Saudi Arabia’s Arab Spring, at Last
By Thomas Friedman
Nov, 23, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/opinion/saudi-prince-mbs-arab-spring.html?comments#permid=24947255
I am with Mr. Friedman in his fervent wish, that this "Arab Spring" will actually lead to real, positive, and lasting change in Saudi Arabia, and perhaps the Middle East.
However, just as Mr. Friedman's overly optimistic analysis of the past Arab Springs, for example in Egypt, was completely off base, colored, as his analyses mostly are, by the last person he talks to, and by a blue-eyed unrealistic assessment of what social media can do, I fear this optimistic analysis too will prove to be wildly off.
Friday, November 24, 2017
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Comment on: "Angela Merkel’s Failure May Be Just What Europe Needs", by Ross Douthat, NYT, Nov. 22, 2017
Angela Merkel’s Failure May Be Just What Europe Needs
by Ross Douthat, Nov. 22, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/opinion/angela-merkel-germany-liberalism.html?comments#permid=24930133
Germany will emerge just fine from this political crisis , but I'm not so sure the US will survive Trump.
I do agree that the major political parties, both here, in Germany and in many other democracies, have failed to grasp and grapple with the negative effects of globalization. But the response of Britain and the US of blaming all problems on immigration is self-defeating. Already the UK is suffering from a lack of employees in a number of fields, healthcare for example, and Trump has to get special dispensation from his own anti-immigration rules in order to keep his various golf resorts functioning.
There is a battle going on between the US/UK (Anglo-Saxon) rapacious, unfettered free enterprise system and the system of "social market economy" (favored by Europe - capitalism with a social conscious and social restraints). Ray Dalio, also of Business Insider, makes a very interesting case for making policy not on the basis of global statistics (which hide vital internal differences) but to look at statistics separately for the lower 60% and upper 40% and focus social and economic policies on the statistics of the lower 60%.
Trump won by recognizing this split between the 60/40 and speaking to their frustrations (as have most right-wing nationalist), but in Trump's case, all his promises were self serving lies and his policies have nothing to do with helping the lower 60%, but rather, everything he says and does is simply aimed to bolster his low self-esteem and frighteningly sick personality.
by Ross Douthat, Nov. 22, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/opinion/angela-merkel-germany-liberalism.html?comments#permid=24930133
Germany will emerge just fine from this political crisis , but I'm not so sure the US will survive Trump.
I do agree that the major political parties, both here, in Germany and in many other democracies, have failed to grasp and grapple with the negative effects of globalization. But the response of Britain and the US of blaming all problems on immigration is self-defeating. Already the UK is suffering from a lack of employees in a number of fields, healthcare for example, and Trump has to get special dispensation from his own anti-immigration rules in order to keep his various golf resorts functioning.
There is a battle going on between the US/UK (Anglo-Saxon) rapacious, unfettered free enterprise system and the system of "social market economy" (favored by Europe - capitalism with a social conscious and social restraints). Ray Dalio, also of Business Insider, makes a very interesting case for making policy not on the basis of global statistics (which hide vital internal differences) but to look at statistics separately for the lower 60% and upper 40% and focus social and economic policies on the statistics of the lower 60%.
Trump won by recognizing this split between the 60/40 and speaking to their frustrations (as have most right-wing nationalist), but in Trump's case, all his promises were self serving lies and his policies have nothing to do with helping the lower 60%, but rather, everything he says and does is simply aimed to bolster his low self-esteem and frighteningly sick personality.
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
Comment on: "Who Won the Reformation?" by Ross Douthat, NYT, Nov. 1, 2017
Who Won the Reformation?
by Ross Douthat, Nov 1, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/opinion/protestant-reformation.html?comments&_r=0#permid=24674932
I generally try to stay away when Douthat writes one of his "religion" columns, but this heading intrigued me.
Working my way through all the gobbledygook of this column, the statement that takes the prize for "The Rediculous" is:
"But it [a unified Catholic Church] might have served as a stronger moral check on the new powers, a stronger countervailing force against greed and secular absolutism, than the divided churches that Europe had instead."
The Church, either in the time of Luther or now, is anything but a "moral check", but was and is morally bankrupt -- I have great respect for most individuals who profess the Christian faith of any denomination, but The Church is morally bankrupt (which includes the "religious right" - mostly Protestant - supporting the crazy person in the White House).
Even today the Church hides its culpability for eons of child molestation, even having various Diocese declare bankruptcy rather than acknowledging their culpability. And the graveyards still being discovered (e.g. In Ireland) with the bodies of babies born to unwed mothers is just abhorrent - I guess for these Catholics killing babies after they are born is better than abortion -- how do you like that for "the sanctity of life"???
Any large power structure, such as "The Church", will always find rationalizations to justify their terrible deeds, out of greed for money or greed for power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)