Weekend Reflections is on again. Please comment on any topic of interest (civilised discussion and no coarse language, please). Feel free to put in contributions more lengthy than for the Monday Message Board or standard comments.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
John Quiggin 
In the Fairfax Press today http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pell-challenges-islam–o-ye-of-little-tolerant-faith/2006/05/04/1146335872951.html it was reported that Cardinal Pell had spoken on Islam to a US Catholic business forum. In his address he related his impression of the violent nature of Islam that he had gained from reading the Koran.
He then referred to the “population race� where it was clear that Islamic nations were outbreeding the democratic and former soviet communist countries, implying that a program of increasing the breeding rates of non-Islamic peoples was needed in addition to Christian-mediated dialogue (secularism not being “fit� for such a task).
He then introduces pagans into the equation in order to have a shot at them.
The situation of the United States and Australia is not as dire as this, although there is no cause for complacency. It is not just a question of having more children, but of rediscovering reasons to trust in the future. Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.
Read the entire text here:
http://www.sydney.catholic.org.au/Archbishop/Addresses/200627_681.shtml
This happened on February 4, 2006 so is hardly new news but I was struck by Pell’s introduction of a pagan strawman to sacrifice. This, in order to make a point about how secularists, and presumably those with faith in nature, in humanism, in science, but not faith in a benign Christian God are not fit to enter into a constructive dialogue with Islam. Frankly, none of these other faiths (nature, science, humanism) are in conflict with the notion of a God – it rather depends on how exclusively God is defined.
I’m trying to follow the logic here. Pagans must represent those who worship nature above God. If God = business (remember this is a business forum in God’s America), then anyone who puts nature above business is ≠God, therefore must be pagan. What are we to think? The pagans are demanding a reduction in greenhouse gases but the ensuing climate changes may not be benign. Are the pagans therefore right or wrong? The Cardinal sounds Confused.
Pell says that it is always useful to know accurately where you are before you start to decide what you should be doing. He has go a long way to go before will he know where he is, if this is the place where he chooses to start.
This is not to belittle Pell’s call for a dialogue, but I call into question his descriptions as to who is fit or not fit, for such a dialogue.
I find the document, “Labor’s budget rules”, disappointing on the medium term strategy. I am aware that Labor is still bleeding from the “Beazley black holeâ€? charge but that charge is completely false: the net borrowing (cash deficits) of the early 1990’s was fully justified not only on cyclical grounds but also on structural grounds. Instead of running away from it, the ALP should be confronting this lie head on.
The document (Labor’s Budget Rules) says that a Labor Government will keep the budget in surplus on average over the cycle. But what is Labor seeking to balance – the cash account or the cash account? A good many economists believe that a Government, especially one which starts with such low debt, should balance the operational account but leave room for net borrowing for capital purposes. If it is the cash account that it wants to balance, the promise it makes of “quality public services� completely lacks credibility. Another opportunity lost to make Federal Labor distinctive on the social infrastructure deficiency?
What do you think John?
Maybe George is pining for the days of the Church in its’ Middle Ages, hostile- to-science phase.
I think its’ safe to say that Pell, if he had been around, would have been at the forefront of the ‘Jihad’ against Galileo.
Something to do with his crusading spirit perhaps? “Hammer of the Witches” for bedtime reading, anyone?
Cardinal Pell probably has greater knowledge than most of us in the matter of religious violence. Deuteronomy 21:18 is probably quite palatable to someone who has decided never to have children.
WTF was Pell doing addressing “US Catholic business leaders”?
And how’s this:
Nice. Total nutcase. Always has been.
Jews also sacrificed animals in the old testament. And wasn’t Jesus a type of human sacrifice to remove the guilt of our sins?
The idea that the green movement is a form of earth religion is hardly original. And not that different to the accusation made by some that the market has become the new religion for the right.
Perhaps it’s all just competing revelations?
Terje, people who in no way associate themselves with any kind of “green movement” are calling for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. This has nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of “earth religion”, either.
If I observe a series of increasing temperature measurements and draw a conclusion from that, it’s not a revelation from a magical sky pixie.
A friend has just returned from the Plastic & Rubber Industries Exhibition
in Shanghai which apparently included products made from just about everything.
He gives manufacturing, as such, in Australia 10 years – more likely 5.
For example they are now producing cubby houses which can be landed in Oz for less than it costs to manufacture here.
Over dinner one night he was told by a local the plan is “we will kill your economy. Australia will be a supplier of raw materials. When we get sick of paying you for them we will come and take you over”.
Next day the the same guy showed him a naval yard full of brand new warships.
A real tory the only thing that gave him hope: the environmental degradation all over the place which has noticed has increasingly got worse in the four years he has been travelling there. No greenie he is now convinced as to global warming by the stories of horrendous droughts and rapid desertification in the Chinese interior he was regaled with by several people.
Interesting, Ugly Dave. Do you also believe the Jewish Banker conspiracy?
Nice to see the Yellow Peril’s alive and well. Just as well we’ve got a new Dictation Test just about ready to keep the inscrutable little blighters out.
ON Thursday Radio National Breakfast carried an interview with Professor Sir Michael Marmot talking about a major international study into health stats between various developed nations. The interesting thing about the study was not that it showed US morbidity and mortality to be at much higher levels than European nations and Canada: that much was expected on account of the large proportion of the US population unable to afford health insurance. The revelation that US ‘free market’-based health spending far exceeds other developed nations and yet delivers poor outcomes is so well known as to be a cliche.
No, the interesting thing about the study was that US morbidity and mortality remained significantly worse at every income or wealth measure. That is, rich Americans with access to the best – certainly the most expensive – treatment for illness, were still more likely to be sick and die younger than equally wealthy Brits or French.
Marmot noted that possible factors such as preventive health policies and public health campaigns were a possible factor, but that spending on such activities was not notably lower in the US.
It seems the main factor appears to be the stress levels in Americans induced by their economy. Americans are much more anxious about their economic status and their liability to fall into poverty than their counterparts in the societies touched by social democracy. The dog-eat-dog free market Americans – and their many apostles here in Australia – are so proud of literally makes them sick.
Since Australia is headed in the same direction as fast as John Howard can drag us, this research puts the Queensland hospital crisis into some perspective.
I have made a minor contribution to the Wikipedia entry on the Cole enquiry but the story really needs a decent time line ( I haven’t seen any complete ones in the media) , a list of main players e.g. Bronte Moules , the person from the U.N. who examined the AWB’s contracts, who was who in the AWB ,intelligence reports ( from the Australian O.N.A ) and links to the general topic of corruption ( and to its theoretical aspects : general conclusions about risk management and corruption) , whether the previous government( Keating) would have picked this up and to other countries investigations of matters related to the Volcker inquiry.
Bill
It was me what started the Cole Inquiry entry and I agree. But it is a time consuming thing.
And to Andrew and morganzola – jeez I was just making a comment on what I had been told over dinner. On rereading it I see that it looks a bit Erskine Childers-ish but there you go.
I just want to know how to tell when blue cheese has gone mouldy.
Re Fred Argy. The problem with discussion about budgets is that not only is the populace at large economically illiterate and prone to simple explanations, but the commentariat is too. My namesake, for instance, wrote the other day of the Howard/Costello economic paradigm which includes a ‘permanent budget surplus’. So Paul believes we’ll never ever see another recession? And he’s one of the more literate ones.
The ALP thinks it’s safer to just ignore these accusations than confront them, presumably because they don’t have sufficient confidence in their own rhetorical and arguing abilities. It is sad to watch.
I’m puzzled how the RBA can regard the inflationary effects of fuel price increases as ‘overheating’. This is not the same as a housing bubble or a temporary supply bottleneck for DVD players or whatever. Does it follow that there will be more interest rate hikes when fuel goes up? In other words more of high interest rates and high fuel prices at the same time. Already the combined effect could be an economic dead weight. Maybe the RBA got it wrong.
Actions speak louder than words.
A quick whiz around the Wingnut sites indicates that they’ve done a Basil Fawlty: “Don’t mention the War”.
They haven’t gone as far as “Good News from Iraq” which has terminated itself because, like there isn’t any good news from Iraq. Well Derrr.
The American Heritage Foundation has a sturdy list of relentlessly upbeat stories under the heading:
“Progress in Iraq”
The site intones:
“The debate over the war in Iraq has increasingly divided Americans. The purpose of this website is to help forge a national consensus on the continued need for patient American assistance to help the Iraqi people build a broad-based democratic government that will be an ally in the war against terrorism.”
As Americans have grown more divided, the AHF has cut and run. Only three articles for the entire calendar year of 2006.
And its even quieter over at the “Project for the New American Century” They’ll be remembered as the folks who gave us the “Revolution in Military Affairs” of which Iraq was to be the exemplar.
Guess what? Nothing. Yes nothing since September 2005.
I suppose that leaves only those far-out RWDB websites to continue to beat the now tattered Iraq drum. Keep up the good work fellas. Don’t let the moral cowardice of those sunshine patriot elite Right Wing defeatists get you down.
Burger-eating-surrender-monkeys the lot of them.
I bet Cardinal Pell isn’t too keen on the theory of evolution either…and will someone remind him of the Catholic Church’s persecution og Gallileo !!
“It seems the main factor appears to be the stress levels in Americans induced by their economy.”
I would hazard a guess that the Japanese and Chinese, who work much longer hours than Americans (another factor often blamed for poor American health) suffer at least as much economic stress as Americans do. Unemployment, much higher in some places, notably Europe with the exception of England, must be terribly stressful. And not only because of the money; it’s got to be stressful to be educated and be unable to find employment. Surely that led at least in part to the riots in France; it would be hard to make the case that stress played no role in those.
I will also point out that the study is a British study, paid for by the Rand Corp, but done by Brits in academia, surely all fans of the NHS. I think the most important factor people overlook when discussong or thinking about US healthcare, is that if Americans wanted nationalized healthcare on the scale of some other nations (as the US has some ntationalized care already), we’d already have it.
We are all Catholics now http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19030829-421,00.html?from=rss
“Burger-eating-surrender-monkeys the lot of them.”
Well they do have to consider that the usual laydown latte leftists will achieve for our military what the insurgents and Islamists from across the globe can’t
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2006/05/mccaffrey-trip-report.html#links
Also we may have to face the bleak fact that Muslims in Iraq, like so many places in the ME and elsewhere, are beyond easy redemption. That has ramifications for Afghanistan and Iran of course. Perhaps it’s more a case that the West will not continue to flog dead camels forever. We do have alternative methods of dealing with the Milosevics and Ghaddaffis, should current methods prove too optimistically ambitious.
“Well they do have to consider that the usual laydown latte leftists will achieve”
Why didn’t the pundits of the Wingnut thinktanks think of this sooner? Would have saved a lot of trouble.
Can it be that our would-be Masters of the Universe who piled like rent boys into Bush’s pimpmobile hadn’t learned from history?
Would have spared a lot of trouble if these arrogant and stupid keyboard warriors had learned something rather than trying to rise to greatness on their backs.
And the now-disillusioned acolytes of these very rent boys (thanks Observa for the above reference to them) are fighting amongst themselves.
Consider the following questions inspired by Observa’s use ofthe word redemption:
1. Do Muslims think they need “redemption”?
2. Do Muslims think they need redemption brought to them by the COW?
3. Do Muslims think they need redemption delivered from the barrels of a US gunship?
4. Do Muslims think that the US could ever organise a useful redemption under any circumstances.
Fascinatingly, the silences at Observa’s favoured RDBW hang out again speak volumes.
Much embattled discussion of points 2 and 3. But nothing on points 1 and 4.
—
Now let’s look at what the Belmont Boys think about the record of achievement in Iraq:
1. Do the Belmont Boys think Muslims need “redemption”?
Certainly. Beyond debate.
2. Do the Belmont Boys think Muslims need redemption brought to them by the COW?
Someone has to do it.
3. Do the Belmont Boys think Muslims need redemption delivered from the barrels of a US gunship?
Huge debate here. Some are turning on other parts ofthe US administration, notably the State Department, akin to the question “Who lost China?” Some Belmont Boys are massing for a necktie party.
4. Do the Belmont Boys think Muslims think that the US could ever organise a useful redemption under any circumstances.
No debate. Just like the better-heeled denizens of the Wingnut blogosphere, the facts on the ground are just too horrible to discuss among friends. That’s proof of their refusal to face facts. And when you can’t face facts you can’t learn from the wisdom of historians.
It’s probably a deep human failing of we Anglos Katz, that we want to believe our sworn enemies are redeemable. You’re probably right, that we should learn from history and cut straight to annihalating our sworn enemies, without the feelgood time wasting.
So the “Beacon of Light” (BOL) has been snuffed out?
I ask that because you have hitherto been one of its great proponents.
Given an affirmative response to the above question, do you now agree that the Iraq adventure was misconceived and/or poorly executed?
Solomons.
Rini resigns, new (popular?) government. Police minister and one other minister banged up in jail pending prosecution for inciting riot (against Chinese assumed to be corrupting politicians). New government reaffirms recognition of Taiwan, but announces new method of distributing Taiwanese aid.
Light at the end of the tunnel?
“So the “Beacon of Lightâ€? (BOL) has been snuffed out?”
Truth is I don’t know and even the Belmont Club article doesn’t come down one way or the other on that. Let’s just say the BOL theory was looking a whole lot better after Iraqis held their 2nd elections last year, or perhaps it has about the same chance of succeeding as the BOL in Afghanistan.
Let’s assume that Iraqis can’t pick up the BOL baton and run with it successfully then it’s right to pose ” Given an affirmative response to the above question, do you now agree that the Iraq adventure was misconceived and/or poorly executed? ”
The simplest answer would be to say, only inasmuch as Afghanistan was as well, although there may be some particular ameliorating cultural or historical factors at work there. Can’t say I was more enthused by any such factors in the ‘graveyard of empires'(quite the contrary in fact), but some obviously were. Nevertheless, my challenge to those who hold to ‘Afghanistan good, Iraq bad’, is to put down in writing what they see as the end goals in Afghanistan and when they can call that venture ‘mission accomplished’. I think we can all readily appreciate why none will. The comparisons with Iraq would be too difficult for them to sustain their argument. I’ll skip the poorly executed bit, sufficeth to say that I think Marshall Plan nation building is not for the faint hearted and probably only entered into under duress. For many the duress of the ME was brought to a head on Sept 11. The Cold War was finished but a new threat was popping up on the international radar.
An integral part of that threat was the Iraqi regime just as it is with the Iranian one now that the former has been neutralised. Economic sanctions against Saddam could not hold and in the absence of any Anglo restraints, Saddam would have been free to take Ahmadinejad’s current path, as belligerently as the latter is today. In the absence of any other remedy, invasion, regime change and BOL was the best (possibly the only) solution I could see. Was it in Muslims nature or their nurture? Do they really need Saddams to bind them together, that was the question to be asked about the whole of the ME in Iraq. I’d have to say that on the evidence so far, we won’t take that approach to Iran. We will give them an ultimatum to desist with nuclear enrichment and destroy their facilities if they don’t. BOL is not an option for Iran now. Will that cause the backlash from Islam that leads us to a Clash of Civilisations again? Well if you believe the left, with their estimates of moderate Islam, that’s most unlikely. Moderate Islam will see the benefits of dealing firmly with mad Persians too. This time it will be shock and awe only. No more mr nice guys.
‘Given an affirmative response to the above question, do you now agree that the Iraq adventure was misconceived’
Further to the answer above, I’d also say no it wasn’t because in the absence of Plan A, the ideal BOL panning out, then the logical PlanB default position would be better than sanctions fatigue and a reinvigorated and unrestrained Saddam. Plan B would see, Saddam gone, the Kurds happy and probably ME Muslims split into Sunni and Shite warring factions where the Two Rivers meet. Presumably they’d all need to keep pumping the good oil to keep up the fight just like Iran and Iraq did for nearly a decade. Also not much room for Al Qaeda nutters in amongst that lot trying to work out which is the ‘True Islam’, but then I have a hunch my stupid leaders have already thought that through a few years ago.
Of course for all the Not Happy George, Tone, Johnny, etc folk, they have the golden opportunity to state here, how they’d deal with the latest bunch of mad Muslim Persians to strut the world stage. We know economic sanctions don’t work and presumably now BOL theorists are a bit passe, the canvas is all clear for their broad policy brushstrokes. Just like Saddam all over again, but with the benefits of all that historical wisdom gained in Iraq and Afghanistan eh?
“I have a hunch my stupid leaders have already thought that through a few years ago.”
So you’re implying that the proponents of the “Beacon of Light” (including Blair?) were just a bunch of patsies.
Just for the record, this has been my argument all along, i.e., if Iraq’s major export had been soil not oil, Saddam would still be stumped up in one or other of his vulgar palaces. (Of course, if Iraq’s major export had been soil and not oil, Saddam wouldn’t have had so many vulgar palaces.)
All in all, Observa, we seem to be agreeing on more and more.
Enjoy the latte.
‘So you’re implying that the proponents of the “Beacon of Lightâ€? (including Blair?) were just a bunch of patsies.”
No. I prefer to think of them as idealistic realists in dealing with problems that arise, or if you like, aim high and strive for the best outcome, but be prepared for the worst. Seems like everyday sound business practice to me. Basically some things you just gotta suck before you can really tell about these things.
Nothing against palaces. Palaces are fine, as Buckingham Palace is a fine outstanding example. Oil is good and best used in our car tanks than tank tanks. That said, if we had all the oil and Sadam and Ahmadinejad had all the gold or diamonds, the argument would be the same.
Experience suggests not observa.
observa Says:
“idealistic realists”? I thought they were stupid geniuses. No wait, they were beligerent pacificts. Insane rationalists.
Feathers of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health!
observa, I’m not sure that one could describe Blair and Bush as realists. Idealists for sure, but realists? No realist would try to democratize the middle east. Or even try to clear a path for democracy to take root in the ME. And neither man was “prepared for the worst” in Iraq. Not sure how one can ever be prepared for the worst though, as if you knew the worst in any war, you probably would do whatever to appease your way out of it, even in the face of historical evidence that that won’t work any better than sanctions work.
I think both Bush and Blair just got tired of dealing with Saddam, he’d been an irritant since the ceasefire. Had 9/11 not occurred, he probably could have survived as a low level irritant longer. It was Saddam’s bad luck that 9/11 changed the rules of the game.
Fred, it’s depressing how little progress there has been on all this stuff. The EPAC Taskforce report on private infrastructure is more than a decade old now, and politicians still think they can deliver infrastructure with no debt.
On the other hand, I do think that slowly, very slowly, a more sophisticated view is percolating through. Even if the general public doesn’t understand all the details, they can see that PPPs aren’t necessarily a good deal.
Avaroo – “I would hazard a guess that the Japanese and Chinese, who work much longer hours than Americans (another factor often blamed for poor American health) suffer at least as much economic stress as Americans do.”
The study was of developed nations, so the Chinese weren’t in it. The Japanese don’t work longer hours than Americans do. 2000 figures for annual working hours from Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training are 1,986 in the USA, 1,970 in Japan, 1,902 in the UK. There is, as you correctly observe, hazard in guesses.
“I will also point out that the study is a British study, paid for by the Rand Corp, but done by Brits in academia, surely all fans of the NHS.”
A fine example of the Rush Limbaugh school of argument by smear rather than logic. An argument in the same logical format would run ‘Jeffrey Dahmer is a serial killer. Jeffrey Dahmer is an American. Therefore all Americans are serial killers.’ There are plenty of other websites where you’ll find this sort of stuff welcomed. You should consider migrating to them.
Let me say I think they were realists in understanding that unless the ME ‘problem’ was resolved, there would be no lasting peace for the West generally and idealists in the sense that they thought up the BOL for Iraq to try and kickstart the process. They may also have been realists in understanding that failure of the ideal outcome, would still have some real returns. I said a long time ago these men were either going to be great statesmen in the ME or naive fools. I should correct that statement as I don’t think our leaders are fools. Rather, they may simply have been prepared to risk looking foolish in order to achieve a great goal. I have no doubt they knew that goal was always going to be dependent upon the mettle of Iraqis. If enough Iraqis didn’t want a reasonably, peaceful, civil society, there is no way our leaders were ever going to do a Saddam to crush them all back together.
ah, I see what you mean observa.
There are two overriding failures of intellect exhibited in Bush’s Mesopotamian adventure. Observa verbalises one of them:
“If enough Iraqis didn’t want a reasonably, peaceful, civil society, there is no way our leaders were ever going to do a Saddam to crush them all back together.”
There are several models of civil society. The preferred US model for the Middle East is just one of them. This model does not resonate with large numbers of Iraqis and others. And the methods adopted by the US to impose its non-resonant model (and, frankly, the absence of determination with staying the course) have destroyed the possibility for evolution of alternative models of civil society.
Secondly, war proponents vastly overestimated the tolerance of the US civilian and military for pain and sacrifice required to achieve the aims of nation-building in the Middle East.
It is poor form to misunderstand a foreign culture. It is breathtaking negligence to misunderstand one’s own culture. This second failure looks like idiocy to me.
It looks like the Federal Govt is massaging the message that Australian troops may be redeployed to Basra:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/troops-facing-greater-risks-in-afghanistan-iraq/2006/05/08/1146940475887.html
“Dr Nelson appeared to leave the Basra option open, saying the troops’ future deployment was being discussed with the Iraqi Government and with the US and Britain.
“We have discussed and considered a whole range of options and the outcome . . . will be a result of consensual agreement with the key governments that are involved,” he said.”
With the imminent demise of Blair as British PM, the British Labour Government is likely to follow Italy out of Mesopotamia.
That leaves Australia to do some of the heavy lifting that Howard has avoided so far.
This is a touchy time to take up residence in Basra.
Further to the above.
This from the Murdoch press paints a rather extraordinary picture of the British presence in Basra which might add weight to the thesis that Australians have been earmarked for action there.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19080462-2703,00.html
“BRITISH troops could be sent to clean out extremist militias in Basra who orchestrated the rioting at the site of a helicopter crash at the weekend, if the Iraqi army fails to do the job.
“Lieutenant-General Rob Fry, the British deputy commander of the multinational forces in Iraq, … said that if Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq’s recently elected Prime Minister, failed to curb the power of the militias – who take their orders from leading clerics and politicians – then military action may have to be used.
…
“In Basra, the main target to be disarmed is the Mehdi Army, led by the volatile cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who on Monday was haggling for his party to have more seats in the cabinet.
“”He can’t be taken as a serious politician and have this tinpot army around him,” General Fry said.
“Intelligence reports suggest there is a danger that many gunmen in Basra are now beyond al-Sadr’s control and that terror groups in Iran are funding and arming local militia.
…
“General Fry said … that the events of the weekend would not disrupt plans for withdrawal of British troops from southern Iraq.”
It is clear that General Fry is portraying British action in Basra as a Parthian Shot, the last act of defiance before withdrawal. And it is clear that he doesn’t really expect the Sadrites to be quelled before British withdrawal.
Thus someone else will have to pick up the pieces. And the only party mentioned in relation to this task is Australia.
If Australian troops go to Basra it is certain that Australian troops will die.
Why aren’t the Australian media talking about this, or at least asking some probing questions?