Finally, my reading of the Supreme Court's letter--it signals to the Covid Puppets that 'the system' is switching into survival mode, i.e., a large sacrificial offering of 'pawns' is in the making
No matter the background of the letter, it is an official inquiry and has to be answered. Whatever the general direction of the answers, they can only turn out a PR desaster. The Court's decision might not be the point here but the effect on the public.
Sorry mate, but that ORF article on Italy is completely wrong!
The new DPCM is saying exactly the opposite: for VACCINATED ONLY no more restrictions, they can travel, go everywhere, don't even need to stay home if your classroom have 3 or more infected, and so on and on.
While for unvaccinated everything is OFF: you CANNOT go everywhere, you CANNOT use Public Transportation, you CANNOT go to eat a pizza, you CANNOT go to the Post Office or Bank, and if you are 50 yrs old or more unvaccinated a ticket of 100 euro and if caught around in voided place up to 1.500 euro. And sorry, my sun 10yrs old if he has 2 classrom mates infected has to stay home and watch lessons from pc....
I assume that ORF considers the uninjected to be subhuman, and so restrictions against them (us) don't count, as long as the injected can live a normal life.
Also, most media outlets now tell the story of hospitalised as 'vaccinated' vs. 'not (yet) fully vaccinated'--they are consciously lumping together unvaccinated/no Covid, unvaccinated/with Covid, 1 jab, 2 jabs/<14 days after the second jab.
No way anyone could make sense of any data, hence the Court's question.
The old guard is making way (or are being made to give way) for "the young turks" so to speak seems to be the take not only from your horizon but here as well. I think we are seeing it all over western Europe, if not now then during the coming two years, that the whole top brass in politics will be replaced with those born from 1970 or younger.
As in, those without any personal experience of anything being less than the "perfect" wellfare society. The east-west divide in the EU therefore deepen quite rapdidly and in severity, and this is what will be used as an argument for what will in practicality be a fully corporativist EU with the nation states reduced to provinces. Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and possibly the Czech republic will be put between the franco-germanic axis on one side, and the russo-turkish on the other.
With "perfidious Albion" standing off to the side ready to profit however the chips may fall.
It might well be the case, but--with specific reference to your speculation--the role of the EU at-large is incredibly important, and one must not forget NATO and US over-lordship.
The simmering US-Russian stand-off, allegedly over Ukraine, is the biggest issue that hs been obscured by Covid: the US lost, as evidenced by Nuland calling on China to 'do something' about Russia. As a geopolitical reality, NATO is toast, and this is out in the open now.
This US weakness marks a de facto withdrawal from the security commitments to Eastern European nations, hence there will be much more 'instability' as NATO de facto crumbles in the coming years. I doubt that the UK will play much of a role in this, with perhaps the (wrongful, in my view) assumption of London's repeated huffing and puffing about this or that Eastern European country, but this will, in all likelihood, be mainly to throw a wrench into the framework of the coming Franco-German rapprochement with Moscow.
Yeah, pretty much what you say. I'm more used to look at historical patterns (too used to it probably, it becomes self-referential in a sneaky way) and on top of that from Sweden's historical position and horizon:
Every time Denmark or Sweden looked to gain the upper hand against the other, from the fifteenth century onwards, Britain, France, the Hanseatic League and the Netherlands acted to redress that imbalance to prevent the emergence of a new power (and that our ancestral royal families didn't get that and intermarried to restore the Kalmar Union, well such is life).
It is that kind of pattern I project onto the european theater now. A weakened and disparate but not failed continent serves Britain best, the brit's frist reflex is always to retreat to their island fortress. For France, it's all about projection - they were /the/ power on land until the unification of Germany (I'm playing fast and loose with the timelines here) and still sees itself as the only real cultural and military power in western Europe. Germany still struggles as any german cooperation with eastern Europe or Russia is met by franco-british sabotage, and any german move to be part of that special "best frenemy" between the french and the brits is met by the casual assumption that Germany is the junior and subservient party in such an affair.
For Russia, an ineffectual EU (or an EU locked in a death spiral of increasing corporativist corruption) is a dream come true, and mimicks well Russian diplomatic efforts from the time of Peter the Great onwards. Putin's foreign policy is pretty much just a continuation of Peter's.
The british will in all likelyhood, barring a labour victory with key moslem/migrant support, make sure to be well paid to keep being 'Airstrip One' for the US. And since the Biden presidency is actively shuttling migrants around (2 000 000 last year I think it was), possibly or even probably in order to skew the next presidential election, it is quite possible that an even more radically progressive Democratic party will continue to increase military expense all the while decreasing the efficiency of same.
On the other hand, as I love pointing out to economists and political science scholars, no one in 1988 predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Though personally I'm seeing way too many similarities with the period 1850-1930 for comfort - hopefully that's just my mind making spurious connections.
Sorry for the dealyed response, I don't use notifications and such so I only see responsens when sctually checking a page:
I see two probable outcoms, and one unavoidable (in all probability they will overlap, that's not just me hedging my Kassandra-isms, it's reality). To keep it short:
An ever closer union moving towards a United States of Europe before 2050. If this union goes to war with a major opponent, i.e. Russia as all other possibles are too far off (China) or too diffuse (islam), it might cement it enough to counter the already visible gangrene of corporativist corruption. If it maintins peace by appeasement it will instead develope along french synarchist ideals towards a police state where factions struggle to control parts of the administration via clientilism. And it will be gone before 2075, collapsing either as the USSR did or as Jugoslavia.
Or internecine racial/religious war within those nations who has allowed millions of moslems to create substates and colonies. Here, Sweden, Germany an France leads the trend, especially Sweden as islam will be the largest relgion before 2030, and swedeswill be in the minority before 2050. Thus, western/central and northern Europe will resemble the troubled states of the close Orient and North Africa. This development can only be contained either by a strong central federal governement - the EU - or by ethnic clensing (which of course is completely impossible and unthinkable due to all western europeans having from birht been conditioned to associate their own nationalism and patriotism with evil). In this timeline the EU may well endure as the only safeguard against a total collapse mimicking the fifth century.
Or the outlier, very improbable: the eastern parts of the union along with the Baltic states break away, keeping only the financial and trade parts of the EU membership, forming their own coalition for joint defence against Russia (militarily), the franco-german axis (politically and economicall) and the islamic world (culturally and religiously).
Politically incorrect tangent:
Demography is destiny, as they say. The leopard doesn't change his spots, nor can I ever be [other race/ethnicity] than the one I was born into. Any political ideal ignoring or denying the importance of race, creed and culture cannit work and will doom all smaller races to oblivion - you don't need an active genocidal policy (or even the idea), it happens naturally:
Green women have on average as a group 2.1 children, and the first child is born after the mother turns 30. Red women have 4 to 6 children, and have their first one between age 20-25. Blue women have 6-8 children, and the first one before age 20. Even if the green women outnumber the other 10:1, it does not take long for them to become a minority.
Huhum, well, I think that EU and NATO are like Siamese twins, i.e., the spawn of (less overt) US domination over Europe, an area that has become a US colony after 1945, a process that has intensified after 1989/90.
I expect the façade of the EU-as-is to be kept up for all intents and purposes, hence 'the core' (France, Benelux, Germany, Italy, Austria, perhaps Czechia) will form some 'deeper union', which will also be done via 'regulatory alignment' or the like. It's both too unpopular with people and otherwise impractical. Imagine: 'would you like to become one EUrostan under the benign rule of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels' isn't exactly a winning campaign slogan. (Neither is 'unite or Putin', by the way.)
The split you mention, to me, is already there: the Eurogroup is different from, say, EU-27, but keep in mind that not all of these countries are equal (viz. Greece in 2015).
Also, it's a multi-dimensional split: there's Schengen, which incl. non-EU states, such as Norway; there's the Northern states (Denmark, Sweden) that are technically not part of the Eurogroup, but they tied their currencies to the Euro; then there's some Eastern countries (e.g., in the Baltics) that want the Euro, hence their currencies are tied to the Euro, too. Then there's the South-Eastern members who want to be 'more integrated', if 'only' for reasons of economic development (Romania, Bulgaria), and let's not forget about the W Balkans' 'EUropean perspective'.
Note that these 'splits' are apparent, to certain degrees, in NATO as well: its core has a high degree of overlap with the EU's core; do the Northerners (Norway, Iceland, Denmark) really count? What about the Baltics? Poland is another particular case, with Turkey's membership being ever so fickle, too.
You see, these US-derived 'systems' are fundamentally flawed: if they are a lose association with a single purpose (NATO in the Cold War, the EC before it morphed in the EU), there's room for movement. Since the early 1990s, though, US domination has tightenend in a myriad ways, hence increasingly constraining sovereignty and the like.
Long story short: EU, NATO, and the like (think: their copy-cats in South-East Asia) are fundamentally unlike the UN, and the latter might well continue to exist in our multi-polar world. The continued existence of EU, NATO, and the like is intimately connected to, and in the final analysis derivative of, US power.
As a historical anecdote, I offer the fact that 1648 is commonly identified as the point 'Switzerland' left the Holy Roman Empire, although the latter's insignia were put up on official buildings until at least half a century later. And, yes, this is me saying (tongue-in-cheek) that this might well be the case in our time: keep the blue flag with the stars, whatever it means, but in reality the EU's power will fade.
Huhum, same to you, my friend. Your above take is also very thought-provoking. I'm in agreement with your dislike of the common lack of nuance and context.
Next time, we should also include potential future NATO enlargement that Russia might complain about, but ultimately be disinterested in, as in maybe Sweden and Finland wish to (officially) join NATO before too long, what do you think about that?
Sweden must for reasons of internal politicking at least for the present continue its (according to me cowardly) fence-sitting with regards to NATO.
Longer rambling version:
Too much support would be lost for the socialist democratic party if they would openly endorse NATO membership. That we de facto always have relied on NATO in any hypothetical conflict with the USSR/Russia is a laughably public "secret".
We have three major divides:
The old school communist parties, still loyal to Moscow as the ahave been ever since the 1920s. Opposed to NATO because they oppose anything american - that is also the reason they supported ISIL, supports palestinian terrorism simply due to Israel being an ally of the US, embraces moslem anti-semitism, and ignores the existence of China and DPRK. (I pick no side re: Israel/Palestine, unfortuantely this must always be stated.) These people used to march in support of the Khmer Rouge - after the Killing Fields became known. Argues as if it was 1975 and the Cold War was in effect.
The "chickenhawk" liberals. Pro-Israel no matter what Israel actually does to the palestinians, pro-NATO no matter the consequences or the cost (and also pro swedish nuclear weapons originally - is that grandiosity or what?), and anti-Russia: any action but acquiscence and appeasement from Russia as per the pre-Putin years are regarded as an act of war. Inheritors of the classic liberals here, who unabashedly supported the french and american wars in Indo-China. Argues as if it was 1975 and the Cold War was in effect.
The swedish nationalist perspective. No to NATO, including partnerships as todays. No to EU, period. No to cooperation within "the Baltic Nine". Think the most insular of non-interventionist americans. Thinks that as long as we cannot mount an effective defence against a russian atack, the russains will not attack us. That's some logic, that.
The real bother is that across all this, like a rake on a path, lies party loyalties, business loyalties, career paths and our unique brand of swedish hubris: if we do it, it must be the right thing to do since it's us dpoing it. A Mikado of internal politicking if you will, where no one is willing to give even a little to potentially gain a lot.
Since the only external military threat to Sweden in the present and foreseeable future is Russia, regardless of all other factors since geography and logistics doesn't care about -isms or business, an alliance or even full membership with NATO is necessary for defence. I'd rather it wasn't, but as it is we lack the resources to rebuild what was demolished in the mid-nineties (about 90% of the swedish armed forces were scrapped, if we include the home guard and similar organizations and general readiness).
The soft clap emanating from behind the curtains at sidestage is yours truly. I've spent literally my entire sentient life seeking this sort of discourse and analysis. Sadly, I've come away from nearly every opportunity -- analog and/or digital -- largely disappointed.
Yes, rare moments of lucidity would bubble to the surface, in the badly lit cracks between so many soaring towers of pedantic academic tedium and the vast sea of manufactured banality, all tarted-up as "informed" opinion.
Honestly, I remain surprised that the financial overlords "public offering" took this long to bring to market, based on my own long reading of history (economic, political, social and "beyond").
Growing up in the "Soviet of Washington" (a well-earned nametag pinned to the state in early 20th C. press, accurate in the urban spaces west of the Cascade Range), I was fascinated by the colorful costumery stitched together around several generations of the "collectivist" impulse, by way of marketing it to the wavering middle caught up in the tidal ebb and flow of mass media.
After a few years on the California coast during my "peak energy" phase, 9-11 sent the European wife and I running for her ancestral family farm in Karl der Grosse's native Eifel, to make ready for what we're confronted with today.
Distance from urban centers. Check. Local network. Check. Access to abundant fresh water and wood. Check. Food channels. Raw milk around the corner. Part of the local chicken fanciers network. Old-school beef sans chem. Pork from the next village. A centuries-old house garden that fed the family through several wars. Check.
On the upside, when rolling blackouts are the "new normal" in soon-to-be deindustrializing Deutschland, at least there's plenty to do here on the farm to keep our minds off the "Impfkommando" units working their checklists in the urban and suburban zones.
That said, thank you gents for providing such marvelous morning reading over my first cup of coffee.
Hi Doug, many thanks for reading and sharing these insights. I'm very happy that you read these posts--and the commentary--and that you find them interesting.
As to my experiences, the more responsibilities I take on, as a husband, as father, as a scholar, as an educator, the more I feel horrified by these collectivist impulses that are pushed by these putschists.
As to the deplorable state of academia, well, I agree: there's precious little debate going on, and if you're ever been to (esp. German-language) workshops and conferences, there is this seemingly unwritten rule not to disagree with each other because that's apparently something that isn't what one's supposed to do. Needless to say, I disagree strongly with this notion.
Most academics are either extremely good at sycophancy (best example: the Anglo-US 'foreign policy' think tank-academia clusterf***, specifically relating to 'Eastern Europe') and very bad at expressing themselves clearly and/or coherently.
Honestly, I remain surprised that those who are in these circles (think: the Twittering Classes) fail to 'look beyond the pale', hence I suspect that the dynamic in these circles runs a bit like this:
They all talk to themselves, re-tweet their own utterances, and fail to recognise the reality beyond, i.e., they remain locked in something like the prisoners in Plato's Cave while whatever else is occurring outside. Our main problem in all of this, of course, is that those inside prisoners running our societies are, well, doing just that, but the perception of both reality and 'the other' is thus very biased.
Thanks for reading, and thanks doubly so for the good question.
I think that your take is quite close to their (patronising-paternalistic) worldview, but I don't think it's a correct way of putting this.
My reading is: yes, 'the public' can take 'too many crises', but the people will quite likely stop accepting such gross mismanagement after a certain point. You see, I hope, that the main problem--at least to my mind at this point--is that the technocratic elites understand this differentiation as well, at least on a kind of gut level, hence the need to close ranks.
Even though, I suspect that the Court is actually in agreement with the régime, but they need to show the public that 'the system' can take care of even such a brutal case of incompetence and mismanagement as all matters Covid-19. In other words: this is about the safeguarding of 'the system', as opposed to, say, a landslide victory for an anti-system party.
Think, in part, Brexit or Trump, which seriously impaired the minds of a good deal of government, media, and the chattering classes--whose members, incidentally (?), are the ones that push the Covid crap the hardest.
In Covidistan/Austrian terms--and here recourse is made to 'western poli-sci lingo and concepts' used to 'describe' Russian and other 'authoritarian' countries--the Freedom Party's anti-mandate stance, while certainly laudable, may be more because of political expedience (which is what I think), hence the FPÖ would be part of the 'systemic opposition', i.e., tolerated by the machine politicians because they function as a safety valve. Keep in mind that in that one local election I covered in depth yesterday, the Freedom Party--which is unpalatable to many centrist Austrians--actually lost votes, too.
Hence: I think the Court's pushback, of sorts, is actually telling us about 'the system's' closing of the ranks.
Agreed on the flu crap coming, and I'll have something on this in the works, too, but there's really only one thing that can be said about these injections and kids:
NO F***** WAY my kids are going to take it. And no other kid should, either.
As a personal aside, *this* is the hill I elected to die on many months ago.
Hi Yakari, I'm always interested in such insights (as I'm preparing my next instalment on Covidistan). Feel free to reach me at diefackel2punkt0(at)protonmail.com.
Our former Socialist/working class party SPÖ is now very aggressive as „it is the state‘s obligation to execute this vaxx raffle!!!“ 😂
I am sure that many Covidistan inmates‘ souls are now crushed as they could not wait to get their vaxxes or boosters in order to gain a spot in the raffle.
Hi again, Ms. Yakari, thanks for the link: I saw that failing raffle piece (over at ORF, I think) and almost fell of my chair, but this is even 'better'. The only positive thing to mention is that Covidistan's putschists are (even more) incompetent than the 'old guard' from, say, 10-15 years ago.
By my estimate, that is actually a positive outcome: failure by incompetence may still lead to the same outcome as failure by design and/or malice, but this is hilariously idiotic. Thank you for bringing it up.
you might be quite right. that could be it. next fall will be the real battle with all flu, covid, influenza combined into one mRNA vaxx which would be made mandatory. that could be it.
Unfortunately, this appears the most likely way forward: according to the mandate, this can be decreed by the Health Minister.
Now, if it's mRNA crap that is, say 'Covid-plus' (somewhere I read 'flurona'), I would expect someone like Mückstein or Lauterbach to try to force-feed it via decree.
that could well be. i wondered if boris singlehandly blew out their plans and hence all this coordinated effort to push him out. next fall will be the challenge, this was the warm up phase.
Do you mean: BJ is such a big buffoon it makes, say, Berlusconi look statesman-like by comparison?
I agree with next fall being the crucial challenge, and it's of utmost importance that citizens don't relent, 'even' if some or all mandates are scrapped now.
No matter the background of the letter, it is an official inquiry and has to be answered. Whatever the general direction of the answers, they can only turn out a PR desaster. The Court's decision might not be the point here but the effect on the public.
I agree--whatever the outcome, it'll be a (PR) desaster.
Also, on the upside, whatver the outcome, it might actually do somthing good.
Sorry mate, but that ORF article on Italy is completely wrong!
The new DPCM is saying exactly the opposite: for VACCINATED ONLY no more restrictions, they can travel, go everywhere, don't even need to stay home if your classroom have 3 or more infected, and so on and on.
While for unvaccinated everything is OFF: you CANNOT go everywhere, you CANNOT use Public Transportation, you CANNOT go to eat a pizza, you CANNOT go to the Post Office or Bank, and if you are 50 yrs old or more unvaccinated a ticket of 100 euro and if caught around in voided place up to 1.500 euro. And sorry, my sun 10yrs old if he has 2 classrom mates infected has to stay home and watch lessons from pc....
https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2022/02/02/decreto-covid-green-pass-illimitato-e-zero-restrizioni-in-zona-rossa-per-chi-ha-il-booster-nuove-regole-su-dad-e-quarantena-a-scuola-misure/6478498/
So sorry, but ORF got it wrong!
Thanks for this correction: don't shoot the messenger (me), this is another sign that ORF is a crude BS purveyor.
I assume that ORF considers the uninjected to be subhuman, and so restrictions against them (us) don't count, as long as the injected can live a normal life.
Sad, but true.
Also, most media outlets now tell the story of hospitalised as 'vaccinated' vs. 'not (yet) fully vaccinated'--they are consciously lumping together unvaccinated/no Covid, unvaccinated/with Covid, 1 jab, 2 jabs/<14 days after the second jab.
No way anyone could make sense of any data, hence the Court's question.
Speculation:
The old guard is making way (or are being made to give way) for "the young turks" so to speak seems to be the take not only from your horizon but here as well. I think we are seeing it all over western Europe, if not now then during the coming two years, that the whole top brass in politics will be replaced with those born from 1970 or younger.
As in, those without any personal experience of anything being less than the "perfect" wellfare society. The east-west divide in the EU therefore deepen quite rapdidly and in severity, and this is what will be used as an argument for what will in practicality be a fully corporativist EU with the nation states reduced to provinces. Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and possibly the Czech republic will be put between the franco-germanic axis on one side, and the russo-turkish on the other.
With "perfidious Albion" standing off to the side ready to profit however the chips may fall.
It's almost like history is repeating.
It might well be the case, but--with specific reference to your speculation--the role of the EU at-large is incredibly important, and one must not forget NATO and US over-lordship.
The simmering US-Russian stand-off, allegedly over Ukraine, is the biggest issue that hs been obscured by Covid: the US lost, as evidenced by Nuland calling on China to 'do something' about Russia. As a geopolitical reality, NATO is toast, and this is out in the open now.
This US weakness marks a de facto withdrawal from the security commitments to Eastern European nations, hence there will be much more 'instability' as NATO de facto crumbles in the coming years. I doubt that the UK will play much of a role in this, with perhaps the (wrongful, in my view) assumption of London's repeated huffing and puffing about this or that Eastern European country, but this will, in all likelihood, be mainly to throw a wrench into the framework of the coming Franco-German rapprochement with Moscow.
Yeah, pretty much what you say. I'm more used to look at historical patterns (too used to it probably, it becomes self-referential in a sneaky way) and on top of that from Sweden's historical position and horizon:
Every time Denmark or Sweden looked to gain the upper hand against the other, from the fifteenth century onwards, Britain, France, the Hanseatic League and the Netherlands acted to redress that imbalance to prevent the emergence of a new power (and that our ancestral royal families didn't get that and intermarried to restore the Kalmar Union, well such is life).
It is that kind of pattern I project onto the european theater now. A weakened and disparate but not failed continent serves Britain best, the brit's frist reflex is always to retreat to their island fortress. For France, it's all about projection - they were /the/ power on land until the unification of Germany (I'm playing fast and loose with the timelines here) and still sees itself as the only real cultural and military power in western Europe. Germany still struggles as any german cooperation with eastern Europe or Russia is met by franco-british sabotage, and any german move to be part of that special "best frenemy" between the french and the brits is met by the casual assumption that Germany is the junior and subservient party in such an affair.
For Russia, an ineffectual EU (or an EU locked in a death spiral of increasing corporativist corruption) is a dream come true, and mimicks well Russian diplomatic efforts from the time of Peter the Great onwards. Putin's foreign policy is pretty much just a continuation of Peter's.
The british will in all likelyhood, barring a labour victory with key moslem/migrant support, make sure to be well paid to keep being 'Airstrip One' for the US. And since the Biden presidency is actively shuttling migrants around (2 000 000 last year I think it was), possibly or even probably in order to skew the next presidential election, it is quite possible that an even more radically progressive Democratic party will continue to increase military expense all the while decreasing the efficiency of same.
On the other hand, as I love pointing out to economists and political science scholars, no one in 1988 predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Though personally I'm seeing way too many similarities with the period 1850-1930 for comfort - hopefully that's just my mind making spurious connections.
Sorry for the dealyed response, I don't use notifications and such so I only see responsens when sctually checking a page:
I see two probable outcoms, and one unavoidable (in all probability they will overlap, that's not just me hedging my Kassandra-isms, it's reality). To keep it short:
An ever closer union moving towards a United States of Europe before 2050. If this union goes to war with a major opponent, i.e. Russia as all other possibles are too far off (China) or too diffuse (islam), it might cement it enough to counter the already visible gangrene of corporativist corruption. If it maintins peace by appeasement it will instead develope along french synarchist ideals towards a police state where factions struggle to control parts of the administration via clientilism. And it will be gone before 2075, collapsing either as the USSR did or as Jugoslavia.
Or internecine racial/religious war within those nations who has allowed millions of moslems to create substates and colonies. Here, Sweden, Germany an France leads the trend, especially Sweden as islam will be the largest relgion before 2030, and swedeswill be in the minority before 2050. Thus, western/central and northern Europe will resemble the troubled states of the close Orient and North Africa. This development can only be contained either by a strong central federal governement - the EU - or by ethnic clensing (which of course is completely impossible and unthinkable due to all western europeans having from birht been conditioned to associate their own nationalism and patriotism with evil). In this timeline the EU may well endure as the only safeguard against a total collapse mimicking the fifth century.
Or the outlier, very improbable: the eastern parts of the union along with the Baltic states break away, keeping only the financial and trade parts of the EU membership, forming their own coalition for joint defence against Russia (militarily), the franco-german axis (politically and economicall) and the islamic world (culturally and religiously).
Politically incorrect tangent:
Demography is destiny, as they say. The leopard doesn't change his spots, nor can I ever be [other race/ethnicity] than the one I was born into. Any political ideal ignoring or denying the importance of race, creed and culture cannit work and will doom all smaller races to oblivion - you don't need an active genocidal policy (or even the idea), it happens naturally:
Green women have on average as a group 2.1 children, and the first child is born after the mother turns 30. Red women have 4 to 6 children, and have their first one between age 20-25. Blue women have 6-8 children, and the first one before age 20. Even if the green women outnumber the other 10:1, it does not take long for them to become a minority.
Huhum, well, I think that EU and NATO are like Siamese twins, i.e., the spawn of (less overt) US domination over Europe, an area that has become a US colony after 1945, a process that has intensified after 1989/90.
I expect the façade of the EU-as-is to be kept up for all intents and purposes, hence 'the core' (France, Benelux, Germany, Italy, Austria, perhaps Czechia) will form some 'deeper union', which will also be done via 'regulatory alignment' or the like. It's both too unpopular with people and otherwise impractical. Imagine: 'would you like to become one EUrostan under the benign rule of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels' isn't exactly a winning campaign slogan. (Neither is 'unite or Putin', by the way.)
The split you mention, to me, is already there: the Eurogroup is different from, say, EU-27, but keep in mind that not all of these countries are equal (viz. Greece in 2015).
Also, it's a multi-dimensional split: there's Schengen, which incl. non-EU states, such as Norway; there's the Northern states (Denmark, Sweden) that are technically not part of the Eurogroup, but they tied their currencies to the Euro; then there's some Eastern countries (e.g., in the Baltics) that want the Euro, hence their currencies are tied to the Euro, too. Then there's the South-Eastern members who want to be 'more integrated', if 'only' for reasons of economic development (Romania, Bulgaria), and let's not forget about the W Balkans' 'EUropean perspective'.
Note that these 'splits' are apparent, to certain degrees, in NATO as well: its core has a high degree of overlap with the EU's core; do the Northerners (Norway, Iceland, Denmark) really count? What about the Baltics? Poland is another particular case, with Turkey's membership being ever so fickle, too.
You see, these US-derived 'systems' are fundamentally flawed: if they are a lose association with a single purpose (NATO in the Cold War, the EC before it morphed in the EU), there's room for movement. Since the early 1990s, though, US domination has tightenend in a myriad ways, hence increasingly constraining sovereignty and the like.
Long story short: EU, NATO, and the like (think: their copy-cats in South-East Asia) are fundamentally unlike the UN, and the latter might well continue to exist in our multi-polar world. The continued existence of EU, NATO, and the like is intimately connected to, and in the final analysis derivative of, US power.
As a historical anecdote, I offer the fact that 1648 is commonly identified as the point 'Switzerland' left the Holy Roman Empire, although the latter's insignia were put up on official buildings until at least half a century later. And, yes, this is me saying (tongue-in-cheek) that this might well be the case in our time: keep the blue flag with the stars, whatever it means, but in reality the EU's power will fade.
Applause. This is the kind of analysis - right or wrong - that should be a permanent ongoing debate regarding the EU.
(Just wanted to state that clearly since I deeply dislike the "upvote/downvote" systems all kinds of blogs and the like use.)
Huhum, same to you, my friend. Your above take is also very thought-provoking. I'm in agreement with your dislike of the common lack of nuance and context.
Next time, we should also include potential future NATO enlargement that Russia might complain about, but ultimately be disinterested in, as in maybe Sweden and Finland wish to (officially) join NATO before too long, what do you think about that?
Short version:
Sweden must for reasons of internal politicking at least for the present continue its (according to me cowardly) fence-sitting with regards to NATO.
Longer rambling version:
Too much support would be lost for the socialist democratic party if they would openly endorse NATO membership. That we de facto always have relied on NATO in any hypothetical conflict with the USSR/Russia is a laughably public "secret".
We have three major divides:
The old school communist parties, still loyal to Moscow as the ahave been ever since the 1920s. Opposed to NATO because they oppose anything american - that is also the reason they supported ISIL, supports palestinian terrorism simply due to Israel being an ally of the US, embraces moslem anti-semitism, and ignores the existence of China and DPRK. (I pick no side re: Israel/Palestine, unfortuantely this must always be stated.) These people used to march in support of the Khmer Rouge - after the Killing Fields became known. Argues as if it was 1975 and the Cold War was in effect.
The "chickenhawk" liberals. Pro-Israel no matter what Israel actually does to the palestinians, pro-NATO no matter the consequences or the cost (and also pro swedish nuclear weapons originally - is that grandiosity or what?), and anti-Russia: any action but acquiscence and appeasement from Russia as per the pre-Putin years are regarded as an act of war. Inheritors of the classic liberals here, who unabashedly supported the french and american wars in Indo-China. Argues as if it was 1975 and the Cold War was in effect.
The swedish nationalist perspective. No to NATO, including partnerships as todays. No to EU, period. No to cooperation within "the Baltic Nine". Think the most insular of non-interventionist americans. Thinks that as long as we cannot mount an effective defence against a russian atack, the russains will not attack us. That's some logic, that.
The real bother is that across all this, like a rake on a path, lies party loyalties, business loyalties, career paths and our unique brand of swedish hubris: if we do it, it must be the right thing to do since it's us dpoing it. A Mikado of internal politicking if you will, where no one is willing to give even a little to potentially gain a lot.
Since the only external military threat to Sweden in the present and foreseeable future is Russia, regardless of all other factors since geography and logistics doesn't care about -isms or business, an alliance or even full membership with NATO is necessary for defence. I'd rather it wasn't, but as it is we lack the resources to rebuild what was demolished in the mid-nineties (about 90% of the swedish armed forces were scrapped, if we include the home guard and similar organizations and general readiness).
I feel I must apologise for be so wordy.
The soft clap emanating from behind the curtains at sidestage is yours truly. I've spent literally my entire sentient life seeking this sort of discourse and analysis. Sadly, I've come away from nearly every opportunity -- analog and/or digital -- largely disappointed.
Yes, rare moments of lucidity would bubble to the surface, in the badly lit cracks between so many soaring towers of pedantic academic tedium and the vast sea of manufactured banality, all tarted-up as "informed" opinion.
Honestly, I remain surprised that the financial overlords "public offering" took this long to bring to market, based on my own long reading of history (economic, political, social and "beyond").
Growing up in the "Soviet of Washington" (a well-earned nametag pinned to the state in early 20th C. press, accurate in the urban spaces west of the Cascade Range), I was fascinated by the colorful costumery stitched together around several generations of the "collectivist" impulse, by way of marketing it to the wavering middle caught up in the tidal ebb and flow of mass media.
After a few years on the California coast during my "peak energy" phase, 9-11 sent the European wife and I running for her ancestral family farm in Karl der Grosse's native Eifel, to make ready for what we're confronted with today.
Distance from urban centers. Check. Local network. Check. Access to abundant fresh water and wood. Check. Food channels. Raw milk around the corner. Part of the local chicken fanciers network. Old-school beef sans chem. Pork from the next village. A centuries-old house garden that fed the family through several wars. Check.
On the upside, when rolling blackouts are the "new normal" in soon-to-be deindustrializing Deutschland, at least there's plenty to do here on the farm to keep our minds off the "Impfkommando" units working their checklists in the urban and suburban zones.
That said, thank you gents for providing such marvelous morning reading over my first cup of coffee.
Hi Doug, many thanks for reading and sharing these insights. I'm very happy that you read these posts--and the commentary--and that you find them interesting.
As to my experiences, the more responsibilities I take on, as a husband, as father, as a scholar, as an educator, the more I feel horrified by these collectivist impulses that are pushed by these putschists.
As to the deplorable state of academia, well, I agree: there's precious little debate going on, and if you're ever been to (esp. German-language) workshops and conferences, there is this seemingly unwritten rule not to disagree with each other because that's apparently something that isn't what one's supposed to do. Needless to say, I disagree strongly with this notion.
Most academics are either extremely good at sycophancy (best example: the Anglo-US 'foreign policy' think tank-academia clusterf***, specifically relating to 'Eastern Europe') and very bad at expressing themselves clearly and/or coherently.
Honestly, I remain surprised that those who are in these circles (think: the Twittering Classes) fail to 'look beyond the pale', hence I suspect that the dynamic in these circles runs a bit like this:
They all talk to themselves, re-tweet their own utterances, and fail to recognise the reality beyond, i.e., they remain locked in something like the prisoners in Plato's Cave while whatever else is occurring outside. Our main problem in all of this, of course, is that those inside prisoners running our societies are, well, doing just that, but the perception of both reality and 'the other' is thus very biased.
Interesting analysis. Do you think they think they public can't cope with too many crises at one time so need to scale back on the corona one?
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/
Thanks for reading, and thanks doubly so for the good question.
I think that your take is quite close to their (patronising-paternalistic) worldview, but I don't think it's a correct way of putting this.
My reading is: yes, 'the public' can take 'too many crises', but the people will quite likely stop accepting such gross mismanagement after a certain point. You see, I hope, that the main problem--at least to my mind at this point--is that the technocratic elites understand this differentiation as well, at least on a kind of gut level, hence the need to close ranks.
Even though, I suspect that the Court is actually in agreement with the régime, but they need to show the public that 'the system' can take care of even such a brutal case of incompetence and mismanagement as all matters Covid-19. In other words: this is about the safeguarding of 'the system', as opposed to, say, a landslide victory for an anti-system party.
Think, in part, Brexit or Trump, which seriously impaired the minds of a good deal of government, media, and the chattering classes--whose members, incidentally (?), are the ones that push the Covid crap the hardest.
In Covidistan/Austrian terms--and here recourse is made to 'western poli-sci lingo and concepts' used to 'describe' Russian and other 'authoritarian' countries--the Freedom Party's anti-mandate stance, while certainly laudable, may be more because of political expedience (which is what I think), hence the FPÖ would be part of the 'systemic opposition', i.e., tolerated by the machine politicians because they function as a safety valve. Keep in mind that in that one local election I covered in depth yesterday, the Freedom Party--which is unpalatable to many centrist Austrians--actually lost votes, too.
Hence: I think the Court's pushback, of sorts, is actually telling us about 'the system's' closing of the ranks.
What do you think?
I hope so, but remain sceptical!
Fair enough.
Let me ask you this, then: what do you hope for? The régime falling apart?
Just that the truth is told and those responsible for any harms held accountable.
good points but not there yet. pfizer just applied for 6 months old shots, which fauci expects in late february. There are sacrifices to be made over next 2-3 months then ... yes, they will throw faucki and few others stupidos under the bus ... they enjoy throwing them under, but most probably by late spring early summer. canadian truck drivers are warming up that road (most likely well controlled as usual). this fits with pfizer documents to be released (with few suprises there) and so on. who knows what next autumn will bring ... that international flu vaccine could still be in the cards. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/02/02/covid-cover-ups.aspx?ui=1af24b813f25a6206f1915e188a6a5d1d0c4bba905d78a33a9d988a9366a57ab&sd=20211012&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20220202_HL2&mid=DM1098218&rid=1396333816
Agreed on the flu crap coming, and I'll have something on this in the works, too, but there's really only one thing that can be said about these injections and kids:
NO F***** WAY my kids are going to take it. And no other kid should, either.
As a personal aside, *this* is the hill I elected to die on many months ago.
@epimetheus, I have insider news from a ÖVP member. If you are interested, just tell me, I will then provide you with it 😁.
Hi Yakari, I'm always interested in such insights (as I'm preparing my next instalment on Covidistan). Feel free to reach me at diefackel2punkt0(at)protonmail.com.
I have already told this insider story on your newer post and I have seen that you have already seen it 😉.
Mr epimetheus, I am honored that you have cited and addressed my humble concern in the above text. (I am female, by the way 😉.)
I would like to share another great comedy act from our circus regime with you: The planned „Impflotterie“ (vaccination raffle) that - naturally 🤣 - comes with the vaxx mandate will most likely not be installed as the designated institution refuses to execute it. Here a link to a press article: https://www.puls24.at/news/politik/impflotterie-offenbar-vor-dem-aus-spoe-veraergert-orf-schweigt/255928
Our former Socialist/working class party SPÖ is now very aggressive as „it is the state‘s obligation to execute this vaxx raffle!!!“ 😂
I am sure that many Covidistan inmates‘ souls are now crushed as they could not wait to get their vaxxes or boosters in order to gain a spot in the raffle.
Hi again, Ms. Yakari, thanks for the link: I saw that failing raffle piece (over at ORF, I think) and almost fell of my chair, but this is even 'better'. The only positive thing to mention is that Covidistan's putschists are (even more) incompetent than the 'old guard' from, say, 10-15 years ago.
By my estimate, that is actually a positive outcome: failure by incompetence may still lead to the same outcome as failure by design and/or malice, but this is hilariously idiotic. Thank you for bringing it up.
you might be quite right. that could be it. next fall will be the real battle with all flu, covid, influenza combined into one mRNA vaxx which would be made mandatory. that could be it.
Unfortunately, this appears the most likely way forward: according to the mandate, this can be decreed by the Health Minister.
Now, if it's mRNA crap that is, say 'Covid-plus' (somewhere I read 'flurona'), I would expect someone like Mückstein or Lauterbach to try to force-feed it via decree.
Tyranny must stop.
that could well be. i wondered if boris singlehandly blew out their plans and hence all this coordinated effort to push him out. next fall will be the challenge, this was the warm up phase.
Do you mean: BJ is such a big buffoon it makes, say, Berlusconi look statesman-like by comparison?
I agree with next fall being the crucial challenge, and it's of utmost importance that citizens don't relent, 'even' if some or all mandates are scrapped now.