to this civil rights movement and it was not until late 1970, 18 months after the "invasion", that the UIATF left alcatraz. even though the island itself was not converted into a cultural center, the native american movement was able to enforce other important institutions. for example, the "daybreak star center" in seattle "became a nucleus of activity for the local and regional Indian community", see www.unitedindians.com.

this is just one example of how an ordinary tourist attraction can offer more than just a quick pleasure of sensation. oh, and I am sure that even the golden gate bridge hides some interesting stories - but I don´t know any and so it´s just some boring red bridge with lots of traffic to me...

(thanks to dominik for the pictures).