Saturday, April 15, 2006
The Euston Manifesto
Yesterday a principled, rational statement appeared in the blogosphere from the political left. While I don't agree with it fully, boy am I glad to see something like this!! The Euston Manifesto is a very welcome breath of fresh air. Here is my point-by-point views of its details:
Preamble
Yeah, it's fine, although I think it might be a narrow-minded mistake to present the document as being belonging to the Left.
Statement of Principles
1) For democracy
I wish this had more emphasis against "rule by the elite". Nearly every two-bit dictator or ruling elite starts out seeing themselves as a true representative of the people, but then through a slow process, becomes the oppressor of new ideas and new leadership.
The key thing is that the government is controlled by the people and not vice versa. There will always be times when people get comfortable as the ruling class only to be tossed out by the populace, and when that happens, they view it as some sort of dangerous coup. Hogwash!
When the Palistinians elected Hamas, I viewed that as a good result because 1) we can now see the true face of these people, 2) they will have to accept the responsibility for their actions, 3) nothing is better for getting people to accept reality than having them eat their own cooking, having to live under the rule of their heros.
2) No apology for tyranny
Finally!
3) Human rights for all
Finally we see someone point out the double standards that are routinely applied. They add even more to this in the Elaborations section.
4) Equality
This has a lot of emphasis on "democratic" trade unions, which have been anything but democratic lately. I would argue that a better defense of workers' interests is a fair and open marketplace for employment coupled with strong government regulations of workplace safety and such.
I strongly agree with the rights of children and protecting people from sexual slavery and all forms of institutionalized abuse. If the world saw a large global movement against these things in an apolitical manner, a lot of things would get better.
5) Development for freedom
I strongly disagree with the statement about the expansion of global markets and free trade not being allowed to serve the narrow interests of a small corporate elite in the developed world. Sorry, but if you want my money to go to work in your country, you're going to have to protect my property rights.That includes the right to economic benefits of the capital I've put at risk in your country. If you want to bark up the correct tree, then create a set of fair laws regarding labor, consumers, and especially property rights and enforce them rigorously. People have no frickin idea how terrible it is when capitalists put huge amounts of money into a country only to have it nationalized or stolen by some other official means.
6) Opposing anti-Americanism
The USA has consistently done more good in the world than most everyone else. That statement probably shocks a lot of people, but I stand by it. The world has relied on the USA to do its dirty work: fighting the Soviets for decades and now fighting Islamofascists who are most definitely already at war with us. There is a terrible irresponsibility in the world today that points to its military as being evil while gladly living in the bubble of peace that their military provides. It's no different than claiming the butchers who slaughter cows are somehow horrible people yet the people who eat hamburgers are above it all. The people living in the bubble of peace believe that what they experience is normal. It's not. The normal state of things is a gigantic ugly power grab. The USA must exist within that power grab world and do a great deal of work to maintain the bubble of peace that exists over the USA and Europe. It's about time that Europe woke up to that fact.
As far as Iraq is concerned, it was a classic Sun Tzu move. We were already at war there. The Islamofascists were obviously going to do hit-and-run attacks on the West while remaining hidden. When your enemy is hiding like that, seizing a place where they must respond (a time and place of your own choosing) is necessary. What better than to overthrow a horrible dictator that no one wants in place (except the recipients of oil-for-food bribes), a dictator that we are already at war against, and a location in the home region of our overall enemy. The Islamofascists were forced to invade Iraq to chase after us. They did. They're losing and they're slowly losing the support of the people of Iraq and of the Arabs and Muslims in general because they're killing their own people. I could go on and on about the root causes of Islamofascism (oppression, not poverty), the best method of attacking those root causes (self-rule for all), and the best means of fighting the Islamofascists that are here now (straight out of Sun Tzu and all the modern military strategy books).
It's very easy to point to some event and frame it in such a way as to make the US look bad. But if you do the same thing for other countries, they look just as bad or usually worse. Some of the areas where I think we've done harm is when we violate our own principles, such as in agricultural protectionism.
It's very odd that at the time when the US is finally learning to oppose bad dictators and idealistically embrace democracy (even when that results in electing people we truly despise), that people are so irrationally against the US. What we're finding out is that in many cases, the people so vocally against us are the ones making shady deals with ugly dictators. The roles are reversing.
7) For a two-state solution
Historically, when one group conquers another, they do it with a vengence and they take the spoils. We definitely see that with Arabs slaughtering fellow Muslims in a grotesque genocide in Darfur. The Israelis kept land that they conquered after being attacked by their neighbors multiple times. They've bent over backwards to make other people happy in following a one-sided peace process for decades. They've made multiple generous offers to those with grievances. But that's not good enough. Those people want the Israelis to play nice so that they can drive the Israelis into the sea and "wipe Israel off the map".
My advice is to face reality (if you don't like what I'm writing, then you should definitely read what's at the other end of that link).
But I believe in people overall even when they behave badly. I'm all for a two-state solution. Give the Palistinians a state and then hold them accountable when rockets fly over into Israel (as they have been lately). Here's a clue: if you keep on trying to declare war, eventually the other guys might actually accept your offer.
8) Against racism
I would like to see this section come right out and say that we should just ignore people's race altogether. Within the US, every "despised" group of people has had to prove themselves in the court of popular opinion against prejudice and bigotry. The Irish, Italians, Jews, Chinese, Japanese, etc. have done this. It's an uphill battle and maybe it's unfair. But I refuse to accept bigotry and preferential treatment behind some ideal of "equal outcomes". If popular opinion says that you're group has some negative aspect, it's up to your group to prove them wrong.
9) United against terror
Finally! I'd also like to see this oppose journalists who work closely with terrorists.
10) A new internationalism
This is excellent in that it defines the cases where a country forfeits its sovereignty. But I fear that this could open the door to opportunistic colonization, such as in Lebanon by Syria.
I'd like to see something about how the UN is now a totally corrupt and ineffective organization. I honestly don't see any other alternatives because an international body like that is always going to be unaccountable. The EU is heading in the same direction.
11) A critical openness
Finally!
12) Historical truth
Finally! It's about time to admit that Communism was a murderous disaster.
13) Freedom of ideas
Yes!
14) Open source
I've worked with open source software and proprietary software for many years. I agree that there's a lot of truth in what they say. I'm a patent inventor myself (with only one patent granted, shared with several others), I believe that a lot of patents should never have been granted. Open source is a way of doing things that is very successful and I have great hopes for it in the future. But some areas must continue to have property rights when they require huge costs of invention yet can be easily used by others who didn't do the work.
15) A precious heritage
Excellent!
Elaborations
Yes, millions are in poverty, but poverty has become a political problem and not an economic problem. In the world today, it's very easy to make the required changes to allow capitalists to employ the labor of any given country and pay those people a competitive wage based on their productivity. Should any group of capitalists attempt to exploit those people, an open system allows other capitalists to step in and offer better terms.
I can't even begin to say how happy I am to read this:
UPDATE: I signed it. I'd sign it in my own blood if they'd let me.
UPDATE: Here is a good article about "Eurabia".
Preamble
Yeah, it's fine, although I think it might be a narrow-minded mistake to present the document as being belonging to the Left.
Statement of Principles
1) For democracy
I wish this had more emphasis against "rule by the elite". Nearly every two-bit dictator or ruling elite starts out seeing themselves as a true representative of the people, but then through a slow process, becomes the oppressor of new ideas and new leadership.
The key thing is that the government is controlled by the people and not vice versa. There will always be times when people get comfortable as the ruling class only to be tossed out by the populace, and when that happens, they view it as some sort of dangerous coup. Hogwash!
When the Palistinians elected Hamas, I viewed that as a good result because 1) we can now see the true face of these people, 2) they will have to accept the responsibility for their actions, 3) nothing is better for getting people to accept reality than having them eat their own cooking, having to live under the rule of their heros.
2) No apology for tyranny
Finally!
3) Human rights for all
Finally we see someone point out the double standards that are routinely applied. They add even more to this in the Elaborations section.
4) Equality
This has a lot of emphasis on "democratic" trade unions, which have been anything but democratic lately. I would argue that a better defense of workers' interests is a fair and open marketplace for employment coupled with strong government regulations of workplace safety and such.
I strongly agree with the rights of children and protecting people from sexual slavery and all forms of institutionalized abuse. If the world saw a large global movement against these things in an apolitical manner, a lot of things would get better.
5) Development for freedom
I strongly disagree with the statement about the expansion of global markets and free trade not being allowed to serve the narrow interests of a small corporate elite in the developed world. Sorry, but if you want my money to go to work in your country, you're going to have to protect my property rights.That includes the right to economic benefits of the capital I've put at risk in your country. If you want to bark up the correct tree, then create a set of fair laws regarding labor, consumers, and especially property rights and enforce them rigorously. People have no frickin idea how terrible it is when capitalists put huge amounts of money into a country only to have it nationalized or stolen by some other official means.
6) Opposing anti-Americanism
The USA has consistently done more good in the world than most everyone else. That statement probably shocks a lot of people, but I stand by it. The world has relied on the USA to do its dirty work: fighting the Soviets for decades and now fighting Islamofascists who are most definitely already at war with us. There is a terrible irresponsibility in the world today that points to its military as being evil while gladly living in the bubble of peace that their military provides. It's no different than claiming the butchers who slaughter cows are somehow horrible people yet the people who eat hamburgers are above it all. The people living in the bubble of peace believe that what they experience is normal. It's not. The normal state of things is a gigantic ugly power grab. The USA must exist within that power grab world and do a great deal of work to maintain the bubble of peace that exists over the USA and Europe. It's about time that Europe woke up to that fact.
As far as Iraq is concerned, it was a classic Sun Tzu move. We were already at war there. The Islamofascists were obviously going to do hit-and-run attacks on the West while remaining hidden. When your enemy is hiding like that, seizing a place where they must respond (a time and place of your own choosing) is necessary. What better than to overthrow a horrible dictator that no one wants in place (except the recipients of oil-for-food bribes), a dictator that we are already at war against, and a location in the home region of our overall enemy. The Islamofascists were forced to invade Iraq to chase after us. They did. They're losing and they're slowly losing the support of the people of Iraq and of the Arabs and Muslims in general because they're killing their own people. I could go on and on about the root causes of Islamofascism (oppression, not poverty), the best method of attacking those root causes (self-rule for all), and the best means of fighting the Islamofascists that are here now (straight out of Sun Tzu and all the modern military strategy books).
It's very easy to point to some event and frame it in such a way as to make the US look bad. But if you do the same thing for other countries, they look just as bad or usually worse. Some of the areas where I think we've done harm is when we violate our own principles, such as in agricultural protectionism.
It's very odd that at the time when the US is finally learning to oppose bad dictators and idealistically embrace democracy (even when that results in electing people we truly despise), that people are so irrationally against the US. What we're finding out is that in many cases, the people so vocally against us are the ones making shady deals with ugly dictators. The roles are reversing.
7) For a two-state solution
Historically, when one group conquers another, they do it with a vengence and they take the spoils. We definitely see that with Arabs slaughtering fellow Muslims in a grotesque genocide in Darfur. The Israelis kept land that they conquered after being attacked by their neighbors multiple times. They've bent over backwards to make other people happy in following a one-sided peace process for decades. They've made multiple generous offers to those with grievances. But that's not good enough. Those people want the Israelis to play nice so that they can drive the Israelis into the sea and "wipe Israel off the map".
My advice is to face reality (if you don't like what I'm writing, then you should definitely read what's at the other end of that link).
But I believe in people overall even when they behave badly. I'm all for a two-state solution. Give the Palistinians a state and then hold them accountable when rockets fly over into Israel (as they have been lately). Here's a clue: if you keep on trying to declare war, eventually the other guys might actually accept your offer.
8) Against racism
I would like to see this section come right out and say that we should just ignore people's race altogether. Within the US, every "despised" group of people has had to prove themselves in the court of popular opinion against prejudice and bigotry. The Irish, Italians, Jews, Chinese, Japanese, etc. have done this. It's an uphill battle and maybe it's unfair. But I refuse to accept bigotry and preferential treatment behind some ideal of "equal outcomes". If popular opinion says that you're group has some negative aspect, it's up to your group to prove them wrong.
9) United against terror
Finally! I'd also like to see this oppose journalists who work closely with terrorists.
10) A new internationalism
This is excellent in that it defines the cases where a country forfeits its sovereignty. But I fear that this could open the door to opportunistic colonization, such as in Lebanon by Syria.
I'd like to see something about how the UN is now a totally corrupt and ineffective organization. I honestly don't see any other alternatives because an international body like that is always going to be unaccountable. The EU is heading in the same direction.
11) A critical openness
Finally!
12) Historical truth
Finally! It's about time to admit that Communism was a murderous disaster.
13) Freedom of ideas
Yes!
14) Open source
I've worked with open source software and proprietary software for many years. I agree that there's a lot of truth in what they say. I'm a patent inventor myself (with only one patent granted, shared with several others), I believe that a lot of patents should never have been granted. Open source is a way of doing things that is very successful and I have great hopes for it in the future. But some areas must continue to have property rights when they require huge costs of invention yet can be easily used by others who didn't do the work.
15) A precious heritage
Excellent!
Elaborations
Yes, millions are in poverty, but poverty has become a political problem and not an economic problem. In the world today, it's very easy to make the required changes to allow capitalists to employ the labor of any given country and pay those people a competitive wage based on their productivity. Should any group of capitalists attempt to exploit those people, an open system allows other capitalists to step in and offer better terms.
I can't even begin to say how happy I am to read this:
The founding supporters of this statement took different views on the military intervention in Iraq, both for and against. We recognize that it was possible reasonably to disagree about the justification for the intervention, the manner in which it was carried through, the planning (or lack of it) for the aftermath, and the prospects for the successful implementation of democratic change. We are, however, united in our view about the reactionary, semi-fascist and murderous character of the Baathist regime in Iraq, and we recognize its overthrow as a liberation of the Iraqi people. We are also united in the view that, since the day on which this occurred, the proper concern of genuine liberals and members of the Left should have been the battle to put in place in Iraq a democratic political order and to rebuild the country's infrastructure, to create after decades of the most brutal oppression a life for Iraqis which those living in democratic countries take for granted — rather than picking through the rubble of the arguments over intervention.I would have liked to see freedom of religion made more clear.
UPDATE: I signed it. I'd sign it in my own blood if they'd let me.
UPDATE: Here is a good article about "Eurabia".
// posted by Bruce @ 8:36 AM 
