The Bewilderness

Poet, peace activist, seeks controversy

Would Israel have been better off if the country had decided to ignore the controversy surrounding Gunter Grass's new poem? Or does the report of a poem that feeds into the extreme critiques of what such amoralists call the 'Zionist entity' lead to a reaction, especially when the poet is a self-confessed member of the Waffen SS? I have not read the poem though its contents, if reported accurately, are unsurprising and fit the prejudices of the anti-Zionist left.

Perhaps, at 84, Grass is no longer able to assert a moral independence from Left or Right. If a strong voice could provide an independent counterweight to the alliance between extreme left and anti-semitism, now would have been the time. There is plenty of ammunition to criticise Israel without aligning yourself with eliminationists. That is the rhetoric of Iran. That is not the rhetoric of Israel.

"It is unacceptable," said Willi van Ooyen, a spokesman for a group that organises the traditional peace marches held each year on Easter weekend in Germany since 1960.

"Threats and preparations for war poison the political climate," said Ooyen, referring to concerns that Israel might launch a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities to stop a suspected weapons programme.

Israel will not be listening to this German peace activist soon. His paean of defenceless prostration before barbarism does not carry a voice in Israel (Talk often with a visibly big stick!)

But, as voices in Israel attest, the shrieks of disapproval have been fanned by a political class that wished to make an example of a left-wing Nobel prize winner, whose reputation was tarnished by a revelation of Nazi participation. Their actions were framed for domestic and US consumption: banning an author for equating Israel with a second holocaust. Grass's search for notoriety through poetic cliche may have strengthened the Israeli government, an outcome he would not have encouraged.

Yet, as war rolls closer, the Palestinians may have already lost their hold on the pedestal for victims. The height of international interest in this conflict has been reached, and fundamentalist intransigence leaves this local difficulty as an aside to the Iran/Israel tango.

 

Volatility and unpopularity in the polls

All three mainstream leaders are now suffering from low ratings. All that has changed is that Cameron now joins Clegg and Miliband. Perhaps it was only a matter of time and adverse publicity. As Mike Smithson points out it is unprecedented for all three leaders to suffer from such disillusionment on the part of the electorate.

Yet, this may prove most dangerous for Miliband. With a Labour lead in the polls and an unpopular leader, the temptation to look for a more popular candidate will increase. An unpopular budget and a week that undermined notions of competence have wounded the Coalition. None of these indicate that we have faced a change in polling or a swing to Labour, when Galloway's victory points to increased volatility.

Eyeballing the Euro

And after all the threats, deadlines, ultimatums and wolfcries, Germany and Greece stand eyeball to eyeball. Now, austerity is no longer a measure that Greek politicians will abide by:

At a press conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy on Monday, Ms Merkel: "There can be no new Greece programme if agreement is not reached with the troika... All those who bear responsibility in Greece must know - we will not deviate from this position."

She added: "I honestly can't understand how additional days will help. Time is of the essence. A lot is at stake for the entire eurozone."

Who will blink first?

 

The Great Northern (European Banking) Run

What can they think? After a sleepless night where detail was discarded for the merits of a result, Merkozy must be overwrought at the bodyblow dealt to them by George Papandreou. Presented with the cost of bailout versus default in strikes, riots and the destruction of the Greek middle class, the Prime Minister could not continue to support European solidarity. The blubbering was not long in coming:

The Dutch Labour party called the referendum a "deal breaker" and said it would not support the Brussels accord if it were put to the vote. Jose Blanco, the spokesman for the Spanish government, said Greece's referendum was "bad news for Spain and bad news for Europe"

Recycling debt through the special purpose vehicle of the EFSF and preventing credit writedowns was considered more important than the obligatory impoverishment of one or more Eurozone members. Which politician will take such punishment for his fellow elites? Are we surprised that Papandreou made a sudden break for freedom with a democratic invocation. The referendum device was totemic, since its primary purpose was a figleaf of decency if his government lost a vote of confidence.

Constitutional doubts apart, politicians in the debt zone can no longer be relied upon to shore up the Merkozy. Torn between elite and electorate, the latter wins hands down. That being so, the debt crisis now embarks upon its most dangerous phase: political co-operation is no longer believed, yet we all wait for the actions of politicians to deal with their own crisis: and we will know their mettle when Italy crosses the finish line of market denial followed by the toppling of the banks.

Darling's opt-in

Additional evidence that Labour could not be trusted with the public finances turns up from a freedom of information request. Despite the accusations of the frustrated, Osborne did not support the European Union's bail-out mechanism. A telephone note has surfaced where Darling was urged not to take any decision that could heavily impact the public finances.

So what did he do? He signed us up. The advice given by the civil service was legally correct, but Darling's contempt for consultation with a potential incoming government speaks volumes. Any decision undertaken by labour in those dying days appears to have placed party and spite above the needs of the country.

Another top-down revolution in the NHS falters....

Smoke and mirrors have attended the latest differences in opinion over the NHS. Andrew Lansley, Health Secretary, has taken some flak for being too radical in public sector reform. Wasn't that the distinct flavour of the coalition? Yet, after a torrid spring conference for the Liberal Democrats with howls of "save the NHS" from the remnants of producer interest still within their ranks, Cameron and Clegg have bowed to concerns and the bill is stayed at committee stage.

The raft of reforms appear quite radical on the surface: a regulated market in healthcare, an independent commissioning board and concentrating procurement power in the hands of the GPs. Yet, the right of centre think-tank, Policy Exchange, have cast doubt on the efficacy of the reforms:

The statement by Lansley follows the Policy Exchange warning that the health and social care bill's proposals to abolish every primary care trust (PCT) by 2013 "could lead to the new structure simply replicating the existing system in all but name".

Without support from GP consortia and ensuring the necessary skills to exploit the new structure, an NHS 'big bang' could result in much heat and eventual status quo. So, the 'Lansley problem' is one of two left feet: annoying the GPs without Bevan's pot of gold, whilst the set of reforms suffers from a skills gap. Surely the answer is to seek out those who have the skills and allow them to partner with GP consortia to allow the reforms to move forward (perhaps they could, whisper it, make a profit too!).

Lansley's reforms, a rehash of earlier organisations, are failing because they do not allow enough diversity in provider or provision. Typical top-down revolution without considering that local structures must mutate to meet local needs. Wasn't devolution a principle once upon a time?

Into the bow wave

It is rather dull waiting for all of this debt to collapse. Whether we call it 'extend and pretend', 'delaying the inevitable', delay the day' and any other such labels that magical financing brings up, government has subprimed the pump for a few years now, and nowhere more than China or the United States. Opposites attracting for a united ruin.

We have had some calm for a while now, since markets don't appear to be able to digest more than one crisis at a time if generated from within. Events are moving beyond the markets: with upheavals in the Middle East placing, perhaps, too much weight on the entitlements of the West for their survival in their present form.

An oil shock could produce such a whirlwind that the bow wave of a reserve currency dying leaves Irish or Greek default as a careless whisper, blown away before it registers beyond the local setting. One can perceive dimly and wide eyed the worst case scenario of this potential tsunami: the United States wrecked and insular; Europe broken: its currency union divided, its markets balkanised and a North African littoral condemned to a generation of irrational and imperialist fundamentalisms; Japan condemned to a rapid decline in living standards under the twin decay of debt slavery and depopulation; a China, recentralising and marshalling a cheated bourgeoisie through post-communist expansionism, fighting chosen wars with its proxies.

We have the potential to revisit the 1930s under our policy mistakes and, then as now, not all representative institutions survived.

Ambrosia without nectar

This is what happens when free trade is managed carelessly.

I was curious as to why Evans=Pritchard would state a problem that does not exist. It is a surprising aside in an article where he discusses the decrease in bee numbers and their possible deleterious effect on agriculture. The point that complex problems have foreseeable consequences is an agreeable conclusion.

We return to the original statement. Evans-Pritchard is actually referring to the consequnces of free trade and argues that their consequences can be mitigated. His other example is rare earth metals where mercantilist policy has seized a temporary monopoly. And that is the answer: monopolies cease under competition, work-arounds or avoidance. Managed trade is perhaps one answer that we know will not work.

Still, if the article is striking a right note and that thorium enthusiasm was a cul-de-sac, then apian atrophy will be the new term for 2011.

Better to think the worst of the Jews....

Not so with the Jews. Men find the bad among us easily enough - among what peoples are the bad not easily found? - but they take the worst of us as samples of the best; they take the lowest of us as presentations of the highest; and they say, "All Jews are alike"

Mr Riah in "Our Mutual Friend" by Charles Dickens.

The quotation may date from the nineteenth century, but despite the denials of the moderns, we see the same prejudice oozing its way through their sanctimonious outpourings. Those who now argue that they have transcended prejudice through an attachment to multiculturalism and diversity are blinded by their very words. It is not an ascent to a more rational plane but a descent to excusing wrongs on the grounds of difference. Prejudice is embraced by its denial. Anti-semitism returns by default: an age-old hatred reignited because the alternative is a rejection of the mulown ticultural.

For many of the multicultured, it is better to think the worst of the Jews than to question one's beliefs

The best student protest in the world, ever, innit?

The radical nature of the student demonstration began to filter through my antennae about lunchtime when visions of the unwashed storming Millbank flashed across Sky News. Any riot forms an interesting counterpart to a quotidian day at the office, especially as public reaction to the cuts has been quiescent up to now.

Hindsight confirms that the police did not anticipate the number of demonstrators or the possibility of anarchist violence. The graffiti of scarlet A from wannabe revolutionaries on Millbank property gave the game away. Was this a minority? Interviews afterwards from some of the students attending the University of March with Banners ineffectually did bring out their views: bashing police around is worthwhile if it reduces my debt levels when I graduate. They are demonstrating for themselves.

A vicious minority reflected wider sympathy amongst the student body, whipped up by a hysterical union leadership.

The NUS president told protesters: "We're in the fight of our lives. We face an unprecedented attack on our future before it has even begun. They're proposing barbaric cuts that would brutalise our colleges and universities."

After today, we can conclude that they have managed to brutalise themselves. Without harping on about the lazy hyperbole that disfigures political rhetoric from "The Best Student Protest in the World...Ever", we have seen the first sign of the privileged constituences battling their entry into the world of price. 

As student loans and grants still remain, even after the current reforms, a redistribution from the working class to the middle class, my sympathy for this faux right to subsidised education at my expense is nil. Give it a few years and the student body will adjust to thinking rationally about career and degrees. Those who don't will find their own level.