Greek election consequences and the shape of the developed world’s future

“(…)The supreme court coup in Egypt, the outright refusal to obey even the letter of the law let alone the spirit in the case of Wikileaks and Assange, are teaching an entire generation that you cannot fix the system from within(…)”

Eh, Supreme Court coups are not rare (remember Honduras?). The whole point of a supreme court, as designed by the American Founding Fathers, is to stop any democratic threats against the plutocratic oligarchy. As for Wikileaks, the powerful disobey the law at least since the Code of Hamurabbi.

I don’t disagree with your conclusions, but, IMO, you’re too optimistic in your belief that people will “wake up”. These things have been going on for a looooooong time. And still, each new generation continues to think that all problems will be solved if only the other set of rich oligarchs obtains power.

The people will only stop hanging on to this failed system when it finally comes crashing down. And maybe not even then. I only hope that the new Dark Age is shorter than the last one.

I knew you would write this. I suspect that it won’t do much t0 solve the underlying contradictions within the Eurozone and only drag out this episode maybe a year or so longer. The “Merkel bet” is that she can prolong this until the next German elections.

FWIW this is Krugman’s take on it, if you haven’t used up your free 10 articles:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/and-then-what/

I’m not sure about the “if I lose I win” logic, but there you are.

“That such things occur throughout history is not in question, that the frequency and the blatancy is increasing is the point. As I like to say “they don’t even pretend any more.””

Ah, then we are in agreement. I guess we’ll have to wait and see if the increased frequency and blatancy will really make a majority (or at least a large minority) realize they have nothing to lose, though.

Honestly the successful Global implementation of the Borgdom is amazing.

Not that surprising. If you have even a passing personal familiarity with the South Asian professional and/or ruling class, for example, you’d hardly be surprised. Of course, that’s a legacy of British rule, but most of the planet has been in, historical terms, part of one imperial constellation or another. And the elite matches up with these constellations.

less than 20 years? haha try less than 10.

The electrical economy wants to happen, but it will not happen on a wide scale until after war and revolution.

Mm … I would say that a post fossil fuel economy wants to happen. Eventually even young adults whose parents can afford them a doctorate level education (much more those who sell themselves into debt-slavery) may realize that protracting adolescence to age 30 or beyond in the hopes of a white-collar career — which probably won’t exist, grad school or no grad school — is not worth it. May realize that all those “hipster” hobbies like gardening and knitting are actually the seeds of the new economy, one where we can be treated like adults instead of overgrown teenagers.

But ultimately there will not be much electricity around. The methods of large scale electricity generation that are not direct from fossil fuel — nuclear, wind farms, photovoltaics or mirror fields — are fairly high tech; that is, they nevertheless require a fossil fuel powered industrial base to build and maintain. Which cannot last. So…

The middle ages were a shit time for philosophy and learning, yes, but for the AVERAGE person things actually got better compared to late antiquity. Agricultural efficiency did not go down, while the rentier population dropped immensely. The plantation slaves of the Empire, supporting vast cities, became serfs supporting a relative handful of knights and clerics.

Now admittedly, being addicted to the crack cocaine of fossil fuels, humanity will consider any diminished future as cruel and unusual. Surely the old Empire, whose narcotic was slavery and deforestation, felt the same way. “The Roman way of life is not negotiable!” But we may as well become mediaevalists, because something analogous is happening whether we like it or not.

One might argue that it is the duty of a concerned citizen to hasten said revolutions, to move the world to the next stage before fossil fuel reserves draw down too much.

Two Points:

1] Looking at the electoral map, Crete should secede from Greece [it has been an independent state before]. Greece could find this useful as China found Hong Kong.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OzeS-6tqPLM/T984xwN0wVI/AAAAAAAAWc4/e6kZZkls2C8/s1600/greekelectionfinal.PNG

2] “The electrical economy wants to happen” I agree 100%. With Thorium Reactors [please read up about this technology…before REACTING] we COULD reduce our carbon footprint to the size of aviation [9-12%], lubrication [1%] and synthetic materials [6%]…roughly, an 85% reduction, or factor of 5 improvement. Ain’t gonna happen…we will kill ourselves first…but we could.

The Tragically Flip,

The elites will most certainly begin to eat their own. It is in their nature. They can’t help it.

Cause the bottom nine-tenths of the top 1% are only there serve the very, very top. Doctors, lawyers, etc. are not real royalty. They are simply highly paid help. I wonder where Obama falls on the scale of royalty versus help.

“I wonder where Obama falls on the scale of royalty versus help.”

In 2008 Obama was a very valuable servant…more than anybody he deserves all the credit for stopping reform in its tracks and maintaining Bush’s policies.

But now?

In 2012 Obama is still eager to have the serfs water-boarded, killed if necessary, whatever it takes to please his superiors. If loyalty mattered to his masters, his position as a minion would be secure. But in 2012, nobody is talking reform, Obama, ever the over achieving gofer, has already enshrined in law Bush’s notorious acts. So while Obama will always be loyal to wealth, hehas already done what he was sent do…really, he serves no useful earthly purpose anymore…unless he’s used one more time…as a patsy for the economic mess.

Romney in 2012? Doesn’t like war, Not as reliable as Obama…questions, questions…how to decide who should win? Well the important take away is…the people have to choose between a smooth talking, more effective evil and a guy who has evil in his heart, but who’s execution has been…how shall we say…sloppy.

On the other hand, Obama has promised to turn Social Security into a private annuity plan…if only the Supremes will do their bit and not overturn government mandated purchase of private health insurance, then…then we can destroy SSI. Decisions…Decisions.

This is not a reaction. It is fact. Thorium is not a panacea, nor a suitable substitute to uranium.

http://nuclearfreeplanet.org/thorium-fuel-no-panacea-for-nuclear-power.html

Z, it’s a foregone conclusion. Obama is the next president…..for the very reasons you stated. Romney’s just theatrical juxtaposition. Romney’s got as much sex-appeal as a Mondale or a Dukakis or a Bush, Sr…..meaning he’s bland…like milk toast.

FYI, I’m opposed to all forms of Nuclear Power, thorium, or otherwise, and renewables cannot sustain growth, nor current population levels. This System has proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that it cannot be trusted with fire, so to support yet another variation of that is insane. The only way forward is to change our way of life so thoroughly that it is unrecognizable from its previous self. The only thing that will bring that about will be devastating calamity, I’m afraid. It’s a classic double-bind.

Z, here’s a hint: there is no such thing as “the blacks”.

Love, John B.

@Z

You should have omitted the definite article: s/b the Blacks, or, referred to the “Black vote”. “The Blacks” is a loaded phrase.

And of course, recognizing that while he enjoys overwhelming support among African Americans, their support for Obama is not universal – see The Black Agenda Report.

friends,

I have been pondering the issue for more than 10years now, as presumably a lot of You did also.

Ian’s theme:
—
“Greek election consequences AND THE SHAPE OF THE DEVELOPED WORLD’S FUTURE”
—
Have been going through all the mess:
Limits to Growth, Jay Hanson (dieoff), Herman Daly (steady state economy), the oildrum (from Stewart Staniford to Tom Murphy), JM Greer etc.

Pondering all the options from the Olduvai Cliff to slow descent (JMG).

Hanson being one of the harshest (and most intelligent) critics of the human condition I ever encountered.

—————
But there is another issue, which is LENR.
And do’nt kill me too early as being completely deluded!

LENR is a real effect, with lots of hot air, to be sure.

Apart from the vortex-l-list —
see eg http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/index.html ,
see eg Peter Gluck, who is a chemical engineer from Romania in his early 70s and is a humanist at heart, who maintains the blog ‘egoout’: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.de/ .

The core of the message is, that there is an energy-source in the making, which basically cures all our CURRENT energy-woes.

Now believe that or not, but if one disbelieves the evidence, I accuse him of being a fool, perferring a doomsday-scenario without considering the evidence to contrary.
This is not an easy endeavor, and even an associate Professor of Physics falls prey to this possible self-deception.
http://www.energybulletin.net/authors/Tom+Murphy
So even the hard-core scientist is not immune to big-time errors.

As a grim pessimist and fundamental critic of the human condition, I of course try to deconstruct this scenario from the philosophical side, which I occasionally do at vortex (guess my name, it is easy), but agree from the scientific side, as someone holding a fringe opinion wrt several sorts of aspects -besides being a hopefully level-headed father of a decent son-.

Message:
Be careful expecting doomsday.
You might be in for an unpleasant (from a pessimist POV) surprise!

BTW, this has nothing to do with we all being the lucky winners of a jackpot.
Which it is of course not!
We would be poor souls with zero advance, without us working on our inner condition, if we just mindlessly cashed in.

Shouldn’t that be the African-American Agenda Report? I have to laugh at that title, though. There’s a strong message of solidarity across racial, cultural and class lines. Yet another special interest concern, regardless of how poignant their criticism of the status quo is. Whites not included, nor welcome.

You should read it before you criticize solely based on its title.

“20 years to fully convulse” I think is rather optimistic. Personally I think they will do just enough each time to drag it out a little longer and by that stag we will all be so immune to poverty and death it sadly wont be such a big deal.

Groo, I’m generally pretty optimistic about our energy future, but even I’m not holding my breath for fusion, hot or cold. If it worked I’d be ecstatic, but scientists have been beating their heads against the brick wall for at least 50 years now, to no avail.

Or better yet, how about the White Agenda Report….or WAR for short? The National Review or The Nation could rename itself this.

a 50,000 year fuel supply

Sweet Mother of Jesus, if you’re going to shill for the Nuclear Industry, at least demand some remuneration for your services. If you are being paid, please forgive me assuming you’re not.

You have to be joking with this comment, right? Right? Considering our current System, and how it treats commodities as investments, what incentive would there be for investors to invest in a commodity that is so ubiquitous with an endless supply? There would be no incentive. The Commodity Regimes, in this case the Mining Companies, are not going to waste their time with Thorium unless they know they can make it scarce at a later date and drive the price up……..a later date, when unwitting shills like yourself are dead and gone and no longer available to slap around for selling us a load of horseshit, once again. Not to mention, even at face value, nothing that humans become interested in lately will last anywhere near a fifty thousand years. That’s absurd. Review this before telling us Santa Claus is coming to town:

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/07/galactic-scale-energy/

Also, your Thorium solution plays, once again, into the hands of the Central Planners. It’s a power source that will be tightly controlled by an Elite group of insiders who answer to the Plutocrats, and no one else. It’s it direct opposition to the direction we should be taking, which is decentralization and diversification.

the pedantic bs back and forth here is proof of the “Us vs.Them” civil war. so petty and so useless, except for all the one upman ship involved.

liberals or whatever the “correct” name for these “alpha” male behavior is helping the Elites, not us who read this blog. typical though. it shows how Divide and Conquer works.

i normally don’t bother to comment about such internecine warfare, it does get in the way of the conversation, or it this warfare the conversation.

the Elites will drag this “stage” out as long as possible. until some loony,like Netanyahu, for example, decides to get his “dig” in while he can. and upset the carefully designed game of Thrones.

Napoleon leading up to Waterloo, but how long before. if you expect the White Southern Americans to ever question Big Daddy/Republican/Elite behavior, then i would expect the decline will be a long and carefully crafted decline.

the only variables will be the extent/speed of climate change, vs higher food prices. that’s the Elites measure of success, how long they can keep the Ponzi scheme going.

if i could only afford to move, but us poor folk have to continue to work. and we poor are expendable for the time being, at least. having to watch the Liberals fight amongst themselves over the “correct” words to fling at the “Elites” is so tiresome and part of the problem.

so please, people, focus your “stuff” at the “right” Right group. divide and conquer has given us the Lord of the Flies Society, and your fighting is part of that type of “anti-society” behavior.

i always thought it was to work for all of us, since we are all owners and members of the Earth. being misdirected in our focus, scattering our energy doesn’t help.

Ian, I’m afraid I can’t take quite as optimistic a view as you have.

To wit:

It’s damn near high time for the next Dark Ages, and by Ged, we’re going to have a lot of fun losing about 2 billion people (at today’s global pop) on the way there!

Or, in a slightly less flippant mood, there will be no revival.

It’s about that time in historical development when the oligarchs and their flappers decide to double-down on the global grab in a last gasp at maintaining a declining level of opulence.

In the meantime, the already bare subsistence level existence enjoyed by the majority of one portion of the “developed world” (the United States) will continue to create the vacuum necessary for the oligarchs to enjoy a safe home base – aside from London (where I’m not entirely confident they can pull it off) – from which to run this Machiavellian comedy show for several decades to come.

(In other words, I expect the collapse to be well after we’re dead.)

Which doesn’t make me any more sanguine about the resource poor world we’re leaving behind for some future generation to try and drag themselves up from a few centuries or more hence…

Now believe that or not, but if one disbelieves the evidence, I accuse him of being a fool, perferring a doomsday-scenario without considering the evidence to contrary.
This is not an easy endeavor, and even an associate Professor of Physics falls prey to this possible self-deception.
http://www.energybulletin.net/authors/Tom+Murphy
So even the hard-core scientist is not immune to big-time errors.

groo, I’m asking for some clarification here.

From what I gather, Murphy is not contesting the possibility of viable energy sources – even on a scale comparable to our fossil-fuel-extravaganza of today – but is instead challenging the idea of infinite growth on a finite planet, ultimately from a thermodynamic perspective.

While I do not prefer a doomsday scenario, I am indeed one whom you might consider a “fool,” in that I am skeptical of the likelihood of technological relief for our energy problems, be it Thorium or other innovations, spoken and perhaps as yet unspoken. However, my objection here is more rooted in the observation that such techno-speculation comes off all-too-easily as a psychological panacea for our challenges (and as such should be viewed with perhaps greater scrutiny,) than it is in objective fact. So, I am willing to provisionally suspend my skepticism, but I am still left with what is, to me, the inescapable conclusion that continued access to “cheap” energy is a guaranteed death-warrant in its own right, given the historical demonstration of what our appetites become in such a “nutrition rich petri dish.”

Murphy’s “boiling” of the Earth is an apt metaphor.

It is my contention, and the contention of most energy-skeptics, that we do humanity a far greater service in addressing its appetite-problem than enabling energy inputs.

I think that recognizing a finite planet is a maturity thing.

“It is my contention, and the contention of most energy-skeptics, that we do humanity a far greater service in addressing its appetite-problem than enabling energy inputs.”

Okay, now we know your “contention”.

How do you plan to tell people [most of whom have far less than you] to ‘tighten their belts”? Assuming you come up with the requisite billions to get your message out in an attempt to turn back 5,000 years of human history…and…if history is prologue, they will give you the finger for your efforts…what’s plan B?

[crickets]

C’mon, contentions are for the high and mighty, let’s hear a plan that has a touch of reality.

A great campaign slogan for the next president:

A Liquid Thorium Reactor in every pot.

Meth’s not a bad thing…….they’re just not making it right. The answer to the Meth epidemic is to make more of it….stronger and better with less side effects.

S Brennan, you’re the one who is out of step here, not me. The message of Ian’s post is extremely dire, and you swoop in and tell us all our troubles can be cured with Thorium. I call bullshit on that and you get your panties in a wad. How is posting a youtube of a presentation given by a couple of commodity hucksters doing “your personal best?”

Petro,

You are correct in asserting Luddites were using “collective bargaining by riot” and as legitimate as any Robin Hood. However, I was using it in the rhetorical pejorative definition [2], not the social movement itself [1].

Lud·dite
1. Any of a group of British workers who between 1811 and 1816 rioted and destroyed laborsaving textile machinery in the belief that such machinery would diminish employment.
2. One who opposes technical or technological change.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Luddite

I’m glad you think revolution/reform is possible. I think you’re being optimistic. I’m looking forward to a Blade Runner society without any of the cool technology. Sort of a Dark Age feudal reign by corporate masters.

Ideally thorium—being poisonous but less poisonous than uranium—could be used as a “transition” power source, helping us carefully de-urbanize and move slowly to a more sustainable, low-entropy, low-population society.

Except in reality it would simply fuel mankind’s techophilia and lead to more growth and consumption until even thorium’s benefits were exhausted.

The problem would seem to be outdated memes as much as it is thermodynamics and limited resources. I wish I knew how to fight a meme without feeling like Don Quixote….

In regards to “doing your personal best,” I’ve been giving that phrase a good deal of thought the last couple of days, and I’ve arrived at the following. Please, please, please, I implore you, do not do your personal best, because all too often, in this System, doing your personal best unfortunately amounts to feeding this beast with ever greater efficiency and effectiveness. The Thorium push is a prime example…..it perpetuates the myth. I can’t tell you how many National Merit Scholars I’ve worked with over the years, and I can’t help thinking of them with lament…..and disgust. All of that potential turned to so much mush, yet wrapped in the pretty package of “doing your personal best.” They amount to nothing more than glorified cogs in this machinery of death and destruction that’s slouching its way towards Bethlehem.

Spot on documentary here….allegedly made by North Korea. Maybe I’ll move to the DPRK…..and lose that last ten pounds. Seriously, it couldn’t be more accurate, even if it is ironic.

Part 1

Part 2

There is a total of 10 parts….the rest of which can be found at the link for Parts 1 & 2 above.

@MB – It looks as though the poster of that documentary is still vetting parts 5-10, yes? They don’t seem to be all up yet.

(His FB page)

To groo:

Would you care to outline the study that explains how “to store solar and wind in existing methane-gas-infrastructure”?

@Petro,

II
The second aspect.

Now imagine those two options:

i) seaweed could fuel our future ON THE LEVEL we currently have.
ii) LENR could fuel our future with 1000-1mio that we currently have.
Mindboggling.

As an environmentalist by heart I am even suspicious wrt (i), which implicitly suggests something like maintaining the status quo, which is pathological per se:
We have to tinker with the financial system, throw the (financial) bums out, and live within our collective material means.
(ii) opens up lots of opportunities, not really interstellar space-travel, but colonizing Mars etc being a ‘real’ option.
Whether this is nonsensical in itself, is another question.

BOTH options seem to generate a deepseated cognitive dissonance amongst those trying to get accustomed to a good retreat. Eg JM Greer, one of my spiritual heroes, including my humble self.

but this should not hinder us to exclude by definition something like LENR, which is to me as an engineer/scientist/philosopher at heart something with HIGH probability.
How it plays out, in what timeframe and what circumstances, I do not know.

To refuse this possibility per definition or learned methods is what I term foolish.
Ignorance on shaky ground.

There is a permeating term in the LENR crowd:
‘Pathological skeptizism’.
Where does it begin/end?
It is late in the night,when I’m thinking/writing about that.
Not to drown in doubt the next day, or having a pathologically firm position on this or that, but to keep my internal watchman alert.

Maybe I should challenge Murphy and Bardi on their respective blogs.

To be clear:
I think it was Luther who said in one of his clearer moments:
“was hülfe es Dir, wenn Du die ganze Welt gewönnest, und doch dadurch Schaden an Deiner Seele erlittest”

“What would it help You, if You won the world, but damaged your soul because of that.”

Because of statements like that I do not write off the believers altogether.
Some of them have a point.

Part II:

The other part of this is the recognition that the fact that what could be reasonably looked at as “excess” solar energy (and we do receive that as well), is systematically radiated outwards into space, or safely interred into the ground (in what eventually becomes coal & oil) in order to somewhat miraculously prevent our planet from turning into Venus and becoming merely a fascinating chemical soup, devoid of life.

Murphy’s point – and I take it well – is that any “excess” energy which is unlocked for use will have thermodynamic output as per the laws of entropy, with undesirable results. The perfectly apt metaphor is what is happening to us right now due to our incontinent disinterment of “ancient sunlight” of the last 300 years, thus upsetting the fine intentions of millions of years of work done by mostly plants here on Earth.

Unlocking potential nuclear energy can only be seen as an exacerbation of this problem! This is why I have a general “Are you kidding me?!” reaction to nuclear-based fuels – we can’t even handle over-usage of our solar input, and we’re contemplating introducing that source of heat as well?

I understand your arguments regarding close-mindedness, and this hits home to me, and that is why I go off and bother to re-read and re-examine the case whenever it comes up – as I have here with the links provided by you & @S Brennan. For personal reasons, I don’t want to fall victim to any “foolish consistencies.”

But I keep butting up against the laws of physics. They are not laws by decree, but laws by brick-wall-in-your-face. They don’t seem willing to negotiate.

As for Mars – and I admit that perhaps this falls into a bit of spiritual dogmatism – but I can’t countenance expanding out into other planets (leaving aside the sheer ridiculousness of seeking refuge on barren wastelands with hostility issues that rival anything we see here on our home planet) if we can’t work out a sustainable relationship with this one.

But that last is a minor side issue that will probably remain moot for the foreseeable future…

James Lovelock, amongst others, thinks that nuclear power may be required as a transition and as the only way to avoid climate armaggedon.

I like some of Lovelock’s ideas, namely the Gaia concept, but he’s claimed in the past that we’re already doomed, and yet now he’s promoting Nuclear as a transition. So, which is it? Are we doomed, or not? Also, a transition to what, may I ask? Do any of us here really believe that those who have there hands on power are going to relinquish it readily? Hardly, they are only going to double down when the going gets tough….as we see them doing now. We will have to pry it from their cold dead hands……but there is no we, as teh North Korean documentary so aptly points out.

It’s mitigated, however, by the high comedy of their “glorious enlighted leader” rhetoric. You just can’t write better parody than that.

Yeah, it’s one of the reasons I posted it…because of the irony…because irony is one of the few pleasures left for me in life…..and it’s in such abundant supply these days.

Something’s fishy about the whole thing. It’s probably yet another psyops by our twisted intelligence services. They have a penchant for creating their own self-critique’s and then attributing that blatantly honest critique to the notorious Enemy Number One du jour thus ensuring that anyone in the West who also holds the same criticisms is also an enemy of the state and must be watched more closely…..and perhaps, put on one of those endless lists.

I would go a step further and say, if “we” are to survive, it is imperative that we change form, meaning we must evolve from biological beings into something beyond. Biological cannot cut what is coming our way. Its resiliency is quite fragile and within a narrow range of survivable limits. If the essence of Humanity wishes to continue for any length of time, it’s going to have to upload, and I’m not sure it can beat the clock.

Euthanasia should not be considered illegal considering our imminent future. I would much prefer to slip into death via an anesthetic injection, as opposed to a torturous death. I recently experienced anesthesia for a procedure and it’s the way to go, let me tell you. It whisks you away in a flash…no pain, no nothing…poof, you’re gone…here today, gone tomorrow. What could be better, really?

http://video.pbs.org/video/1430431984/

What a beautiful, and humane way to go.

Re Lovelock: Given his professed disdain for the way in which his Gaia theory was co-opted by the New Agers, it seems he’s always had a bit of “hippie punching” in him. So perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised to see him go Full Metal Curmudgeon on us as regards nuclear. 🙂

When you read this, the Germans will have won.
Metaphors we live by.

Is this you being smug over Germany’s position in the unfolding Euro debacle, groo? Sigh – nationalism rears its ugly head once again… (I’m absolutely just teasing here. 🙂 Low hanging fruit and all that.)

Cheers!

Mr. Welsh, do you speak Greek? Because I do & I even have the Greek channels on my TV here in the states. I have family in Greece whom I visit every year. So, I dare say I’ve been following things more closely — and more accurately — than most non-Greek speakers. Thus, I have to tell you that you — and your brethren in the blogging community & the US MSM at large — seem to have a huge problem understanding the various political parties in Greece, which is understandable being used to what is, for all intents & purposes, a 2 party system where the 2 parties really aren’t that different from each other. So take this as constructive criticism — the Golden Dawn party, despite what you read in the US press, are anarchists — that’s their core philosophy — anarchy. They even wear the Guy Fawkes masks at rallies & they are the ones seen destroying property & setting fires during protests. To describe them as “right wing” is inaccurate. Are they fascist a–holes? Why yes, but they are extreme left-wing fascist a–holes.
But again, even using the term left-wing & right-wing to describe Greek parties for an American audience is misleading because of the connotations those terms have here. The New Democracy party is called “right wing” here in the US, but they are only “right wing” compared to the communist parties SYRIZA (oh, and btw, it is an acronym, so all capital letters, not “Syriza” — I see that all the time too) and KKE. (Yes, there are two communist parties in Greece — again, hard concept to understand for American readers, but true nonetheless — SYRIZA can be understood as “soft communist” and KKE as “hard communist”). PASOK, the socialist party, is the *center* in Greece. So, as you can see, to be center-right (New Democracy) in Greece is *not* the same thing as being center-right in the US.
You certainly have the right to opine on what the elections in Greece means for the future of the world, but you really should describe the parties correctly & in context.

Dear Ian,
Well, it seems to me that from your sentence here: “both the US parties are so far to the right in a global context or any 20th century historical context that only in America could someone call a Democrat a left winger, or even a liberal” that you and & I are in agreement about my main point, so I don’t see why you take issue with my asking you to present the Greek parties in context. By virtue of your writing this blog on the internet, as opposed to, say a Canadian print newspaper, you most certainly are writing with the possibility of reaching an American audience (and I think you know that), so my point that you should present your descriptions of the Greek parties in context is valid, unless you are saying you don’t want “new readers” and are satisfied with the ones you have. If new visitors are frowned on, than I’m so sorry I bothered you. Finally, I am a Greek who is speaking to you — I was born in Athens to a Greek mother (American father); own property in Athens; I spend approximately 1/4 of the year there; the entire maternal side of my extended family lives in Athens & I too speak to them on a daily basis. Obviously, you are going to rely more on the people you “know” rather than on me — a stranger on the internet — but trying to dismiss my description of Golden Dawn — and they are anarchists & as I said, fascists — so again, where is the disagreement, unless you think that fascism can only arise from the “right” — as not being “valuable” is just plain old condescending, as is your pointing to “long term readers” not needing you to clarify party descriptions (unless, again, new readers are not welcome here). (Also, just a side note — I looked at your “About” section before writing that response to you, and while it notes you reside in Toronto, it also notes that you write for Firedoglake & HuffingtonPost, which I know are geared to American audiences about American politics and it certainly does not describe basic assumptions about your writing that new readers should be aware of before commenting. Just FYI).
As I said, while it wasn’t the issues I had with your post (all of which, btw, I stand by re: the Greek political parties), you certainly can opine on whether the Greek people did the right thing or the wrong thing in your view as a person who has Greek friends and “knows about economics,” but who doesn’t actually have family & property in Greece & who doesn’t actually speak Greek (btw, that would be me, again, the person whom you dismiss) but the fact is, as I have known from the moment that Greece decided to join the EU, that there was no “good” outcome for Greece — and that not only had to do with the disparity in the value between the drachma and the euro, but also with the civil war after the end of WW2 & Greece’s consequential failure to industrialize properly (but that’s another discussion). You are right, however, that with the state that Greece is in now, ND & austerity isn’t going to save Greece, but you are fooling yourself if you think SYRIZA & more borrowing would have done any better. The people of Greece made what they felt was the best choice among a bunch of really, really bad choices (SYRIZA included) and while it is easy to opine based on what all your Greek friends tell you on what the “right thing” would have been for the Greek people to do, the bottom line is this: No one is going to be able to save Greece. It’s done. And I say that as someone who actually cares about the country & the people in more than an abstract “I know about economics & like to give my opinion on the internet” way.
Thanks for your time & your response.

Just because someone lives in a country 1/4 of the year, doesn’t mean that their analysis is accurate. We each bring biases to our evaluation of a situation.

Ostensibly anarchist or not, if Golden Dawn is populated by anarchists, their xenophobia will drive them to the hard right. Also, as 50% of the police voted for Golden Dawn, it is fair to ask if GD really is anarchic. The job of a career police officer is to maintain order. It’s difficult to believe they would vote so heavily for anarchists.

dear Angie, appreciate your comments (as a -ahem-hopefully not your typically German) very much.

Lots of mistakes have been made by the EU-buerocrats and politicians.
Greece seems to have a defunct financial administration for a long time.
joke: “Need a receipt? Or can we use the Greek method?”
Nothing new here. It is everywhere, to a different degree and with quite different intentions.

Eg the richest ‘per person’ country in the EU is Luxembourg, which is THE tax-haven within the EU.
See eg here:
“New data: Tiny tax haven is EU’s biggest outside investor and inward recipient.”
http://taxjustice.blogspot.de/

Now Greece is A problem, but not THE problem within the EU.

Considering the whole, the ‘fish’ actually stinks from the head, which is Luxembourg, with different intensity of smell in other countries, including the Netherlands and Germany.

Which promotes a common habit of ‘we are all criminals, some small, some large’, and is nearly univeral.

I have an old friend who bought some land on the Peloponnese around 1990,and bult his house with his own hands, with a tower, just like the pirates had in the middle ages (humor).
ca 1996 the EU financed roads to the fingers, and I was baffled by this waste. Rarely anybody drove these roads. Along the road: ruins of black constructions from people who could not pay their bribe.

Anybody with an eye to see could notice that.

Anyway, on a much larger scale, this happens everyday in Luxembourg, and btw, black money from GB and Germany going to Spain.
(Not to mention the US variant: tax-haven Delaware)

This is an ubiquitious tax/corruption issue, where the blame regularly is put on the small fish, if anything goes wrong.

Lurker the Third

… For examples, see Stirling Newberry’s recent comments about Paul Krugman. …

Lost sight of Stirling for quite some time now.
Even Google seems to have difficulties to track him, but maybe its just me.

Do you have a link?

Btw, Krugman seems to loose credibility by the day,
see eg http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/06/the-widespread-economic-myths-destroying-the-economy/

@Julien,

thanks!

It’s difficult for me to associate an “anarchist” party with anti-immigrant activity. Not even right-wing anarcho-capitalists are in favour (if they’re anarchists worth their salt) of immigration restrictions. Is angie suggesting that Golden Dawn isn’t anti-immigrant? That’s really big news to me.

Not anti-immigrant, but anti-immigration, and my reasons for being so are, I’m sure, vastly different than Golden Dawn’s reasons for being anti-immigrant.

But that’s the key, right? Golden Dawn wants to use the power of the state to delineate a line enforced by violence against people who cannot be referred to as powerful authorities. They don’t have a problem with the authority as such. They are also known to be involved in anti-immigrant activity—not anti-immigration, though they may be that, but anti-immigrant.

There’s no state without border enforcement.

If you define immigration as an activity of the state to cause movement of populations, I won’t necessarily think that’s non-anarchist to be opposed to immigration. That’s not at all what’s at stake here. I don’t know of any form of anarchism that would endorse the use of force to prevent a resident of Chiapas from becoming a resident of Austin TX and vice versa. Or Kabul vs. Athens.