The argument for collectivism is simple if false; it is an immediate emotional argument. The argument for individualism is subtle and sophisticated; it is an indirect rational argument.
– Milton Friedman (via Ilana Mercer)
|
|||||
|
Last year I suggesting it was time to think about pulling out of Afghanistan as one has to balance the positive effects of Western forces on the security situation with the negative effects on Afghan opinion of having foreign troops there for so long that they start looking like occupiers rather than allies. However the Taliban has shown that it is not quite ready to lay down and die, as the various reports over the last few days have demonstrated the fighting is far from over. Nevertheless there is no real prospect for a Taliban return to power and in most of the country the security situation seems tolerable. And yet… I worry what the actual objectives are in Washington and London. If the main strategic goal is to produce a stable Afghanistan (by local standards) in which the Taliban has no significant chance of being more than a minor insurgent irritant, then that is almost certainly an objective well within reach. That will leave the bulk of the country divided up between sundry (narco-)warlords and the ‘government’ of Hamid Karzai (or the ‘Mayor of Kabul’ as many call him), which in Afghanistan seems to be the natural order of things and, most importantly from a western view point, is hostile to the Taliban. But if the objective really is a unitary nation-state run from Kabul, with a strong central government capable and willing to eradicate Afghanistan’s large drug cash-crop economy, then the planners in the Pentagon and Whitehall are, to put it bluntly, out of their collective geo-strategic minds. To recap the obvious, unlike Iraq which was invaded by large US/UK forces without any local allied elements, Afghanistan was largely ‘liberated’ by an alliance of Afghan warlords with massive US air support and an important but numerically small force of US/UK/Canadian/Australian spec ops and light infantry units… in other words the great majority of the manpower to overthrow the Taliban was provided by the same warlords who now run most of the country in loose feudal vassalage to Kabul. Whilst Afghanistan is hardly a human rights paradise (the Abdul Rahman apostasy case comes to mind), it is still a great deal better off than it was under the Taliban. Provided the western objectives are not really ‘nation building’ but simple ‘tyranny wrecking’, I see no reason why this cannot all end up going down in history as a highly successful episode just so long as the dementing influence of the unwinnable ‘war against drugs’ is not allowed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. June 21st, 2006 | 29 comments - (Comments are closed)
 The Guardian headline states that President Ahmadinejad’s support in Iran is “soaring” although there are no political polls to provide any firm evidence. Cue the quote from a Professor of political science at the University of Tehran that provides a figure without any indication of its accuracy:
Other sources are “Iranian officials and western diplomats” although why their information should be treated as honest and impartial is not provided. We must assume that Iranian bureaucrats provide information about their elected President from a neutral stance. The article then states that the President is favourite to win a second term in 2009, which is only three years away. He may already be a lame duck given the electoral cycle! It is also attributed to his obigatory resistance to the United States. Attributing his success to his populist style and fortnightly meet-the-people tours of the country, the sources said that as matters stood, Mr Ahmadinejad was the clear favourite to win a second term in 2009. The perception that the president was standing up to the US on the nuclear issue was also boosting his standing. Further down, balance returns with alternative views that Ahmadinejad’s popularity stems from his lack of corruption and a high oil price that allows subsidies to be sprayed at the peasant and poor urban classes who voted for him. However, the recent unrest amongst minorities is wrapped into “US claims”: “US officials have described the Iranian president as a threat to world peace and claim that he faces a popular insurrection at home”. His denial of the Holocaust is only “apparent”. Here, Iran is represented in the reporting as another democracy. with an emphasized subtext that Ahmadinejad’s popularity stems from threats by the United States as he is merely standing up for the rights of his country and resisting the demands of the West. An unbalanced article informed by unattributable sources, a lack of hard evidence, and a series of talking heads that are supposed provide a middle point from which readers infer the truth. June 21st, 2006 | 11 comments - (Comments are closed)
It has been a while since my last visit to the excellent India Uncut blog – too long. First laugh – Amit’s latest post links to a chef dispensing advice concerning prawns. As an Aussie, I was rather amused to discover some poor Seppo writing in, wondering what to do with that whole ‘vein thing’ running down the back of a prawn. Kiss it goodbye or let it lie? Basically, if you bought your prawns to impress – as a stand-out ingredient in some culinary masterpiece you’ve had up your sleeve for months – then you should clean them. Even if the prawns are merely a somewhat important ingredient amongst a few others, you should clean them. If you are using those bland tiddlers from Thailand – to add an interesting texture to your gruel or something along those lines – then don’t bother cleaning them. I swear, I was born with that innate knowledge. Bewdy, mate. Throw another… oh, never mind. Now, if you bought your prawns to impress, and in doing so you selected those aforementioned bland Thai tiddlers – then you should clean them, because that’s your punishment for being a tightarse. Apologies, the one minute I spent looking through idiotic online Strine dictionaries did not yield the definition of “tightarse”. Note to the confused; if you are a tightarse, you are cheap. And you know who you are. Second laugh – some politically incorrect Indian astrologer has decided that “Mumbai” is somewhat unlucky, and “Bombay” is rather more auspicious. Whatever. All the terribly clever weathermen on Australia’s two publicly-funded television broadcasters take great pride in saying “Moom-Bye”, like it is a signifier of one’s magnificent cultural adjustment. A decisive strike in your valiant quest to bash down those imperialist Anglosized verbal imposts, comrade! When I was in Bombay, I did not meet a single Indian who termed their fair city ‘Mumbai’ – although a lot of Western tourists did. Having said that, perhaps the Indians did too, because I believe the correct pronounciation is “Mum (like your non-American, Pommy/Aussie mother) – Bay”, and – if you say it quickly (which is invariably the case, because Indians are the greatest communicators in the world) – that sounds rather similar to “Bombay”. Then again, I do not know, because I do not speak Hindi, and am basically a stupid Westerner. June 21st, 2006 | One comment - (Comments are closed)
I doubt that the Afro hairstyle will ever come back into fashion, which is a great shame for all blaxploitation fans. On the other hand, large swathes of sub-saharan Africa may become far richer than they are today, as globalisation deepens. This is worth celebrating. June 20th, 2006 | 6 comments - (Comments are closed)
Reflecting on my recent, rather intemperate post about whaling, I have decided that I may have been a little too hard-line on the issue. Despite the current miniscule numbers of non-Minke whales culled by Japan (only Japan hunts species other than Minkes), it would not hurt to further encourage population growth in less populous whale species. Thus, in an imperfect world where the chances of internationally roaming whales ever being made the property of individuals is about zero, I suggest a compromise with the pro-whaling nations as a best case scenario. Make an offer to Norway, Iceland and Japan to lift the IWC moratorium, in return for all IWC members (with the obvious but unspecified target being Japan) agreeing to the following stipulations: i) all subsidies to whaling industries must be incrementally phased out ii) whale hunting must be limited to the two Minke whale species with abundant populations, until the population numbers of other whale species have recovered sufficiently to remove them from the upper reaches of the ‘endangered’ list Naturally, these conditions need refining; how to decide population numbers, how quickly the subsidies will be dropped etc. Regardless, if these two stipulations are broadly accepted by all parties, Japan can take such an agreement back to its belligerent and powerful pro-whaling lobby and present it as an ostensible overwhelming victory. Truth is, by letting market forces set demand – and hence supply – stipulation one would eventually harpoon (sorry, couldn’t resist) the whaling industry in that country, and stipulation two would protect the less numerous species of whale in the process. I would not expect the perpetually emotionally overwhelmed anti-whaling lobby to accede to such a proposal, but I think it stands as the most effective way of durably cutting back the industry – if that is what consumers demand. Let the market decide the future of whaling. June 20th, 2006 | 17 comments - (Comments are closed)
I am not a driven businessman, but a driven artist. I never think about money. Beautiful things make money. June 20th, 2006 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
The Libertarian Alliance is highlighting the disgraceful way Belgium has been trying to intimidate people who hold politically incorrect views. Put an article up that the powers-that-be do not like and they will order you to take it down or face prosecution. But then what can you expect from a country which simply bans established political parties they dislike? Support the right to home school your children? Advocate the right to self-defence? Want to express your views about Islamic culture? Prepare to be criminalised by the Belgian state. June 20th, 2006 | 22 comments - (Comments are closed)
Well, I had to return to normality eventually. I have just come back with the new Mrs Pearce from Mauritius, an island in the Indian Ocean lying off the east coast of Africa and south of the Equator. An extremely interesting island with a mixed history and a heady brew of different cultures, part Anglosphere, part French, part Indian and part African.(Here is a good collection of literature linked to it). About 11 hours direct flying time from London, the island is pretty much geared these days as a “romantic destination in the tropics”. I liked the place and its people a lot as we travelled around the various nature parks, looking at the coral reefs, the fish, birdlife and assorted animals. If I have one grumble it is that, much to my amazement, the whole island is besotted with English football. Egads, I go all this way and they are still raving about the World Cup. It is funny what sticks in the mind, often completely unexpected. I discovered that the island produces some of the finest and most fantastically detailed model boats I have ever seen. You can, for a fraction of what it would cost in Britain, buy a scale model wooden Victory, or Constitution, or Sovereign of the Seas, or an America’s Cup racer, WW2 battleship, cruiser or Blue Riband liner. There is a substantial industry of locals churning out these boats. The Napoleonic era – when Mauritius was seized by the British from the French – seems to provide the inspiration for most of the models. Unable to resist – I am an amateur sailor anyway – my wife and I bought a model of the 1840s U.S. schooner Albatros, now sitting proudly on the mantelpiece. Hardwoods are the base for much of the boats that are made and as a result, will last for years. The detailing on the rigging, sails, tiny cannon and masts are incredible. (Okay, I am an overgrown boy at heart). And of course while on the island I read Patrick O’Brien’s The Mauritius Command. For a moment, sitting on the beach sipping a beer, I thought I saw Lucky Jack Aubrey walking along, staring out to sea to spot French raiders… Anyway, it has been good to give blogging a miss for a while and re-charge the writing batteries. Thanks to everyone for their good wishes and messages. I really appreciate it. June 19th, 2006 | 11 comments - (Comments are closed)
Oh, how quickly smug, self-righteous smiles can turn into outraged gasping. I was quite pleased to see Japan, Norway, Iceland and others eventually get one over the woolly-thinking Western mouth-foamers at the recent International Whaling Commission meeting in St Kitts & Nevis. Of course, this is a mostly symbolic victory for those in favour of harvesting resources. In a practical sense, it may improve the pro-whaling camp’s ability to set the agenda at future IWC get-togethers. This achievement was dwarfed, however, by the far more notable victory enjoyed by the anti-whalers earlier in the conference. The Japanese attempted to enact secret ballot voting at IWC conferences, and failed. This is a considerable strategic defeat, because secret ballots would have significantly enhanced the appeal of Japan’s chequebook diplomacy in the eyes of swinging IWC members, who might otherwise be concerned about domestic political consequences should they choose to vote with the Japanese. Regardless of the relative unimportance of the Japanese camp’s win – and the relative importance of the anti-whaling bloc’s success at the meeting – the usual suspects are up in arms, like they always are. More on that later. I believe Japan would require a two-thirds majority of members to overturn the moratorium on whaling that is currently in place, and they have no hope of mustering those kinds of numbers any time soon. Personally, I think Japan should simply follow Norway’s lead and unilaterally discard the moratorium. Stop using this ‘scientific research’ nonsense as a pretext for a perfectly legitimate operation. The Japanese – and any other nation – have an absolute right to harvest the whale resource in international waters. They do not need to make excuses to anyone. It is time they looked the anti-whaling hysterics like Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand and their shrieking NGO allies in the eye and told the lot of them to get stuffed. Take Greenpeace genius Danny Kennedy, walking the usual carping course:
Stupidity? How is this for stupidity, you stupid, stupid, stupid man; if there is no demand for whaling, why do you work for an organisation that helps make the dispute more intractable by whipping up ‘pro’ and ‘anti’ mobs and creating political obduracy in Japan over the issue? Can you not see why Japan subsidises its whaling industry? How long would the Japanese government subsidise its whaling industry if the passion was sucked out of the debate? Why not let whaling die a natural death – as it otherwise would in a decade or so – if left unperturbed by environmental crusaders? Do you revel in being counterproductive towards your stated aims, Danny Kennedy? If anyone is interested, I have previously made the case for dropping the moratorium on whaling here. June 19th, 2006 | 31 comments - (Comments are closed)
What happens when you combine 200 liters of Diet Coke and over 523 Mentos mints? EepyBird.com has the answer in the form of the Extreme Diet Coke & Mentos Experiments.  June 18th, 2006 | 14 comments - (Comments are closed)
AmazonBay by Sean Park is a short film about where technology and trends in financial markets get us in 2015. Fantastic. Literally. Thanks to a brush with the financial services in my previous life, the film brought a rueful smile to my face. Especially the bit about assets and cashflows of government programmes being managed dynamically and in real time and with perfect liquidity and every financial instrument…  Heh. Watch the whole thing. Link via Confused of Calcutta. June 18th, 2006 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Recent Comments