It is about time

About a year ago I moved from blogger to wordpress. An improvement, no doubt. But in the last months, and after several attacks to this blog, where relevant posts where deleted into oblivium, I have decided to change, again, the platform of my blog. So from now on this page is stopped.A blog, all the same, remains a handy way to put things in the discussion table, so I’ll keep on having one, but in my new site inti.gl. As the name goes, the whole site is more geared to my activities in dutch politics. The blog is to be read here:http://www.inti.gl/polis-eng/Blog/Blog.htmlFor the ones of you interested in computers, this is my last step into my reconversion to Mac. My new site, blog included, is made in iweb. It has been three years now since I moved back to Macintosh, and I must say that working in a stable Unix-based environment, with plenty of open source readily available, remains far superior to the experience of depending on the quirks of microsoft.  So far I am more than happy with Linux (Debian) in my desktop and OSX in my laptop.  Want to read my last thinking? Just click here      

Europe out of the greenhouse and into the sun

Back in the seventies we were shocked by the Rome report. Population growth and over-consumption will put oil and food prices beyond anybodies’ reach. Then in the eighties we look to the sky, and we could almost see the ozone hole that was growing and bringing cancer for us all. And the nineties brought the heated world into the picture, where the sea will swallow all low countries in the world. Today, well into the first decennia of the XXI century, any opinion poll shows the environment as a high concern for every citizen, if not the highest. Thirty years of environmentalism have make a serious impact in the public opinion. The question is, though, why this impact has not yet translated in green politics? Why the green political parties across Europe seems to be still doomed to the small 10% of the voters? 

WWI brought to an end the idea that civilized democracy would prevent uncivilized wars, and WWII showed that ethnic discrimination could unleash hell on hearth. These two most cherished dreams of the west died in the trenches and in the concentration camps. Only to be reborn with the European Union. For any young european today the slow dead in a trench, or the fast death in a gas chamber is a thing of the far way past. Those nightmares belong to the past due to the European Union, the behemoth that hidden behind an immense bureaucracy, has still brought peace and the reign of law to countries that were engaged in fratricidal wars along centuries. It is shocking, then, that such an immense success has not translated in everyday politics neither. It’s not only the french, the dutch, and now the irish that rejected a new European treaty, but as most politician knows but don’t tell, if referenda were carried today the Lisbon treaty would be rejected in most european countries. 

Now european elections are in the horizon, and before we know, political parties will be trying to convince us to send their own representatives to Brussels. Is it still possible to rescue the relevance of the European Union as a relevant, and positive project?  Or will this election face the skepticism that the UE faces today? What could the progressive and green politician, and citizen, do to not only remember the great successes of the EU, but also use the existing european power to tackle the concern of the citizen for a livable world? 

In first place a fundamental change of tone in European politics is needed. Today, in despite of all doomsday scenarios available, europeans live in a stable welfare society. Wars and famines are things that happen somewhere else, not here. So it is not surprising that the environmentalist turn politician still do not win the popular vote. It does win the popular sympathy… but lets be sincere for once: who wants to give power to persons concerned with coming soon tragedies? Think in one of the core ideas of the pro-Lisbon camp: Europe without the treaty will not function. The threat backfired in the election boot. And Europe goes on, perhaps worse than it could. But it goes on. Calling doom scenarios to the public debate, pro-europeans trapped themselves in their own catastrophe: they loosed credibility. And even if the public today is concerned with global warming, the green politicians must not fall in the same trap. I am writing from a sunny terrace in Utrecht, at noon. A bride and her groom walk by to get married in the stadhuis, and the people from the street cheers. The sun shines and people talk by phone, smiles, drink a beer. Are they concern with global warming? sure they are. Will they vote in fear of an impending ecological catastrophe? No, they won’t. To the green politician of today my message is: let fear be the tool of others. 

Because we know that, after all, fear can play a role in politics. Fear to a giant Europe, or fear to a tsunami… of migrants. As much as a change of tone is needed, a change of ideas is also needed. Just get the newspaper closer to you right now, and read what Sarkozy offers as his Europe: a closed garden. A protected eden of welfare, that is not ashamed of fearing the other. Let’s, for once again, be sincere: the welfare that europe enjoys today is also due to the migrant labor force. Europe is a continent of encounter and mix, a crossroad. The minorities that build the welfare of America depart from here half a century ago. And the minorities that worked for today europe’s welfare arrived here few years later.  The european leaders then asked for workers, and, luckily enough, they receive people. The people that lives and works with you today. Why then must we cave in to the fear of the migrant that the Sarkozy’s, Verdonks and Wilders of this world try to peddle to us? Yesterday, as today in the center of Utrecht, a couple got married in the park at the side of my house. A Moroccan couple, that is, that brought their music and their family to the party.  Yesterday, as today, the visitors of the park cheered and clapped. What have we to fear from the migrant? Today’s european politics must recognize our colorful society, and value the  enrichment that migrants have brought. Have they brought problems? sure they have! as much as the EU have brought problems as well. Do we have to base our politics in rejection and fear? no, we don’t. It’s time for a turning of the tide. Today’s progressive politician have the duty of rescuing the value of our current, diverse society. What most diverse that Europe, after all? Closing our borders to newcomers is an agenda of impoverishment, not only cultural, but economical. 

Economics, to end (and to begin). Europe started as the frequently deprecated europe of the coin and the steel, the economical area. A great deal of the success of the first decades of the EU was, beyond doubt, an economical success story. The huge unemployment before the wars was left behind. The welfare of europe is in great part due to the interconnected continent that we have become. But there are risks looming, beyond doubt. It is possible that the oil prices will peak by 2010, as some analyst predict, but it is a fact that the 100 dollars per barrel is a price unknown in history. The price of energy is still the elephant in the living room. And there is where green politics can and must play a role in the years to come. In the european scene, shyly and slowly indeed, the search for sustainable sources of energy is gaining ground. Europe is a populated continent, and affluent too. Many people with acquisitive power consumes energy. If there is a fundamental role for a transnational union, as the EU is, it is the finding of energy that without destroying our future, will support our present. Oil might or might not become cheaper, but it poisons the world of our children. It would be nice if everybody stops tomorrow using cars, but it would be far more important if the european creativity powers are employed to search, find and implement a way of living that do not destroy our own future. Energy is the key to this search, new sources of energy that as a matter of fact, exist. Wind, sun and water can produce the energy that the growing europe needs. If the european parliament has a task beyond the administration and control of bureaucracy, it’s the task of bringing green energy to the daily life of europeans. 

So elections are in the horizon, and politician are making their minds about what to tell us. As always, they face all sorts of possible defeats and threats. If I might add a word in their making of programs, drop the doomsday scenarios, please. Recognize the brimming diverse society that we live in, and bring your energy to further bloom and progress, don’t hide behind the fear of the other. And if you enjoy as much as I do the leisure of a midday in a terrace in Utrecht, defend our welfare state with energies that will not cover the sun, making from this sunny europe a restricted entry greenhouse. 

For all those raised fingers out there

 Sometimes it is well to think before implementing policy:   

Drunk driving after the passage of smoking bans in bars

Journal of Public Economics 92:1288-1305 

Scott Adams and Chad Cotti 

 Using geographic variation in local and state smoke-free bar laws in the US, we observe an increase in fatal accidents involving alcohol following bans on smoking in bars that is not observed in places without bans. Although an increased accident risk might seem surprising at first, two strands of literature on consumer behavior suggest potential explanations — smokers driving longer distances to a bordering jurisdiction that allows smoking in bars and smokers driving longer distances within their jurisdiction to bars that still allow smoking, perhaps through non-compliance or outdoor seating. We find evidence consistent with both explanations. The increased miles driven by drivers wishing to smoke and drink offsets any reduction in driving from smokers choosing to stay home following a ban, resulting in increased alcohol-related accidents. This result proves durable, as we subject it to an extensive battery of robustness checks.Here the site of the paper   

Yet another one

  Islamist Video Responds to Dutch Film And War on Terror  http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-dutch-islamists.html 

Arend

There is a while since I post here, since I am still thinking what to do with this blog in the time to come. Now via-via I read this, and an overview of Planeetgroenlinks tells me that what follows is yet unknown, so here. The link, and what is there pasted under:  http://www.parool.nl/nieuws/2008/APR/14/ams2.html     

Deelraadslid GroenLinks gearresteerd

ROB ROMBOUTS

AMSTERDAM - Arend Hamstra, deelraadslid voor GroenLinks in Oud-Zuid, is boos omdat hij zondag is gearresteerd bij een preventieve fouilleeractie in de Febosnackbar in de Leidsestraat. Toen hij in de politiecel zat, zijn, volgens Hamstra, beelden verwijderd die hij met zijn mobiele telefoon maakte van het optreden van de agenten. De GroenLinkser heeft bij de politie een klacht ingediend. Volgens Hamstra was hij niet agressief en pleegde hij geen verzet. ”Ik vroeg alleen waarom ze me fouilleerden en ik wilde hun dienstnummer weten. Eén agent gaf dat, maar ik mocht het niet opschrijven of in mijn telefoon zetten. Ik moest het maar onthouden.”De fouilleeractie vond plaats om half drie ’s nachts. ”We werden door acht agenten ingesloten. Je kunt helemaal niets. Het voelde alsof ik in een soort politiestaat terecht was gekomen. Dit verwacht je op de grens van Kosovo en Macedonië.”Hamstra is pricipieel tegenstander van preventief fouilleren. ”Maar als het op een niet-agressieve manier gebeurt en agenten vertellen wie ze zijn en waarom ze het doen, is er niets aan de hand.” 

Hamstra is aangehouden voor verstoring van de openbare orde, zegt politiewoordvoerder Rob van der Veen. ”Daarvoor hoef je geen blaasproef af te nemen. Wij hebben eerst uitgelegd waarom de actie plaatsvond. Toen bij het fouilleren bleek dat hij niets op zak had dat niet mocht, wilde hij niet weggaan. We hebben hem naar buiten gebracht. Toen heeft hij tot twee keer toe een agente aan haar kleding getrokken.”Hamstra werd samen met een andere arrestant naar het bureau gebracht. ”Met die man had ik niets te maken. Die was wel agressief. Hij schopte tegen een politieauto. Toen agenten met hem naar het bureau gingen, zeiden ze over mij: ‘Laten we hem dan ook maar meenemen.’Hamstra, werd zondagmorgen om kwart over acht vrijgelaten. ”De opnamen waren verdwenen.”De politie gaat die beschuldiging onderzoeken. ”We hebben de telefoon uit handen genomen en in zijn rugzak gestopt. Misschien heeft hij vergeten de beelden op te slaan of heeft hij het verkeerde knopje ingedrukt.” © Het Parool, 14-04-2008,  

Open brief aan Kritisch(e) Groenlinks(ers)

Beste mensen

Gisteren was de plenaire bijeenkomst van het toekomstproject. Wij hebben zo’n plenaire bijeenkomst gehad ongeveer een jaar geleden, en misschien zullen we er nog een hebben voor het project is afgelopen. Deze dag hebben wij de status van de drie panels bekeken en bediscussieerd. Het was een informatieve dag, met enkele belangrijke discussies. 

Jullie werden zeer gemist. 

Jullie werden gemist omdat wij het over jullie hebben gehad. Geen verrassing, omdat jullie deels verantwoordelijk zijn voor het bestaan van het toekomst project. Wij hebben ook over jullie gepraat omdat afgelopen maanden enkele van jullie prominente leden forse kritiek hebben geuit over het toekomstproject. In Amsterdam heeft Leo Platvoet, zelf lid van het beginselen panel, een politiek café begonnen met de uitspraak dat hij het panel niet kan verdedigen, omdat hij er tegen is. In de laatste partijraad heeft Karel van Broekhoven een sterk aanval tegen Bart Snels gelanceerd als hoofd van het wetenschappelijke bureau, en secretaris van het beginselen panel. Wij weten dat jullie grote twijfels hebben over wat tot nu toe is geschreven door het beginselen panel. Daarom heb ik, hebben wij, jullie gisteren gemist. Jullie waren daar niet om jullie kritiek concreet en constructief te maken. Feitelijk weten wij nog niet wat jullie kritiek precies is. 

Maar ja. Gisteren was het alleen maar een vergadering en het toekomstproject is meer dan vergaderen. Maar het project is ook bijna ten einde. Op 24 mei zullen wij nog een grote groenlinks dag hebben hierover, in juli wordt het laatste voorstel van een beginsel programma bekend, in september en oktober zullen er regionale bijeenkomsten zijn om het voorstel te bespreken en uiteindelijk zullen wij in november voor of tegen (met alle amendementen) stemmen in het congres. Mijn vraag is: wanneer zullen jullie jullie “move” doen? Wanneer zal jullie kritiek vertaald worden in een constructief (of niet) alternatief? 

Het feit is dat dag in dag uit verschillende afdelingen bezig zijn met discussies. Wij panelleden proberen om debatten los te laten in elke stad. Maar jullie posities (jullie alternatieven misschien?) zijn nog niet bekend, of zijn nog niet open voor debat. Zoals jullie weten was ik heel positief over de start van jullie opstand (onze opstand, toen). Maar nu, meer dan een jaar later, weten wij dat jullie het niet eens zijn met ons, maar wij weten niet precies waarmee niet. Erger nog, is niet bekend wat jullie willen in plaats van wat geschreven is.  

Het zou erg jammer zijn als jullie kritiek blijft zoals het nu is. Omdat een belangrijk punt van het toekomst project is, ten minste in mijn ogen, de debatcultuur van onze partij te versterken. Debat is altijd nodig, en kritische denkers ook. Maar niet alleen: wat echt nodig is, is dat jullie gedachten over de toekomst van groenlinks open staan voor een breed debat in de partij. Alleen dan kunnen wij, groenlinks leden, het met jullie eens worden, of niet.    

Wij weten dat congressen en amendementen zijn lange en saaie processen. Dus hoop ik dat jullie posities van tevoren open voor discussie staan. Als jullie dat niet doen, zijn wij groenlinksers de losers. Omdat het waar is dat ontevredenheid en verdeeldheid bestaan in onze gelederen. “De weg naar voren” is het contrast van ideeën in open debat. Om anderen te overtuigen, maar ook door bereid te zijn om overtuigd te worden door anderen.

Alleen door een open debat zal Groenlinks beter worden met het toekomstproject. En wij moeten beter worden. Ondanks dat het nog niet in de schijnwerpers staat, er komt nog een verkiezing aan. Een verkiezing waar wij veel te verliezen hebben, maar nog meer te winnen. Als wij Groenlinks willen presenteren  als de sterke pro-Europese partij die zij is, voorstander van scherp en constructieve kritiek op de bestaande unie, en eigenaar van een unieke visie op de toekomst, moeten wij van het toekomstproject een succes maken. Dus, beste kritisch(e) groenlinks(ers): zeg ons, aub, wat jullie te bieden hebben.

ALV groenlinks utrecht

Yesterday GL-Utrecht had an ALV. Around 20:00 it was declared open, given that the needed tools were made available.       Important to say, some people was preparing their speeches form long before.  The first event of the night was an important exchange of functions: Barry stop as treasurer and got involved in the next commission of financial control, meanwhile Els stop as financial controller and become treasurer.       Ditter gave us a brief overview of the stand of the partijraad,and asked how members would like to be informed about the partijraad. After a deafening silence, we follow the suggestion of several members on informing via email when the discussion texts for the partijraad are available. People will then be able to read and react, if and when they desire so.  After a pause we went into the real discussion of the evening, in which Cees explained the successes of our wethouders, starting by mentioning the new wind that blows across Utrecht with our college. Marry talked about her evaluation from the fractie, and Gijs reminded us our election program. Heleen did a view-right-away transcript of what was said.   The discussion got steam and trundled on, so that one hour later a point was clear for this reporteur: members of groenlinks utrecht are not happy with the style of government that our own wethouders have used: the pretension of a city government that gives the initiative to the citizen, that the citizen perceives as his and her government, is not to be achieved. Our wethouders, interestingly enough, disagree.      Given that this discussion  is a preparation for a mid term evaluation to occur in few weeks, between fractie, bestuur and wethouders, our ALV of yesterday promised interesting tension fields and sharp discussion… and I am looking forward!    

Linda, Tony and the other comeback kid

 More years that I want to remember have passed since few of my friends could gather into an empty house, with a functioning VCR and a crappy television, to watch the oral gymnastics of Linda Lovelace. Not much remains in my memory, after other films stamped their own close ups over the relevant moments of Deepthroat. So I was certainly interested in seeing it a couple of weeks ago, perhaps to check how my memory held out the pass of time and experiences. I must confess that I was surprised by a porno film that, at least in my opinion, has a strong feministic message. Twenty years ago I paid attention to other aspects. 

A week later, or two nights ago if you prefer, I was again looking at a repetition. The Sopranos fifth season was fully re-played in two nights, probably to warm up to the forthcoming sixth season, finally to be broadcasted in NL (soon). It was around a year ago that I saw these chapters of the Sopranos, and I loved them. I still like them, but contrary to seeing Deepthroath twenty years later, to see the Sopranos a year after was not very revelatory. 

Hum. I wonder what that means. 

And now to wait for CNN. Will this be a repetition of ’92 and the comeback kid? Or will we get yet another sweet talker into the white house? 

European greens on migration

Click here and get a pdf version of the document that the migration workgroup of the European Green Party (EGP) wrote along past weeks.  

 The history of this document is that since Groenlinks wrote her position paper on migration, back in 2004, we have been asking the EGP to follow suit. We did not invest a lot of effort, but along the years the need grew, and finally in 2006 the workgroup migration started, following a position paper that Cathalijne Buitenweg wrote on migration then. People from the Kleurrijk Platform (me among others) could attend a couple of workshops organized by our fractie in Brussels and the Herleen Group in Paris, and a first meeting of the workgroup in Brussels, about one and a half years ago. The last meeting of the workgroup, occurred two weeks ago, I could also attend.  In the meantime we passed an enquete to all green european parties, got results, and tried to convert the diversity of opinions into a coherent text. I was in charge of the inclusion of migrants (aka integration in NL) part. 

 What is politically interesting of this document is that it moves away from the idea of circular migration, quite popular in our parties few years ago. There were lots of discussions, but in the end, the proponents of the idea (Lubbers, among others) could not convince us that there is a substantial difference with the gastarbeider scheme of the fifties, an experience that we do not want to repeat.  The circular migration proposal is that if we allow migrants to come, they will happily turn back to their countries of origin in few years. In order to do so, we would give newcomers a  permit of stay valid for few years, and will deport them at the end if they would not get out on their own. No surprise such a position was not very popular in the european greens. What we plea for now is indeed more ways to get legally into europe, and the possibility of staying permanently if the person has a job. Plus integration courses. After all, that has been the core of the groenlinks positions on the matter, if you ask me. 

  Now, we will have to wait for green parties to read our text, and see what ammendments come for the next Council Meeting of the EGP. 

Economia Basica

¿Se apropia la gente de la ciudad, o se apropia la ciudad de la gente? Por una vez empezar con un dilema, aun cuando este peligrosamente cercano a una de esas inteligentes preguntas que abren paso a la inteligente mentalidad del escritor, cuando inteligentemente no se decide y dice “ambos” en las siguientes -e inteligentes- treinta o trescientas paginas… En fin, es difícil de evaluar la inteligencia del que escribe cuando apenas se escribe el primer octavo de la primera pagina. Pero igual… ¿Quien pertenece a quien? ¿Quien se adueña de quien?

Hay una esquina en Caracas que es la comisura húmeda de sus labios. Hay una plaza en Caracas que es mi mano desde su tobillo hasta otra humedad. Y no se si esa plaza y esa esquina son mías, o si yo soy de ellas. No se si algo ínfimo pero fundamental, propio pero entregado, se quedó en un arañazo, en una pared. No se si me llevé ínfimos y fundamentales vestigios de ladrillo y asfalto conmigo. No se si ambas. No se si cuando mis labios y cuando mis dedos Caracas me hizo suyo, o yo me apropie de Caracas. Se, sin embargo, que en ese momento hubo un intercambio, o mas bien un cambio. Se que alguien compró algo, o que algo compró a alguien. Conozco el valor y conozco el precio de lo que se compró. Pero no se quien es comprador y quien comprado.  Desde un puente en Basilea, una vez, deje caer una flauta al agua. No llegué a oír el ruido, y la dejé de ver en instantes. En ese momento, y quizás ahora también, supe que la madera hundiéndose en el agua, allá abajo, fui yo. Se que una vez le compre mi vida, o un pedazo de mi vida, a Basilea. Se lo que pagué, se lo que obtuve. Pero, obviando por un momento el melodramatismo obvio y manido del suicidio desde un puente cualquiera en una ciudad cualquiera. 

Obviando la historia que tu, lector quizás ya aburrido, puede imaginar sobre la flauta aquella. Inclusive obviando las obvias razones por las que quise, alguna vez, dejar de doler en tantas partes a la vez, y caminé hacia un puente para ponerle fin a todo. Obviando todo eso y mas me pregunto si realmente sé que le compré a Basilea, a la ciudad Basilea, un pedazo de mi vida una noche. ¿No será  que una noche hace ya bastante tiempo Basilea compró un pedazo mío? ¿Como explicar sino esta nostalgia idiota por una ciudad de pocas alegrías?  ¿Porqué este repetido sentir de volver a algo mío, cuando vuelvo a Basilea? 

No lo se. 

Se que una vez viví en Basilea, y se que Basilea y yo intercambiamos algo. Alguien -o algo- gano algo -o alguien-. Pero en esta economía básica de la ciudad aun no se quien es el sujeto y quien el objeto, quien el capital y quien el artesano. Se que me debo a Caracas y se que Caracas me debe. Se que hay cuentas cerradas, y cuentas que no se cierran. Pero también sé que en esta economía urbana no hay balances ni sumas cero. Quizás haya que inventar una nueva plusvalía, una nueva teoría del capital acumulado, del capitalista y del proletario. O quizás todo esto sea irrelevante y superfluo, porque a fin de cuentas solo somos humanos y si bien se nos ha dado el don de crear ciudades, no se nos ha dado la capacidad de entenderlas.