Last Wednesday, Italy's richest citizen and prime minister Silvio Berlusconi tended his resignation, effectively collapsing the government. He quickly re-formed his base on Sunday the 23rd, but in Italy – a country where the instability and fecklessness of the government is a national joke – for their longest-serving prime minister to be in such danger is quite an event.
First of all, everyone knows Italy is one of the world’s greatest manufacturer of elections, but just why is Italian politics such a mess? The system for electing members of parliament has single-member districts for 75% of the seats; the remaining 25% are allotted on a proportional basis. This results in a confusing hodgepodge of parties and organizations on Left, Right and Center, as the cutoff point for a parliamentary seat is very low and practically anyone can get into the Chamber of Deputies (in 2001, no less than a dozen parties had seats) Who ends up in the government can seem almost random, as everyone scrambles to form some kind of government. Not surprisingly, these partnerships rarely last long, and Italy has had 60 governments in the 60 years since the end of World War II.
Berlusconi came to power in 2001 with the Forza Italia (Hooray for Italy) party, forming a governing coalition called the Casa della Liberta (House of Liberty). He’s lasted a surprisingly long time; longer than any other Italian government since Mussolini. But now it looks like his days are numbered.
Times have been tough for Silvio. He was already under fire for his conservative views, support of the Iraq war, and the conflict of interest between Berlusconi being head of the government and his ownership of major Italian media, but then there were the massive corruption charges and legal battles, including (but not limited to):
- perjury
- false accounting
- embezzlement
- tax fraud (oh, but who in Italy doesn’t cheat on their taxes?)
- bribing a judge
- bribing a member of the Italian financial police
- various and sundry Mafia ties
The courts even went so far as it convict Berlusconi of several of these charges and sentence him to prison, but the convictions were overturned on some complicated legal issue relating to him being Prime Minister. Still, people said it was only a matter of time before the Berlusconi name would become more of a curse than a blessing, and his supporters would start to abandon him.
And that’s precisely what happened. Recently, his party (and those allied with it) lost 12 of 14 regional elections to the Left bloc know as the Olive Branch (I’m not sure if that pun works in Italian), spreading doubts about whether Berlusconi can hold together much longer. Then the Union of Christian Democrats, the smallest party in the governing coalition, defected, breaking the House of Liberty majority in parliament. We’ll just have to wait and see if the Left can have a government that lasted as long as Berlusconi’s did, or whether this will simply start the yearly cycle of governmental collapse Italy is used to.
I never thought old Silvio had much of a chance; Italy is a very left-wing country, and while they were willing to elect a conservative government in return for some order and stability, his heavy-handed way of doing things was just too much. The same was true in Spain a few years ago, and, in fact, it remains true in most of the democratic world. Some kind of Danger arises, the Right promises to battle it and either does or does not deal with the issue better than the Left, but once the Danger is over people yell “Throw the rascals out!” and the Left comes back in. Of course, there is always more Danger (and more frequently, an Issue or even a Problem), otherwise the government would never change. Democracy is a beautiful thing.
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Palestinian Terrorists And 'Ultra-Zionists': Unlikely Partners (In Hate, I Suppose)
My blog is screwing up; perhaps Benedict XVI has formally excommunicated me like he always threatened to do on his LiveJournal. Oh well.
In studying (or being forced to study) the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one very strong theme emerged: there were two Israels. One was Israel as it truly is, the other a deeply distorted picture of the country as many saw it.
The False Israel: A blood-drenched, aggressive, imperialist state, usually run by a council of bearded Elders of Zion who revel in the suffering of the Palestinians. Probably there’s some puppet or marionette reference in regards to Israeli’s relationship with the United States.
The Real Israel: Peaceful, altruistic, socially progressive, agnostic, and wholeheartedly dedicated to democracy. As Martin Buber one said, a Jewish state could never be a goyishe nation, "with cannons, flags and military decorations". People like Ben-Gurion were trying to build a society such as has never been seen before on earth. Of course, political realities made such a civilization practically impossible, and it’s not complete yet, but progress had been made.
Yet as i sit down to my improvised seder tomorrow, here’s the really striking thing about the whole situation:
Palestinians in general, fed on a diet of Dark-Ages PA media and constant contact with the rougher elements of Israeli policy (security barriers, continued military presence in Palestinian territories, etc.), hate the imagined picture of Israel and refuse to acknowledge that the true Israel exists.* This makes sense if one considers that if people see the country as it really is, they would neither want to harm it nor blame its defenders for wanting to preserve it. Of course, to the critics it doesn’t matter that huge majorities of Israelis oppose such measures, as 80% want to withdraw from Gaza, 2/3 want the settlements dismantled, and 75% desire a two-state solution (all poll numbers are according to the Israeli policy Forum). Even though almost all of Israel wants only the best for their Palestinian neighbors, they've never gained the security needed to let that altruism come into full effect..
To various degrees, Ultra-orthodox Jews and their allies among right-wing American Zionists idolize the gruesome caricature of Israel and despise the real thing. How could they not? It’s the embodiment of everything they stand against: peace-loving, feminist, secular, environmentally conscious, socially liberal, emphasizing cooperation over competition, and with no great desire to impose their particular Gospel on those who don’t want it.
Even today, it’s the religious settler types who demand money and protection while contributing absolutely nothing to society, and it is they who are responsible for why Israel still does not have a real constitution (“Israel’s constitution is the Torah!!”) and lacks some basic liberties, such as civil marriage.
Some people accuse me of being anti-religious; I’m not. I’m anti-clerical, because I don’t think dedication to higher calling should be about enriching yourself, and I’m anti-dogmatic because I don’t see the point of having faith if it doesn’t make you a better person. And any true understanding of Judaism cannot fail to instill one with a sense of social justice. After all, doesn't the Hagadah say (roughly) "Oppress no stranger among you, for remember that you were once strangers in the land of Egypt."
One might say there’s not really an equivalency between what the two groups would do to Israel if they had the chance. Fine, but the fact remains that neither outcome is desirable, as the spirit and value of Israel would still be utterly destroyed.
Ariel Sharon might be the darling of the Project for a New American Century, but if he (much less someone like Ehud Barak) tried to suggest Israeli domestic policies here, he’d be called a Communist and get death threats from Ann Coulter. And Sharon is to the right of most Israelis!
If Israel were magically moved from the Middle East to Western Europe, they’d become just another part of ‘Old Europe’ and be deemed irrelevant. If Israel were in South America, Bush would declare Sharon ‘a Hugo Chavez wannabe’ and try to spark a coup. Conversely, if American-style democracy and economics were imposed on Israel, the whole country would collapse tomorrow.
I really cannot wait for peace in the region. It’s going to be very interesting.
*Actually, I’m not entirely sure how effective PA propaganda is, as 70% of Palestinians want to end attacks on Israeli civilians. Still, it’s definitely there, and it’s hard to have a decent society where a minimum of 30% of the people want to kill civilians.
In studying (or being forced to study) the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one very strong theme emerged: there were two Israels. One was Israel as it truly is, the other a deeply distorted picture of the country as many saw it.
The False Israel: A blood-drenched, aggressive, imperialist state, usually run by a council of bearded Elders of Zion who revel in the suffering of the Palestinians. Probably there’s some puppet or marionette reference in regards to Israeli’s relationship with the United States.
The Real Israel: Peaceful, altruistic, socially progressive, agnostic, and wholeheartedly dedicated to democracy. As Martin Buber one said, a Jewish state could never be a goyishe nation, "with cannons, flags and military decorations". People like Ben-Gurion were trying to build a society such as has never been seen before on earth. Of course, political realities made such a civilization practically impossible, and it’s not complete yet, but progress had been made.
Yet as i sit down to my improvised seder tomorrow, here’s the really striking thing about the whole situation:
Palestinians in general, fed on a diet of Dark-Ages PA media and constant contact with the rougher elements of Israeli policy (security barriers, continued military presence in Palestinian territories, etc.), hate the imagined picture of Israel and refuse to acknowledge that the true Israel exists.* This makes sense if one considers that if people see the country as it really is, they would neither want to harm it nor blame its defenders for wanting to preserve it. Of course, to the critics it doesn’t matter that huge majorities of Israelis oppose such measures, as 80% want to withdraw from Gaza, 2/3 want the settlements dismantled, and 75% desire a two-state solution (all poll numbers are according to the Israeli policy Forum). Even though almost all of Israel wants only the best for their Palestinian neighbors, they've never gained the security needed to let that altruism come into full effect..
To various degrees, Ultra-orthodox Jews and their allies among right-wing American Zionists idolize the gruesome caricature of Israel and despise the real thing. How could they not? It’s the embodiment of everything they stand against: peace-loving, feminist, secular, environmentally conscious, socially liberal, emphasizing cooperation over competition, and with no great desire to impose their particular Gospel on those who don’t want it.
Even today, it’s the religious settler types who demand money and protection while contributing absolutely nothing to society, and it is they who are responsible for why Israel still does not have a real constitution (“Israel’s constitution is the Torah!!”) and lacks some basic liberties, such as civil marriage.
Some people accuse me of being anti-religious; I’m not. I’m anti-clerical, because I don’t think dedication to higher calling should be about enriching yourself, and I’m anti-dogmatic because I don’t see the point of having faith if it doesn’t make you a better person. And any true understanding of Judaism cannot fail to instill one with a sense of social justice. After all, doesn't the Hagadah say (roughly) "Oppress no stranger among you, for remember that you were once strangers in the land of Egypt."
One might say there’s not really an equivalency between what the two groups would do to Israel if they had the chance. Fine, but the fact remains that neither outcome is desirable, as the spirit and value of Israel would still be utterly destroyed.
Ariel Sharon might be the darling of the Project for a New American Century, but if he (much less someone like Ehud Barak) tried to suggest Israeli domestic policies here, he’d be called a Communist and get death threats from Ann Coulter. And Sharon is to the right of most Israelis!
If Israel were magically moved from the Middle East to Western Europe, they’d become just another part of ‘Old Europe’ and be deemed irrelevant. If Israel were in South America, Bush would declare Sharon ‘a Hugo Chavez wannabe’ and try to spark a coup. Conversely, if American-style democracy and economics were imposed on Israel, the whole country would collapse tomorrow.
I really cannot wait for peace in the region. It’s going to be very interesting.
*Actually, I’m not entirely sure how effective PA propaganda is, as 70% of Palestinians want to end attacks on Israeli civilians. Still, it’s definitely there, and it’s hard to have a decent society where a minimum of 30% of the people want to kill civilians.
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Papa Frita
Cardinal Ratzinger has been elected Pope.
That reactionary, narrow-minded old crank will do no good for the Catholic Church or for anyone else in the world.
Dogma, hatred, and self-righteousness will continue to overshadow compassion, charity, and reason.
He has, since 1981, been a prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith- the office formerly know as the Holy Inquisition.
He has driven out priests and dissidents of all stripes whenever he had the chance.
He silenced liberation theologian Father Leonardo Boff, the most prominent proponent of efforts to put the church on the side of the Latin American workers and farmers who were seeking a fairer distribution of the region's resources, a fuller democracy and a brighter future for their children.
He has carried out similar campaigns against any Catholic leader brave enough to defy Church doctrine on the rights of women, gays, and the use of birth control.
Clearly, he either doesn't trust Catholics to keep the faith or he doesn't trust himself to do the same, and so he has to avoid even hearing opinions he disagrees with.
The ONLY test of a good leader is whether he leads the fight against poverty, hatred, oppression and hopelessness and for greater freedom, dignity, and truth. In this capacity, Ratzinger has been a resounding failure.
Hopefully, his reign will be short-lived.
This is where you're headed, Kardinal.
That reactionary, narrow-minded old crank will do no good for the Catholic Church or for anyone else in the world.
Dogma, hatred, and self-righteousness will continue to overshadow compassion, charity, and reason.
He has, since 1981, been a prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith- the office formerly know as the Holy Inquisition.
He has driven out priests and dissidents of all stripes whenever he had the chance.
He silenced liberation theologian Father Leonardo Boff, the most prominent proponent of efforts to put the church on the side of the Latin American workers and farmers who were seeking a fairer distribution of the region's resources, a fuller democracy and a brighter future for their children.
He has carried out similar campaigns against any Catholic leader brave enough to defy Church doctrine on the rights of women, gays, and the use of birth control.
Clearly, he either doesn't trust Catholics to keep the faith or he doesn't trust himself to do the same, and so he has to avoid even hearing opinions he disagrees with.
The ONLY test of a good leader is whether he leads the fight against poverty, hatred, oppression and hopelessness and for greater freedom, dignity, and truth. In this capacity, Ratzinger has been a resounding failure.
Hopefully, his reign will be short-lived.
This is where you're headed, Kardinal.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Octet
A few quotes worth considering.
1.
A neoconservative is a liberal who’s been mugged by reality.
- Irving Kristol
2.
A neoconservative is a socialist who’s been mugged by mythology.
- Anon.
3.
For us, this day is only the interment of an elderly and querulous celibate, who came too late and who stayed too long, and whose primitive ideology did not permit him the true self-criticism that could have saved him, and others less innocent, from so many errors and crimes.
- Christopher Hitchens on the death of Pope John Paul II
4.
However, on religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.'
- Barry Goldwater
5.
To the average worker, Socialism doesn’t mean much more than better wages and shorter hours and nobody bossing you about.
- George Orwell
6.
What is religion? A scam. What is government? Oppression. What is property? Theft.
- Anon
7.
Rarely if ever do three men of the same profession meet together without forming some conspiracy against the public.
- Adam Smith
8.
Until I have seen evidence of the infallibility of man, I cannot support the imposition of any punishment so cruel as the death penalty.
- The Marquis de Sade
1.
A neoconservative is a liberal who’s been mugged by reality.
- Irving Kristol
2.
A neoconservative is a socialist who’s been mugged by mythology.
- Anon.
3.
For us, this day is only the interment of an elderly and querulous celibate, who came too late and who stayed too long, and whose primitive ideology did not permit him the true self-criticism that could have saved him, and others less innocent, from so many errors and crimes.
- Christopher Hitchens on the death of Pope John Paul II
4.
However, on religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.'
- Barry Goldwater
5.
To the average worker, Socialism doesn’t mean much more than better wages and shorter hours and nobody bossing you about.
- George Orwell
6.
What is religion? A scam. What is government? Oppression. What is property? Theft.
- Anon
7.
Rarely if ever do three men of the same profession meet together without forming some conspiracy against the public.
- Adam Smith
8.
Until I have seen evidence of the infallibility of man, I cannot support the imposition of any punishment so cruel as the death penalty.
- The Marquis de Sade
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)