Copenhagen and Versailles(?)

So COP15 didn't end with an agreement that actually will save the world. No surprise there. The Norwegian Minister of the Environment and International Development Mr Erik Solheim came back to Oslo disappointed that the final text wasn't as far-reaching as he would have liked it to be. Also, he was furious with Sudan, Saudi-Arabia and Venzuela for their behavior. However, there was one positive point - that US President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabo making an apparence and negotiating.

For the record, Mr Solheim was the chief mediator in Sri Lanka before he first became Minister of International Development in 2005.

So, Mr Solheim praises Obama and Wen, saying without them it might not have been any agreement at all. He says it's unique that heads of state and government from the USA, China and Europe sits down and negotiates an agreement. It's comparable to the Versailles Conference in 1919!

Now, we've established that Mr Solheim doesn't have the best track-record when it comes to negotiating, but even he should know that to compare an international conference to the one in Versailles in 1919 is not a compliment.

Back to the future

The Noughties are rapidly approaching their end. Although the decade technically doesn’t end until 31 December 2010 (remember all the fuzz about the third millennia beginning on 1 January 2000 or 2001? Same thing, just on a lesser scale), for rhetorical purposes it ends in roughly three weeks. Borrowing from others the 1990s was as a decade what the 1800s were as a century – a long and somewhat peaceful one.

The 19th century famously started with the French Revolution in 1879 and ended with the onset of the Great War in 1914. It was a century of hope, peace and progress. It saw liberal revolutions, the first attempts of democracy, the industrial revolution in Europe, an urban middle class paving the way for meritocracy over aristocracy and a globalised wave of free trade and free thoughts. And in the end the most advanced countries, industrially as well as culturally, went to war with one another and a generation of young men lost their lives on the fields Europe.

The decade of the 1990s were in many ways a rerun of the 19th century. It was in many ways a post-20th century decade. It kicked of with the Berlin wall being torn down in 1989 and it saw the spread of democracy, this time beyond the borders of Europe. Francis Fukuyama talked about the End of History and the victory of liberal democracy over all other forms of political systems, Boris Yeltsin made Russia part of the West and internet flattened the world and brought the most valuable commodity of all, information, to the poorest and most remote places of our planet. Utopia, here we come! Then came 11 September 2001.

The attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. were very much the starting point of this decade. They effectively ended the illusion of a liberal world order and brought us back into the age of rivalry. The Noughties haven’t only been the years of Islamic terrorism, although the people of London and Madrid have had their fair share. They have also been the years that ended the monopolar world of the Nineties, and brought back not the bipolarity of the Cold War and the 20th century, but rather the old multipolar system of Europe.

The 19th century, 1789-1914, was a long one. The 20th, 1914-1989, a short one. The 1990s, 1989-2001, was a long decade. There are those that argue that the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States and his subsequent reach-out to the Arab world represents the emergence of a new world order and thus that the Noughties ended in 2009. I am not one of those, I think neither he is Our Savior nor that he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, but I shall not dwell further on this. History is easier to judge in hindsight and there is not often you can see, and realize that you’re seeing era-changing events in the happening.

The Noughties have been, in my eyes, a trip back to the future. In addition to the US and Russia, the superpowers of the 20th century, Brazil, India and China are stepping onto the plate as elite players. South Africa has successfully made the transition to democracy, although they have yet to have a change of government since the transition, is a role model for the rest of Africa and represents a leading voice of the global South. In Latin America Venezuela has taken the role of a leader, and together with Iran they reject the notion of liberal ideas as we see them in Western Europe. International politics is no longer about the fight between Communism and The Free World, as it was in the Cold War. Nor is it about spreading Human Rights and liberal ideas. We have returned to Realpolitik and the era of national interest, only on a larger scale. It is no longer the European states that fight among themselves over control and influence in other parts of the world. Rather, it is Europe as a whole that competes or cooperates with Russia, China, the US, Iran and other emerging powers over influence in places like Africa, Latin and South America, the Middle East and Central and South-East Asia. It’s back to normal.

I cannot see a single event marking the end of the Noughties. If Copenhagen is a success it might be the one. If the world leaders in Copenhagen manages to come to a responsible agreement that will actually lead the way into a green and sustainable future that will be the end of the Noughties and a realization of what we believed in in the Nineties. But I don’t think so. What I can see is the re-emerging of a world order where nations don’t have friends, only common interests. It is a world where countries like France and the UK, as well as my own Norway, must realize their limitations but also the potentials of constructive and institutionalized cooperation. It is a world were autocratic regimes, like Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela, together with the US and regional powers such as Brazil, India and South Africa will play leading roles, but were Europe, it acting as one and being aware of its potential can still take the lead. This is not the world for idealist, but rather for leaders like Bismarck and Kissinger.

Sir Humphrey vs. populism

Just watching an old "Yes, Minister"-episode, "The middle-class rip-off", on art subsidies.

Bernard to Sir Humphrey: - But the people want it!
Sir Humphrey: [calmly] Bernard, subsidy is for art, for culture. [almost furiously] It is not to be given to what the people want! It is for what the people don't want but ought to have! If they really want it they'll pay for it themselves!

So much for populist culture policies!

Young man, you should know this by now.

Walking down King's Road from Victoria Station towards Belgravia I passed a young man clearly preparing for his day as late as possible. This man, probably no older than, maximum, 16, walking in the opposite direction, was wearing suit trouser, a white shirt hanging outside his trousers, and had his jacket hung over his arm. Around his neck was a black tie hanging untied. As I walked passed him his hands were on the knot desperatly trying to tie it and I could litteraly see how frenetically his mind tried to remember how to do it properly.

Poor sod, didn't your father teach you this ten years ago already?

A Night at the Boleyn Ground

Reading today’s papers I see that I was lucky. The queue outside Upton Park tube station stretch for maybe a hundred metres and the streets where lined with shield-and-baton bearing Met officers. Nevertheless, things seemed to run smoothly. Not long after, I learned, all hell had broken loose and these few streets in East London had turned into what some described as a “war zone”.

Three hours earlier I found myself at the Boleyn Tavern, trying to avoid having beer thrown at me. I was standing in a pub doing social-anthropologic field work on the 21st century tribes of working class England, or football supporters, as they’re also referred to as. I’d come to watch West Ham United take on Milwall in the second round of the Carlings League Cup, and was in the middle of a pre-game ritual including singing, shouting obscenities about their rivals and, of course, throwing half-filled plastic-cups of beer in the air. Abiding to the laws of gravity beer falls to the ground and at one point I found myself between the beer and the floor. Oops!

The match itself is worth remembering. Together with 24,491 others I was packed into the Boleyn Ground, or Upton Park as it’s usually known. A friend of mine from the area had gotten us tickets at the Bobby Moore Stand/South Bank, which was inhabited mostly with, from what I could see, fairly die-hard home supporters. For those not having an intimate knowledge of London football rivalries, myself included, Milwall is not very popular in this part of town, and long before the match began there was a heightened tension in the air.

Milwall is a few divisions below West Ham in the league system, so normally this should be a walk-in for the home team. It was far from it. West Ham got of to a decent start, but half-way into the first half Milwall took the lead. This seemed to knock the air out of the home squad, and for the next forty minutes or so, until only fifteen minutes remained of the match, there was not much to enjoy for the over 20,000 home supporters. They sang, they cheered, they shouted and they cursed, but for an outsider the entertainment was much more to be found on the stands than on the pitch. In the far end, where the Milwall supporters were gathered, things started to happen. From where I was standing, some 120 metres away, it was hard to tell exactly what was going on, but steadily more and more police and security guards gravitated towards the area, creating a solid blockade between the Milwall supporters and the pitch and between the supporters and the local majority. Then the bubble burst and the tension, for now at least, was released. With full time less than five minutes away West Ham equalized and crowds from three sides flooded the grass in a jubilant explosion, the guards unable to do anything but watch them in despair. It took a good five minutes or so before the pitch was cleared and the match could recommence.

Full time ended in a draw and early in the first extra half West Ham got a penalty shot. The guards braced themselves, only to find once again the pitch crowded as the home team taking the lead was celebrated. When the match finally ended, 3-1 to West Ham, once again the pitch filled with cheerful boys and girls, men and women celebrating.

After the match the streets were packed, people singing and shouting. As I walked to the tube I saw the police prepared for trubble but everything went smoothly all the way home. A night that could have ended so badly was just one long and joyful study of human interactions and turn of emotions. Then I watched the news this morning and saw what had happened after I left…


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdJNu_KtA-4

Brick Lane

I’m not from this part of town. I’m not even from this very city. I’m a tourist. I’m an intruder, and it’s tattooed on my forehead. I’m a tall, blond, blue-eyed Norwegian in an Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi area. I’m in exotic Brick Lane. Yeah, right!

There’s nothing exotic about Brick Lane. On the contrary, Brick Lane on a Sunday in late August 2009 is a hang-out for the middle-class children and grand-children of 1968. It’s a London symbol of western cultural relativism and liberal colonial guilt. The entire street from one end to the other is filled with white Bob Marley-loving hippies and cappuccino-drinking slim-jeans & hat urban hipsters selling each other books on spiritual enlightenment, the “for Dummies” version, and African wannebe artefacts. And I fit right in.

I jot these lines down while sitting at a café called “Verge” and drinking herbal tea. In my bag is a copy of St. Augustine’s Confessions. Just after I’ve sat down and put my block on the table and started writing an old man, probably remembering when this place was still exotic for anyone looking like me, walks by and exerts “Ah, inspiration!” as his eyes fall upon my activity.

Obviously English is the most common tongue I’ve hear around here, but Hindi is not number two. The language I’ve heard second most often is French. And it’s not Maghreb French, nor is it the French of the banlieus. No, it’s proper French. It’s the French you teachers whish they commanded. It’s the French of Jean Sarkozy when he lunches with his mother-in-law.

The guys walking by are fit and slim. They wear loose and light summer clothes, sport Beatles anno 1964-long hair, smart hats and Ray-Ban Wayfarer sun glasses. They’re my age and a little older, a little younger. Some just got their A-levels and are heading for university, others graduated years ago and are already in comfortable jobs. The common denominator is that they’re all educated, successful and on top of their lives.

I'm in Brick Lane and there's nothing exotic about it.

Ireland on the tracks towards Lisbon

In a resent poll 54% of Irish voters said they would now vote in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, against 24% who said they would vote against. Might we actually get a new and sort-of proper Treaty in the EU soon? I dear not be confident but there's hope.

Goodbye General Motors, welcome Government Motors

General Motors is bankrupt and will be restructured with new ownership within the next three months international media reports. The new company will be owned by the old's creditors, unions and, wait for it, 60% by the US Government.

I'm glad GM finally went bankrupt. The company was unable to reinvent itself and its production line in accord with consumer trends, higher gas prices and the financial crisis and had as such no longer a right to survive in a capitalist society. With the American Government allowing the old GM to go bankrupt they send a clear signal to other car makers that unless they restructure and find their place in today's economy they as well might go bankrupt. Also, the new GM, trimmed down without many of its daughter companies, such as the European SAAB, Opel and Vauxhall and American Hummer, might emerge as an example of the lessons learned from the last years; focus on your core activity and understand that the old way is not necessarily the best way today. The downfall of GM might prove an excellent example of what Schumpeter described as creative destruction, that the innovation of some entrepreneurs, although driving the economy forward, in this case by producing more fuel efficient cars and having leaner business organisations, can destroy old and otherwise seemingly profitable companies. I believe GM's fall may prove to be a major step towards a cleaner, leaner and more efficient automobile industry.

I opened the last paragraph by stating that I am glad GM went bankrupt. This I stand by. Nevertheless, tens of thousand workers may, and probably will, loose their jobs because of the bankruptcy. Additional tens and tens of thousands of family members, people employed by GM's sub-contractors and so on will also be affected by this. Let us not forget that for these people GM's fall is not a good thing. Most of these people were highly qualified workers in a field in rapid change and they will need help and incentives to get back into the work market. Some of them will hopefully start their own businesses, and we need business- and employment laws that helps them along. Others need training and re-education and it is in society's interest that they get this. Not because we should be nice to these people, but because in the long run it is better to pay for their training and get them back as workers than to have them on unemployment schemes for a prolonged period.

A second point worth looking at is the Government's position. They will own 60% of the company. The Government used taxpayer's money to help GM and this is money the Government should ensure that they get back. After having helped GM back on its feet the Government should sell its shares an use the money for public goods, such as schooling and health care. However, the Government should not wait until GM is the world's biggest car producer again. They should sell as soon as possible.

But once again, GM went bankrupt because they were unable to adjust. This is Capitalism 101. Therefore I am glad they went bankrupt.

When pollsters get it wrong.

One of the wonders of living in today's media society, especially if you're interested in politics and elections are due, is that you get a continuous stream of polls showing you movements in the electorate. Sometimes, however, pollsters get it wrong.

The pollster Synovate, polling for the Norwegian tabloid Dagbladet show in their newest poll that the Progress Party (Frp), a right-wing petro-populist, pseudo-libertarian/pseudo-social-democratic, slightly xenophobic party, goes from 25.2% to 20.6% in a month, the same month they had their national convention. In the same month the Socialist Party (SV), an anti-globalisation, anti-capitalism, anti-NATO, anti-EU, intellectual middleclass party, almost doubles their figures and goes from 6.4% to 11.1%

In itself, such dramatic changes in such a short time raise a few eye brows. What make it more interesting is the two parties in question. Had the change occurred between the Conservative Party and Frp it might have been explained by internal movement on the Right, as these two parties often exchange votes, and the Conservative Party had a very successful national convention as well this month. Had it been between SV and Labour, traditionally the biggest party in Norway and the uncontested Party of the Left, it might have been explained by the same reasons as for on the Right. Had the changes been in Frp and Labour, one on the Right and one on the Left, it would likewise had been fairly easy to explain, as these two parties often appeal to the same sociological voter segment. But between SV and Frp?!? Most Frp-voters would not dream of voting SV, and any good SV-voter would feel simply dirty by as much as thinking about voting Frp.

Looking at the other parties (Conservatives +0.5 to 14.5%, Liberals +1.5 to 5.4%, Christian Democrats back 1.4 to 5.9%, Communist +1.3 to 2.4% and Coastal Party +0.3 to 0.8)% there are overall quite a few significant changes, especially for the Liberals, Christian Democrats and Communists, who all have changes of about 1.5 percentage points.

No, this time until I see other polls showing the same tendency I cannot possibly believe this. Synovate, you got it wrong.

Would you like to pay more tax for better health care?

A new survey from FAFO, a Norwegian research institute, reveals that most people are willing to pay more tax if they know it will be used to improve health care and care for the elderly. "It is clearly a myth that most people do not wish to pay more taxes" states Dagbladet, a leading Norwegian tabloid situated on the Left, quoting the news agent NTB.

There are two major flaws here. The first is the question: "Are you willing to pay more taxes if it will be used to improve health care?" No-one in their right mind having grown up in Western Europe would object to paying more taxes if they KNEW it would mean a better heath care system. The premise of the question is wrong, however. We do not pay taxes for an individual task to be done, taxes are not earmarked, we pay into the big pool. The second flaw of the question is the assumption that more money would fix health care. It is a bottom-less hole where pouring more money does no good. We've increased spending on heath care for decades and it is no better than before. It is not more money, but better organisation and more freedom for doctors and nurses to do their job that will fix the problem.

Taliban: Fogh Muslim's No 1 enemy

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former Danish PM about to become NATO's new Secretary General, is the Muslims greatest enemy, states the Taliban homepage, according to Norwegian christian daily VL.

The Taliban has a homepage? That VL checks on a regular basis? Why isn't the address public knowledge? It's not www.taliban.org, at least.

Flanders vs. Norway

Flanders Today, my local, English-language weekly on life in Flanders, reports that population density in Flanders has reached 456 inhabitants per square kilometre. In Norway, on the other half, we're about 13. 13 inhabitants per square kilometre. On average. The reality is that... well, just look at the map and compare the two. For those ignorant souls out there, Flanders is the northern half of Belgium.

And for those of you who have a problem with scale, the total area of Belgium is 30.278 square kilometres, while Norway is a grand total of 307.442 square kilometres, or roughly ten times bigger.

EU ban on snus is illiberal and illegal

I'm neither a smoker nor a snuser (user of snus), and only a moderate drinker. A few years ago when the Christian Democrat Dagfinn Høybråten, then Norwegian Minister for Health, introduced a law banning smoking in pubs and restaurants in Norway I applauded it, and I'm still a bit taken back when I come to countries where smoking indoors, in pubs and restaurants as well as in private homes, is not only completely legal but also common. Okay, so smoking in private homes is not outlawed in Norway, but it is becoming less and less commonplace. I think people should have the right to use substances that might hurt their health, such as tobacco and alcohol, as long as the use of these substances does not inflict harm on others. Which is why I support the ban on smoking in indoor public places. What I neither support nor understand, however, is the ban on substances that have practically no harmful effect on third parties and what's health risks are debatable. I am here talking of snus. Being very common in Sweden as well as Norway as an alternative to smoking, as the only external harm it inflicts is that the use of (old fashion) snus is not very aesthetically pleasing. Unlike cigarettes, snus does not give of smoke stuck on bystanders' clothes. Whether it causes cancer in the same way as regular tobacco is debatable. Nevertheless, albeit being completely legal in most Scandinavian countries, it has since 1989 been banned in the rest of the EU Inner Market. This inflicts not only with the basic freedom of movement of goods, as established in the Treaties, it also contradicts with the principle of mutual recognition, so famously established with the Cassis de Dijon case in 1979. Snus is a legal good according to Swedish health standards and should therefor be able to be legally sold in all countries members of the Internal Market. To forbid it is not only a paternalistic infringement of citizens right to make individual decision for their life, it is also a clear breach of basic Community law and ECJ jurisprudence, and the ban should thus be lifted.

Belgian hygiene

I was having a coffee at Wall Street Café in Rue de la Loi before going to an interview at DG MARKT, and had to do my thing before I moved on. Standing by the sink at the loo I witnessed a sign instructing all staff of the café to wash their hands after having used the toilet. In this part of the world do we actually need to instruct people to wash their hands? Should not that be taken as a given?

Happiness

Overpriced take-away coffee from Häagen-Dazs. A dry bench. Sun that warms in March. The newest edition of The Economist.

Café Brant - 11.03.09

Strasbourg, a Wednesday afternoon in the beginning of Mars. Café Brant, a place I've been before. I sit by the window and if I turn my head I can see the Palais Universitaire. Across the square is Gallia, the student residence, and in front of me passes bus no. 6, a bus I've taken so many times before. A year has passed since I last was here, over two since N and I discussed his French love affairs and nearly two-and-a-half since I moved from the steps of the mentioned Palais and over here to finish my melancholic and longing letters to E while drowning my sorrows in coffee and Alsacian wine.

Half-an-hour ago the heat of the sun through the window forced me to lean back into the shadows. Now the road bricks are steadily turning dark and slippery from the rain, pouring down in uncontrollable waves. I look out and it rains. I turn my eyes down to the papers to write and when I look up again the rain has momentarily ceased. I look down to scribble down my observations and when I look out to confirm then the rain has once again commenced. The changes occurs faster than I manage to note down.

It's spring in Strasbourg and I'm back.

Globalisation in everyday brugeois life

"Due to transport problems in London, Professor NN has been obliged to cancel his class today. The Professor and I are very sorry for this inconvenience."

With this short message in my inbox my class and thus also my presentation today was cancelled. Because of 'transport problems' in London, England a class on the European Parliament is cancelled at a school in Bruges, Belgium. At my old university a class was once cancelled, I remember, as the professor forgot to tell us he was out of town that day, but mostly the lecturers walked to the Hill like the rest of us. Here they tell us about the jam at Manchester Airport at 4am or how much they enjoy travelling with SNCB (the Belgian railway company) from Brussels and up to us. It's nice to have 'the best' professors flewn in and its entertaining to listening to them joking about the 'typical Bruges wheather, as it is the same everytime they come here, but having them cancel because of a London traffic jam is just annoying. On the other hand, it does give me the opportunity to be productiv today...Like that's going to happen.

Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs declines any canditature for new NATO Secretary General

Mr Jonas Gahr Støre, Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs, has long been mentioned as a dark horse in the competition for the post of Secretary General in NATO. The top candidate has long been Danish PM Andres Fogh Rasmussen, who is popular with a vast majority of NATO-member governments, and Mr Støre's Polish counterpart Mr Radoslaw Sikorski. While Mr Rasmussen's drawback has been the cartoon-incident a few years back, resulting in Turkey founding it difficult to support a Danish candidate, Mr Sikorski has come off as a little too anti-Russian for some of the major Western European countries. For the part of Mr Støre, non of these are the case; he managed more or less well (I'd argue more to towards less than more well) with the cartoon-incident, appeasing most Middle Eastern countries, and he is on a good standing with Russia. What has counted against him, however, is that he is not from an EU Member State, as this has been seen as a bit of a pre-requisite for the new Secretary General. Also, Mr Støre's party colleague, former PM and Minister of Foreign Affairs and currently President of the Norwegian Parliament, Mr Torbjørn Jagland, has long been a broadly supported candidate for the Council of Europe Secretary General. The chances of Norway getting both of these posts are at best slim and normally next to none, and Mr Støre's bid for the NATO job would only have undermined the chances of Mr Jagland. This, however, is yesterday's news today. Mr Støre has stated that he prioritised his jobs in Norway, running for Parliament in the fall and continue to work on what he characterises as the "Government project".

Although I believe that Mr Fogh Rasmussen will be an excellent Secretary General and I hope he gets the job, I am a bit disappointed by the news of Mr Støre's withdrawl. Mr Støre has an outstanding background for the job, including several high posts as well in national politics as well as in international organisations, he has proven an excellent capacity for coalition building and management, which he proved during the last phase of the Doha negociations, and he is a truly cosmopolitt who probably would be able to use his potential better in Bruxelles than in Oslo. Also, it should be mentioned, getting him out of Norwegian politics would be quite a blow to the Labour party, as he is by far the country's most popular politician. Despite his qualities, they are not enough for me to wish our Government a continued life after the elections

Physical Attacks on Politicians is just Plain Stupid

Yesterday, as Lord Mandelson, the British Business Secretary and former EU Commissioner for trade, arrived at a low-carbon emission summit in Central London he was approached and, in search for a better word, harassed by a young demonstrator. The demonstrator, the 29 year old Ms Leila Deen, is a member of the a group called Plane Stupid who works against the planned extension of Heathrow to include a third run-way. Ms Deen, after having exchanged a few words with Lord Mandelson, emptied a cup of what The Times describes as 'cornflower paste and green food dye' over the Business Secretary. The Secretary, having formerly been Secretary for Northern Ireland, reacted with initial perplexity before he disappeared inside to clean up and upon his return five minutes later described the incident as adolescent. He added

“She was so busy throwing what seemed like green soup or something in my face that she failed to tell me what the protest was about but, as you can see, thankfully it wasn’t paint and I’ve come through it intact.”

There are two thoughts that comes to mind when I read this. The first concerns Lord Mandelson's reaction, and the second the choice of activism.

Three years ago, as a new centre-left (dubbed 'red-green') government had taken office in Norway, a young economics student showed is discontent with the announced policies of the new, and first, clear-cut socialist minister of finance, Ms Kristin Halvorsen, by planting a cake in the back of her had as she entered the Ministry of Finance building. Ms Halvorsen reacted by calling it an attack on democracy and claimed it was a step away from the openness of the Norwegian society, as she could no longer find herself able to walk to work. Police investigation commenced and the young student faced in a worse-case scenery up to 15 years of imprisonment for his 'attack on democracy". Lord Mandelson, on the other hand, reacts by dismissing the action against him as adolescent and states he is happy it wasn't paint. Scotland Yard, as well, unlike their Norwegian colleagues, downplays the incident, a spokesperson stating

"It's not a murder, it's just someone throwing a bit of paint. There's no investigation underway and no arrest. We would not take action unless we receive a complaint."

This comment, together with the Secretary's statement should probably leave Ms Deen, unlike her Norwegian counterpart, out of fear for judicial prosecutions from the judiciary. The Secretary, by his reaction, clearly demonstrated how little influence pressure groups such as Plane Stupid have when they resort to actions such as this one against high-power office holders. Unlike her Norwegian counterpart, Ms Deen has been reduced to ridicule, with her actions labeled 'adolescent', effectively excluding her from the serious public debate. Ms Halvorsen, unlike Lord Mandelson, only managed to ridicule herself elevating a cake in the back of the head to that of a threat against the system, gave the young student a bit of a status as a hero.

My second comment is on the action in itself. I would assume that by stating my preferences for Lord Mandelson's reaction over those of Ms Halvorsen I have also given away my position on these sort of actions. In a democratic society violence by non-governmental actors have no place apart form in self-defence. We do not seek political aims by violent means. Both the cake against Ms Halvorsen and the cup of cornflower paste are harmless acts that pose no threat whatsoever to neither democracy nor the officials being the targets. Nevertheless, they have no place and they only serve to illuminate the lack of language and arguments of the 'attack's' proponents. We make decisions based on debate and information, not by physical means. These acts represents the mild extreme of a continuum which culminates in actions such as the 2005 Paris banlieu incidents, the Thessalonika 2008 demonstrations or the Seattle 2003 fighting, where masses of people, they be the 'mob', disillusioned and angry young men or well-educated middle-class youths with a need to rebel against their parents. In any case, any politician who gives in to whatever group makes the biggest uproar is weak and unfit for office. To seek to influence decision makers is legitimate. To meet with, have lunch with and by that trying to form the opinions of those in power should be encourage. These are all aspects of a vibrant, liberal, participatory democracy. Peaceful demonstration as a show of force and public opinion, as we saw in Europe in the winter/spring of 2003 against the Iraq war is yet another legitimate way of seeking influence. However, the moment any demonstration takes the step from being purely verbal and by presence, and enters into the territory of violence, however how insignificant, it has crossed a line and lost all legitimacy they once had.

The Radical Right as seen from Bruges

I'm sitting in a class on European parties discussing far-right movements in the European Parliament. Our Italian-Canadian colleague has given us an introduction into Alessandra Mussolini and her likes, and we're currently exploring voter behaviour and the over-representation of young, uneducated men amongst Mussolini's voters. Although her looks, she's a former Playmate, is a plausible argument for voting for her if you're 16 and hormonal, but at 25 it is no longer. Mussolini and her lot occupies around 8% of the seats in the 2004-2009 EP, and there's no reason to see them as a threat, although our Italian house-communist disagrees.

The voters we're talking about are not amongst my colleagues here in Bruges, nor did I meet them at the Hill in Bergen. Not comparing Frp with Mussolini, they are the closest we come in Norway to a right-wing populist party flirting with nationalism and xenophobia, you don't find anyone who will openly support them amongst the students at the Faculty of Social Sciences. The same is the case here. You don't study any form of social science and support a far-right wing party. It is just not acceptable. Being a blood-red communist believing in state-centrism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, so-called "democratic" or "social" ownership of the means of production is fully acceptable, but do not even dream about claiming that any for of right-wing authoritarianism could be desirable (unless you argue by quoting Plato and Machiavelli) or that Muslims and globalisation represents a threat to our society.

That being said, I have no problems with the far-right being seen and treated as pariahs. What bothers me in this respect is more that flirting with the far-left and claiming that the Communist Utopia is something we should strive for. Is it something we should have learned from the 20th Century, in particular here in Europe, it is that totalitarian ideologies, whether they be to the Right or the Left, promising Salvation and a Utopian future, represents exactly the opposite; any ideology that claims to present and represent the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (so help me, God), who promises to set us free and pretends to be the way to something bigger, is in the end, whatever the good intentions, bound to bind us and lead us to serfdom.

I've gone off on a whim here, intending to focus on modern-day populist right-wing parties. It is a sad fact that while the far-right is being dominated by pulp, low-brow, angry young men, modernisation losers, under-educated unemployed victims of globalisation and modernisation, the contemporary radical left has the credibility of being represented by high-fly academics and other May-68 anachronisms, and low-educated voters on the left often vote moderately social-democratic. To specify, I am sorry for the fate of the former, but I am more scared by the choices of the latter.

The Second Coming

He is back. When He first came we were not prepared. We did not know what to expect. For seven years He walked among us. For seven years He preformed miracles and blessed us with His presents. It has been nearly eleven years since He left us. For eleven years we have been in the Valley of Darkness, we have walked in the Shadow of Death. But just as night is darkest just before dawn so was also 2008 a year of misery before His return. Today He was back. With a miracle He returned. Against the three-time World Cup winner football superpower, the machine that is known as Germany, and on their own grass He led us to Victory. This is truly The Second Coming.

The Stig has been outed

The Stig, anonymus test driver for BBC's Top Gear, has his alleged identity revealed by a British newpaper according to Timesonline. Having for years been a devouted follower of Top Gear and the wits of presenter Jeremy Clarkson when I first saw the article i asked myself if I really wanted to know who The Stig was. Off record a BBC employee caracterises the revelation as "bloody enoying" adding with reference to the article "you wouldn't write a piece saying that Santa didn't exist." I can only follow in line behind these comments.

I will not tell you who The Stig (apparently) is, for that you will have to follow the link. I just know that watching Top Gear will not be the same again.

The Stig, I miss you.

We are not alone

We are not alone in the universe. NASA findings on Mars suggest the presens of alive micro-organisms. Yet helas, we've yet to find someone to play with. Next up is macro-organisms, or intelligent life. ET, we are waiting for you!

The lack of formality in norwegian

How do you introduce a formal letter or e-mail in norwegian? In english there's always Dear sir/madam, and the French have their Madame/Monsieur (la Directrice/le Directeur), but what do we have? Writing to the Prime Minister I can't start by Dear Prime Minister (Kjære Statsminister) which would be a missmatch in level of politeness and familiarity. I can't write Monsieur le Premier Ministre (Herr Statsminister) as the "Herr" is a relic of the fifties and an anachronism after 1968. Some would of course propose that I write Dear Jens (Kjære Jens), but as I (1) didn't vote for him, (2) is not very fond of him as a politician and (3) have never even met him nor communicated with him adressing him with "dear" and omitting his last name is slightly to cozy (or koselig) for my taste. Also I can't be properly polite any longer without sounding sarcastic. After we abandoned the "De", "Dem" and "Deres" (Vous and Votre) and replaced it with "du", "deg" and "ditt" (tu, toi and ton) I have a hard time adressing respectable people in a proper way. Just imagine adressing President Sarkozy with "Et toi, Nico, qu'est-ce que tu pense?" The only person(s) I can still talk to without feeling ashamed about my language are the royals, as they can be adressed in the third person. ("And how did Her Majesty find the exhibition?" "Oh, it was quite interesting. I especially liked the pictures by...")