169 thoughts on “Monday Message Board

  1. I am not going to rise to your pointless challenge, thank you, Katz (@45).

    It’s not pointless. It conforms strictly to the canon of historical evidence. I can only conclude that Malthusista has elected to bail out.

    There is a vast difference between accepting the necessity to have one’s class enemies exterminated and expressing glee at that extermination. 

    Here is Lenin in 1916 endorsing Liebknecht’s call to German soldiers to shoot their officers:

    Rühle in Vorwärts of 12/I. 1916 openly declared for a split in the party. Liebknecht, in his speech of 16/III. 1916 in the Prussian Landtag, openly called on “those fighting in the trenches” to “lower their rifles and turn against the common enemy”, for which he was not allowed to finish his speech. Which Russian Social-Democrats, then, displayed “factionalism”—those who stood for the Bolshevik slogans—the only consistent slogans—of civil war and a split with opportunism? Or those who denied the obvious correctness   of these slogans, to which the course of events is leading the internationalists in all countries?

    http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/mar/00gyz6.htm

    Clearly, Lenin supported adding the danger of mutiny and homicide to the dangers junior Tsarist officers already faced from the German war machine in the trenches.

    QED.

  2. @Katz

    You didn’t need to go to those lengths Katz. The major commun|st slogans in relation to Imperialism, and Imperialist war are well known to all who have been part of the movement.

    Turn the imperialist war into civil war!
    The main enemy is at home!

    It was revolutionary socialist policy to seek to divide the officer corps from the ranks and to seek to nullify their authority, with armed force if needed.

  3. Mind you, given that the Russian infantry were overwhelmingly conscripts who were in effect abducted by the state, placed in circumstances in which their life chances were radically prejudiced and being coerced to commit what would be criminal acts on a large scale … those involved in the abduction and coerced criminal conduct could not logically claim immunity from violence calculated to abate the coercion.

    Killing officers determined to enforce the coercion would be ethically defensible.

  4. Yes but this is from a private letter to Zinoviev. Lenin was thus not obligated to espouse the official line.

  5. Alan (@ 46) wrote:

    . Did the Soviet Union count as Communist or anti-Communist when it was allied to Germany in the Pact of Steel?

    ?

    The Pact of Steel (German: Stahlpakt; Italian: Patto d’Acciaio), known formally as the Pact of Friendship and Alliance between Germany and Italy, was an agreement between Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany signed on May 22, 1939, by the foreign ministers of each country and witnessed by Count Galeazzo Ciano for Italy and Joachim von Ribbentrop for Germany

    I presume Alan meant the Hitler/Stalin Pact of 23 August 1939. The pact was clearly a cynical betrayal by Stalin. Had Lenin known of Stalin’s treachery in 1939 on top of his disastrous mis-direction of the German Communist Party (KPD) in 1933 that resulted in Hitler’s triumph over the German Communist and Social Democratic parties, Lenin probably would have dragged himself from his bed and personally demanded of the Central Committee of the CPSU that Stalin be removed from his post of General Secretary.

  6. ABC markets new privatisation grab of public assets

    20 July 2012

    Back in 2002 the Australian Government owned Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) surprisingly placed itself in the forefront of efforts to steamroll the public into acceptance of the Howard Government’s plans to privatise Telstra. In 2012, 10 years later, the same ABC Radio National Breakfast Show, but with a different presenter, is again at the forefront of another propaganda drive to impose yet more privatisation against the will of the overwhelming majority of Australians.

  7. This is one of the most exciting articles that I have read in a long time

    http://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/why-do-particles-decay/most-particles-decay-yet-some-dont/

    Having had my interest sparked following the Higgs Boson experiment and then by

    (http://www) .pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/blog/2012/06/the-higgs-boson-explained/

    If only i had the maths to be able to fully follow the story up close. But there is enough visual simplification in these articles to actually get a bit of a handle on particle physics. And it is very interesting.

  8. @Fran Barlow
    “Laughable, but not unexpected. S@cialism and dynastic quasi-religious autarky are radically different things.”

    You don’t get to pick and chose what regimes should be deemed s@cialist any more than capitalists get to pick and chose what regimes should be deemed capitalist.

    Socialism mean the state ownership of the means of production and the criminalisation of all private economic endeavour (1). North Korea meets this definition.

    A capitalist society is one in which nearly all economic endeavour is of a private for-profit nature. As I like to point out to libertarians, the only countries that fit the bill today are such hell holes as Somalia and DRC Congo.

    Western democracies are a hybrid of capitalism and social democracy, with social democracy having the upper hand in countries like Sweden and capitalism having the upper hand in the Anglophone countries, most notably in the USA.

    (1) including states within a state such as an old fashioned kibbutz

  9. @Katz
    That Aurora victim had previously survived a mass shooting … IN CANADA.,/b>

    Well not exactly. Newspaper reports say that she was nearby and had been the food court of Toronto’s Eaton Centre ~3 minutes before the shooting. I think she may even have helped a wounded person but, apparently, she was not in the actual firing area.

    Also it was not a ‘mass shooting’ in the sense of the Aurora shooting: it appears to have been a gang shoot-out rather than a single crazed gunman randomly shooting.

    Mind you , given Toronto gangs’ marksmanship they seem more likely to hit bystanders than the intended target(s)[1] but we are talking two very different scenarios.

    1. See the more recent Danzig St shootings for innocent victims killed — I don’t think the actual shooters, or at least , original shooters were even wounded. One idiot, who apparently was blazing away, was wounded but, so far, it seems like he was not an instigator or initial target.

  10. @Katz
    That Aurora victim had previously survived a mass shooting … IN CANADA.

    Well not exactly. Newspaper reports say that she was nearby and had been the food court of Toronto’s Eaton Centre ~3 minutes before the shooting. I think she may even have helped a wounded person but, apparently, she was not in the actual firing area.

    Also it was not a ‘mass shooting’ in the sense of the Aurora shooting: it appears to have been a gang shoot-out rather than a single crazed gunman randomly shooting.

    Mind you , given Toronto gangs’ marksmanship they seem more likely to hit bystanders than the intended target(s)[1] but we are talking two very different scenarios.

    1. See the more recent Danzig St shootings for innocent victims killed — I don’t think the actual shooters, or at least , original shooters were even wounded. One idiot, who apparently was blazing away, was wounded but, so far, it seems like he was not an instigator or initial target.

  11. Thanks for the clarification, jrkrideau. I’m relieved to read that Canadians shoot at each other for more explicable reasons than they do south of the border.

  12. Malthusista :ABC markets new privatisation grab of public assets
    20 July 2012
    Back in 2002 the Australian Government owned Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) surprisingly placed itself in the forefront of efforts to steamroll the public into acceptance of the Howard Government’s plans to privatise Telstra. In 2012, 10 years later, the same ABC Radio National Breakfast Show, but with a different presenter, is again at the forefront of another propaganda drive to impose yet more privatisation against the will of the overwhelming majority of Australians.

    that leftwing,poor newsbreaking,nest of pinko-commies!

    yunno,if news broadcasters were recognised as the “commerce policy” wing of of what is laughably known as the conservative ideology the placing of ex murdoch associates and employees everywhere in the industry could make alot of sense.
    (for those of us with only two brain cells and barely functioning synapses)

    the symptoms? fatuous and/or furious

    ABC–scott,albrechtson and the metrosexual in disguise from news corp(how can you tell it’s a disguise? he shaved off the designer stubble).
    Fairfax–sutchbury(sic?) front page saliva sprays and the Higgs boson means getting to Mars will only take 20 minutes and in todays fin,a survey of finance types shows the whole of the country is sunk into irretrievable gloom.
    then there is the overwhelming inevitability of the demise if the fed govt,
    have the QLD broadcasters stopped rabbetting on about the gross incompetence connected with the Wivenhoe or did that have an abrupt cut off point when the elections were over?
    the popularity of the WA premier who got in by 64 votes in Riverton and some large scale promises to one only newly elected MP.
    etbloodycetera.
    oh well,drivel over.
    back to the real world.

  13. @Mel

    You don’t get to pick and chose what regimes should be deemed s@cialist any more than capitalists get to pick and chose what regimes should be deemed capitalist.

    Given that the term “soc|alist” is a matter of some contention, I’d say I’m entitled either to apply strict standards to its usage that conform to Marxism — given that is my declared parafigm or else call you out for equivocation. If you for example you define the word “car” as any carriage and so suggested that cars were no good for long distance travel since the horses would have to be regularly refreshed, the conversation would be ridiculous. Communication requires a meeting of the minds.

    If you go ahead and call the DPRK “soc|alist” on the strength of nothing more than its collectivist property structure I will simply say that we are discussing something peculiar and inimical to soc|alism as it would exist in advanced industrial societies. As things stand in North Korea, rule is dynastic. There are no vehicles for workers in any sense known to soc|alists to determine the usages of productiuon, distribution or exchange. The North Korean state is an example of what happens when a crime family manages to seize and hold state power. The ostensibly “common” property is at the complete disposal of an unaccoutnable elite, and is passed on by inheritiance — making it private property rather than property held in common trust.

    In any event, one of the esential features of socialism is the appearance of material abundance and the consequent dissolution of class society, the weakening of the state and its coercive mechanisms on this basis. If class society and the wage labour system remains, then the society is not soc|alist in any sense for those of us relying on M@rx|st definitions of the term.

    So I’m not letting you debauch the language merely so that you can take some cheap swing at left|sts.

  14. As excellent as the Austrian and British Classical Schools are in terms of being such well thought out edifices of human reason ……. They are not true to the situation we face ourselves in. Take profit maximisation just for example? Does anyone go from being in rags, to being a property magnate, on the grounds of profit maximisation? No of course not. So what are the bigshots really chasing?

    If profit maximisation were really the goal of DECISION-MAKERS (ie real humans with influence (as opposed to getting locked into any “theory of the firm”)), then under even reasonably (only reasonably) sound background conditions, resource allocation would not be too bad, as against the disgrace of resource allocation we see today.

    Not the individual banks, but the banks TAKEN AS A CARTEL create money out of thin air. But people are right to object to us throwing moral opprobrium on this racket, on the grounds that; the banks cannot be getting the full benefit of the counterfeiting racket that a counterfeiter would. Because after all when their asset (your debt) is created, the banks also have a new liability on their balance sheets, of the same quantity in short order.

    Now the banking system rigs it that their liability will always reduce in value, and therefore can be dismissed, and their asset will always out-pace inflation. They rig this with central bank policy. I’ve heard this wicket called “arbitrage” and its been suggested that the answer is to force tighter money on the central bank. Ha ha. Like any politician is in a position to push the banking sector around. Like a central bank is beholden to anyone but the banking sector? Maybe in the sixties in the southern hemisphere such a fantasy could be sustained.

    But its not just a matter of arbitrage or a difference of opinion on monetary policy. And if it is HERE its certainly not, when it comes to the Northern hemisphere.

    Nonetheless the people who argue correctly that the banking industries new assets (via their money creation scam) are always matched by the same quantity of addition to their new liabilities, do have a point.

    How is this resolved to the moral disfavour of this obvious counterfeiting racket?:

    The fact is that like most scams, the scammer has to share a bit of the booty out to middlemen. The illegal drugs booty (economic rent) is shared out to the street dealer. And the cartel picks up “little-fish” now and again (as the cop in “Scarface would have it.”)

    The legal drug-dealing scammers, who are fundamentally the same scammers as the afformentioned networks ….. well they have to give the Doctors a cut. Doctors being after all, drug-dealing prescription writers first, and health professionals second, and for the most part sincere in both their roles.

    So the point of business, or at least the way to get rich, is NOT to profit maximise. Its to give up such notions, about the time you give up on Santa Claus. You see you want to be the other beneficiary to the money creation scam. The banks cannot be the total beneficiary. The banks must accept the liabilities they are bound to incur, along with the assets they expropriate through trickery.

    Your mission (should you choose to accept it) is to be the partner to the bankers money-creation scam. This involves you getting the best interest rate available, on a SURE THING, which in practice means having excellent collateral.

    The banks create money on sure things. Thats why the instincts of people like Professor Quiggin and the great writer Bob Ellis are dead-on when it comes to privatisation. Because what happens is that the investment bankers, the lawyers, the economic consultants …. well they all tongue the ear of the sitting politicians, and get a SURE THING. Competitive business IS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE A SURE THING. A sure thing is proof of market dysfunction.

    Then they pyramid money creation against this sure thing. The net result is that we take all the good things AND ADD DEBT BURDENS TO THEM. Privatisation is about taking something good, AND ADDING DEBT TO IT. That debt has come about through new money creation. The resources therefore having been expropriated from other Australians.

    Moving on we see that there are a lot of get-rich gurus out there in the book market. Some of them are really smart guys who have proved their mettle in good times and bad. And when you boil down what they have to offer, you find that getting rich is about seeking out the fractional reserve subsidy. Getting rich is about being on the other half of the money-creation racket. Its about being the partner with the banking cartel, wherein they extort the wealth of society through new money creation, and your job is to be the other half of that windfall.

    Not long ago I scored a big low-interest loan. It took all my high-interest debt off the table and it turned my life around. Unless there is a sudden sado-monetary epoch that throws most people out of work, this constitutes a massive subsidy. A massive subsidy that I don’t deserve in micro, but that I can consider it okay for me to accept as compensation for taxes and for being stiffed when I fell into debt-addiction.

    Well thats a single loan for me. But the rich slobs are getting this subsidy week in week out, pretty much from the time they turn 21. And we need a REAL new deal, to set this thing to rights and to make sure that no-one gets the money creation subsidy any more ……. the treasury and the extraction industries, alone excepted.

  15. “Given that the term “soc|alist” is a matter of some contention, I’d say I’m entitled either to apply strict standards to its usage that conform to Marxism…”

    Will you stop right there Fran. He was just a writer. He was a writer a long time ago. When you talk this sort of talk, it suggests that you haven’t the moxie to attempt to view things first hand. You ought to be trying to view things in terms of “working models” and paradigms. Not in terms of ideological loyalties.

  16. If only I’d known, when I was a seven year old at the local Baptist Sunday School learning about the Old Testament Joseph’s fortunes in Egypt, that he was creating a s0cial!st state.

  17. @Graeme Bird

    re: what soc|alism entails

    Will you stop right there Fran. He was just a writer. He was a writer a long time ago.

    He was part of something called the 1st Workingman’s International. Not only “Marx|sts” but anarchists and Lassalleans and Proudhonists participated. There was a consensus on what the term meant — it was about the power of working people realised in common ownership of the means of production and the abolition of the wages system. The syndicalists and Social Democrats and DeLeonists and people like Isaac Deutscher developed it further.

    When you talk this sort of talk, it suggests that you haven’t the moxie to attempt to view things first hand. You ought to be trying to view things in terms of “working models” and paradigms. Not in terms of ideological loyalties.

    I do see things in terms of paradigms but that doesn’t mean conceding an equals-sign between soc|alism and dynastic xenophobic autarky, for example. These days, I speak mostly of “inclusive governance” because IMO, “soc|alism” is a long way off and thus not something that working people can in the medium-term future even plan, much less implement. Our first goal ought to be to show that equitable collaboration between the world’s producer classes across national borders is possible and politically feasible.

  18. just as insurance companies won’t touch nuclear power generators with a bargepole is it true they will not insure for the damage caused by “fracking”?
    see
    http ://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/david-letterman-fracking-screwed_n_1687028.html?utm_hp_ref=green

  19. Um, Professor Quiggin?

    Campbell Newman is comparing your home state Queensland to Spain, and claiming that Queensland is bankrupt.

    Do you think that (water lapping gently against chest) at some point (tide of water now around neck) you might perhaps see fit to (water in mouth, spits out words) comment (splash) on that … [gurgle gurgle]

    Or are there a whole heap of posts that I have missed somewhere on this very topic? (despite using your search engine)

  20. Campbell Newman revealed himself to be a complete idiot with that statement. I bet the guys at QTC were most impressed.

  21. ah that’s why I’m modded: The site “thinks” I’m giving it “the bird” … 😉

    I’ll know for next time …

  22. An open letter to ABC Melbourne Local Radio’s Jon Faine

    On Tuesday 24 of July I phoned Jon Faine’s ABC local Melbourne Radio 774 program in an attempt to put a view about Syria to his listeners that was different to what had so far been put to them by Jon Faine and the corporate newsmedia. I was eventually told to ring back tomorrow. I intend to do so, but have decided to also put this letter to Jon Faine on the public record on the Internet.

  23. (second draft with corrected trailing html ‘strong’ tag)

    An open letter to ABC Melbourne Local Radio’s Jon Faine

    On Tuesday 24 of July I phoned Jon Faine’s ABC local Melbourne Radio 774 program in an attempt to put a view about Syria to his listeners that was different to what had so far been put to them by Jon Faine and the corporate newsmedia. I was eventually told to ring back tomorrow. I intend to do so, but have decided to also put this letter to Jon Faine on the public record on the Internet.

  24. Hi All,

    I was wondering if anyone has any further information on the losses the QLD Investment Corporation suffered during the GFC as well as information on the assets they were invested in. Further, if anyone is aware of any literature analysing whether government’s should involve themselves in these markets, That would be greatly appreciated.

  25. Only for those in need of a laugh …

    Climate Science Denier Debunks Greenhouse Theory With Two Fish Cooler Boxes And A Roll Of Cling Film.

    It’s a rollicking yarn with a poignant moment when the intrepid denier responds to his daughter on the integrity of his experiment. I’ll leave his response that to those interested in following the link.

    He did however conclude as follows:

    The Greenhouse Effect theory is not confirmed by this experiment and may be disproved by it.

    Well there you go. It makes you think, doesn’t it. It occurs to me that I could honour Dr Pearson by placing a smear of vegemite into a petrie dish and seeing how long it takes to evolve into something possessed of the wit of Dr Pearson. If I haven’t got anything by this time next week, I’ll pop it into the microwave to simulate the Miocene. If nothing still happens I’ll conclude either that evolution is a myth or that Dr Pearson is no smarter than mouldy yeast. That sounds like science to me …

  26. When I got out of university it seemed that the right had the intellectual strength. I thought that this was in the nature of things. Right now its the left. Its the left, who have some deference and respect for free enterprise, so long as it is a sort of free enterprise that is willing, at least to ATTEMPT TO live up to its own propaganda.

    So right now the really good oil can be found on the Keiser Report (the best show on TV). And we find a fellow like William K Black, who knows how to deal with these banksters, and who is open-minded to the best work on the right. William Black, fundamentally a lefty, knows quality when he sees it, when it comes to Hernando De Soto…… who used to be thought as fundamentally a righty.

    This is what I like to see. I like to see science in action. I like to see Professor Quiggin and Henry Ergas agree that there is something VERY WRONG about the specific form that privatisation has been taking. Take any pseudonym to Catallaxy on such a topic you’ll be abused and blocked. You’ll be abused for being you and blocked for being me.

    Note that Ergas lost his consultancy. Quiggin has lost his Financial Review gig (is that right?) And Keating was up for a massive privatisation bribe.

  27. Nowadays all the great breakthroughs are being made by amateur scientists. Didn’t I read in the Oz the other day about the truck driver who found the higgs boson in his backyard?

  28. BBC Rides with Al Qaeda in Aleppo, Syria

    Earlier this evening, Australia’s Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) television news featured a chilling report by BBC journalist Ian Pannell who rode with a group of Syrian rebels as they attacked the town of Alleppo in Syria. The report featured groups of captives being threatened at close range with automatic rifles. At one point a gun seemed to discharge and wound one of the captives. Ian Pannell did not inform his viewers of the fate of the captives. Shortly after I found on Land Destroyer a comprehensive dissection of the deception and hypocrisy in Ian Pannell’s report. It is republished here.

  29. Turkish Labor Party Deputy Chairman: “We Have Clear Evidence That Turkish President Incited Terrorism and War on Syria”

    26 July 2012

    Assembly of Turkey and the Attorney General of the Higher Court to try Abdullah Gül, affirming that the Labor Party has clear evidence that the latter incited terrorism and war on Syria and signed a secret agreement with the United States, which alone is grounds for trial.

    He said that Gül’s statement after the terrorist bombing that targeted the National Security HQ in Damascus was shameful and disgraceful to Turkish citizens, affirming that Gül didn’t fulfill his duties and responsibilities as a statesman towards an act of terrorism against the officials of a neighboring country.

    He said that Gül’s statement after the terrorist bombing that targeted the National Security HQ in Damascus was shameful and disgraceful to Turkish citizens, affirming that Gul didn’t fulfill his duties and responsibilities as a statesman towards an act of terrorism against the officials of a neighboring country.

    Ozbey said that Gül encouraged the terrorists by saying that the Syrian government isn’t legitimate instead of denouncing the crime, adding that his statements constitute a crime according to the Turkish penal code.

  30. Paul you are likely to muddy the waters with Keynesian and Marxist ideas. What we have is criminal gangsters who have gotten hold of the banks, media, and politicians and are stealing hand over fist. They need to be rounded up under Rico, or any other gang-busting laws that could serve as cover. This ought not be used as ideological fuel when we need to arrest rich thieves by the bakers dozen.

  31. The price of populism:

    Economist Chris Richardson, from Deloitte Access Economics, said that while the government could use the money to invest in infrastructure, neither political party would be willing to do so at the moment.
    “It’s not as though we’ve asked ourselves the question, given money’s cheap as chips, what’s the best pay-off investments we can make for ourselves,” Mr Richardson said.
    ”It’s politics much more than economics that’s holding them back [from running a deficit],” he said.

    http://m.theage.com.au/business/cheap-cash-spurs-deficit-debate-20120725-22r10.html

    Australia has an historic opportunity to fund infrastructure at the lowest real cost in a century, yet fear of the bogan vote holds the government back. 

  32. (Apologies that the first paragraph, posted above, was incomplete.)

    Turkish Labor Party Deputy Chairman: “We Have Clear Evidence That Turkish President Incited Terrorism and War on Syria”

    by H. Sabbagh, published in Global Research, 25 July 2012

    ANKARA, (SANA) – Deputy Chairman of the Turkish Labor Party Hasan Basri Ozbey denounced the position of Turkish President Abdullah Gül who is encouraging terrorists to commit crimes in Syria, saying that the Labor Party will file a complaint against Gul to try him in the Higher Court.

    In a press statement published on Friday, Ozbey said that his party will file a complaint to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and the Attorney General of the Higher Court to try Gül, affirming that the Labor Party has clear evidence that the latter incited terrorism and war on Syria and signed a secret agreement with the United States, which alone is grounds for trial.

    He said that Gül’s statement after the terrorist bombing that targeted the National Security HQ in Damascus was shameful and disgraceful to Turkish citizens, affirming that Gul didn’t fulfill his duties and responsibilities as a statesman towards an act of terrorism against the officials of a neighbouring country.

    Ozbey said that Gül encouraged the terrorists by saying that the Syrian government isn’t legitimate instead of denouncing the crime, adding that his statements constitute a crime according to the Turkish penal code.

  33. @Tom

    Hi Tom, Ben#25 here.

    Thanks for responding. I’m familiar with the report although I’d rather quote page 40.

    No plans to storm the Bastille, then?

    I just thought that there’d a little … um … OUTRAGE! [puts glasses back on nose, clears throat, and returns dutifully to sit down in chair. Folds hands on lap.]

  34. @Tom
    Hi again, Tom

    I just re-read your post. I’m completely in agreement with you. It’s outrageous that Premier Newman and Peter Costello are claiming Qld is bankrupt, particularly when the Qld Treasury 30 June 2012 report you refer to says the opposite is true.

    It just helps the average punter to know that professional economists confirm that the Premier of Queensland and a former Australian Treasurer are, in fact, talking bollocks.

  35. “Australia has an historic opportunity to fund infrastructure at the lowest real cost in a century, yet fear of the bogan vote holds the government back. ”

    There’s never an excuse for running deficits. Deficits are just another bankers scam. We can fund infrastructure by simply knocking out government departments. There is no such thing as a Keynesian multiplier and it would be useless for economic purposes if it could be shown to exist.

  36. John Quiggin (@ 43 – #comment-177180)

    Why shouldn’t the Turkish Labor Party prosecute President Gül for terrorism and waging war?

    Thanks for your comment and for your interest in the Syrian conflict, Professor Quiggin. It is unfortunate that this prosecution has not, instead, been undertaken by, for example, the Turkish Democratic Left Party, a party with more resources and electoral support. It is also of concern that the Turkish Labour Party is a follower of Enver Hoxha. Nevertheless, given the history of Turkey with its coups, its intervention in Cyprus and its conflict with its Kurdish minority and given the heroic resistance by Albanians to Britains’s attempt in 1949 to impose a dictatorship as it had already done in Greece, it seems not altogether implausible that humane and progressive Turks, particularly Turks oppose to NATO’s war crimes against Syria, could be drawn into such a party.

    I think anyone who supports the rule of law and opposes murder, particularly of officials of a sovereign government which appears to enjoy the strong support of the majority of the people of that country as the Syrian Government appears to, should commend the Turkish Labor Party for having launched legal action. Assuming that Turkey has laws on its books against the waging of a war of aggression against another country as every civilised democracy should, then I see no reason why the case should not succeed. I hope that this case proceeds and that it is reported in our newsmedia. However, given our newsmedia’s so-far deceitful, selective and biased reporting of the Syrian conflict so far, there is no reason to exepect that it will.

    I trust that you are not arguing that because this court case is not being undertaken by a larger organisation with more electoral support than the Turkish Labor Party that therefore they must be wrong to oppose the Turkish Government breaking its own laws?

    It would logically follow from that that, because in 2009, no political party contesting the Queensland state elections opposed privatisation and the one independent candidate, who opposed privatisation in that election, did not get a high vote — 163 votes or 0.65%, which was slightly more than the 0.58% that the Turkish Labour Party received across the whole country 10 years earlier — that it would have been wrong to oppose privatisation.

    The outcome of the Queensland state elections held on 24 March this year would suggest otherwise.

    As a consequence of public revulsion at ‘Labor’ Premier Anna Bligh’s announcement of the privatisation fire sale only after the 2009 elections had ended, Labor’s representation in the Queensland Parliament was reduced from 51 of the 89 seats to only 7. Anna Bligh held onto her own seat of South Brisbane, but with her two-party preferred majority reduced from 65% to 55%. In the subsequent by-election, contested for Labor by Anna Bligh’s friend Jackie Trad, that majority was reduced further to 52.85%, that is, it has now become a marginal seat.

    So, I fail to see how the small vote for the Turkish Labor Party in the 1999 elections 13 years ago or some unorthodox opinions held by that party has any bearing on its claim that it has evidence that President Abdullah Gül incited terrorism and war against Syria and that this violates Turkish law.

  37. There’s never an excuse for running deficits. Deficits are just another bankers scam.

    But are they worse than fractional reserve banking?

  38. No fractional reserve banking is the root of all evil. It makes all the other bankers scams possible. It makes Keynesianism and Marxism plausible by way of confusing people about money. It creates recessions. We need to get rid of fractional reserve banking and government borrowing both. Paper money is legitimate in the sense that cash can gain its value from its function as a tax voucher. So there is no need to go to metals in a great big hurry. But we could wipe out fractional reserve in a matter of months. And given that the monetary creation benefit would then be in the treasuries hands, thats a source of funds for infrastructure right there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s