Everyone in the world now knows the good guys at NSA have validated Orwell's prophecy of "Big Brother" by collecting everything on everyone. With NSA's computers overflowing, this data is open to evil Chinese hackers data mining for their own nefarious purposes. Not to be confused with the pristine data exploitation motives of businesses, bureaucratic and criminal miners.
Governments have been quick to assure the world that all your secrets are safe, just trust them with a little more information. Of course you can trust governments, after all have they every misled their own people?
Back in the days of early computing you could lock up your five and a quarter inch disk at the end of the day and feel your files were safe from prying eyes. Then came the Internet for the free exchange of information between trusted colleagues. It was discovered that the open door swung both ways as an invitation to enter individuals' computers. As the information age matured there were millions of computers to be exploited. This presented a daunting problem for miners, how to find exploitable data when information was scattered around the globe. Small companies made vast fortunes as data consolidators building massive files of individual's personal information for sale to marketers and anyone else that wanted access, whatever their purposes.
Where did all this data come from? It unknowingly came directly from individuals who freely surrendered all the intimate details of their lives to banks, businesses, governments, pollsters and opinion surveys. Imprisoned felons are even contracted to collect information. The thing about building a database is that there is always room for more data so collection expands, delving deeper and deeper into your life. Data miners soon discovered there was still an untapped pool of information and began to build clouds somewhere out in the ether where people now park details of their lives from mail, diaries, finances, photos and even fleeting thoughts. Social media has become entertainment where rhetorical nonsense and bad jokes are linked to individuals for eternity by miners seeking leverage.
Your data is international, as much of the collection has migrated offshore. Domestic and foreign miners now interrupt dinners with cold calls seeking details on friends, neighbors even long lost relatives. These calls result in spurious links leading to things like identify theft or records as "known criminal associates."
Miners exploitation leads to GIGO (garbage in, garbage out) targeting individuals for marketing, robbery or government intense surveillance. Private satellites now look down on back yards and a neighbor's nude sunbathing may link you to lewd and licentious behavior of a possible sex offender.
The data never goes away or corrected once it is out there. In the 25th century a distant miner relative may happen to dig out that bit of data on the ancient black sheep of the family. Who is watching you read this right now?
Friday, July 18, 2014
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
Trust me 042914
Walk into any dealership, law office, old-folks home even a funeral parlor and you will be met by a greeter with a warm smile (funeral parlors sport the carrying look) an out stretched hand and the words "Trust Me." When the clammy hand grasp yours the first reaction should be to count your fingers.
Historically such hand shakes signals "buyer beware" a phrase predating money and may have originated with cavemen trading for a dinosaur steak. During the 19th century a handshake was considered as good as a contract. There were flim-flam men out there but for the most part in a rural America trust ruled. A few decades ago sociologist began to note the emerging generations were of an entirely different culture than predecessors. At the time the researchers were unsure in what direction this culture was moving and what it meant for society.
According to more recent research two thirds of the population expressed complete distrust of everyone and every thing. Even the remaining third expressed some distrust in everyday interactions with strangers, government and institutions. Social trust is necessary to get things done between diverse groups, generate economic growth and might even cure Washington gridlock.
Scholars are rushing into print with conflicting pet theories on lack of trust, cause and effect. They fail to realize that they are contributing to the issue. In the past they have justified discrimination, colonialism, genocide and every other evil bringing into question their objectivity, ethics, integrity and truthfulness. Scholars, journalists and politicians create deception by pointing to a single biased explanation for lack of trust.
"Trust Me" deficit is really a case of multiple compounding causations. The rich and famous publicly lie cheat and steal. The news media has become entertainment presenting the wildest speculation for better ratings. Trusted financial manipulators bankrupt retirement plans and destroyed dreams. America is not alone, manipulators circle the globe sending world economies crashing. TV and the social media have separated people from daily civil interaction. That same media illuminates economic disparity while elevating social expectations. Trusted institutions expose their feet of clay. The 20th century's Advertising industry's rise along with press agencies and spin-doctors muddy the water on questions of what is really true. Politicians resort to demagogy to gain power alienating all as their messages change with audiences. Junk mail, junk infomercials, junk charities and a proliferation of junk causes abound to scam money from the gullible and unwary. Fanatics of every religion wield faith as a sword to destroy heretics in the name of their own personal vision of paradise. It has taken generations to reach this point; it may take centuries to recover from trust's fall from grace.
Searching for a causation of declining trust, consider education in the equation. A more literate society with access to more information sources leads to cynical views of the contradictions and absurdity in claims of opinion marketers. This same trend is becoming evident even in the world's backwaters with a rising tide of literate youth.
Historically such hand shakes signals "buyer beware" a phrase predating money and may have originated with cavemen trading for a dinosaur steak. During the 19th century a handshake was considered as good as a contract. There were flim-flam men out there but for the most part in a rural America trust ruled. A few decades ago sociologist began to note the emerging generations were of an entirely different culture than predecessors. At the time the researchers were unsure in what direction this culture was moving and what it meant for society.
According to more recent research two thirds of the population expressed complete distrust of everyone and every thing. Even the remaining third expressed some distrust in everyday interactions with strangers, government and institutions. Social trust is necessary to get things done between diverse groups, generate economic growth and might even cure Washington gridlock.
Scholars are rushing into print with conflicting pet theories on lack of trust, cause and effect. They fail to realize that they are contributing to the issue. In the past they have justified discrimination, colonialism, genocide and every other evil bringing into question their objectivity, ethics, integrity and truthfulness. Scholars, journalists and politicians create deception by pointing to a single biased explanation for lack of trust.
"Trust Me" deficit is really a case of multiple compounding causations. The rich and famous publicly lie cheat and steal. The news media has become entertainment presenting the wildest speculation for better ratings. Trusted financial manipulators bankrupt retirement plans and destroyed dreams. America is not alone, manipulators circle the globe sending world economies crashing. TV and the social media have separated people from daily civil interaction. That same media illuminates economic disparity while elevating social expectations. Trusted institutions expose their feet of clay. The 20th century's Advertising industry's rise along with press agencies and spin-doctors muddy the water on questions of what is really true. Politicians resort to demagogy to gain power alienating all as their messages change with audiences. Junk mail, junk infomercials, junk charities and a proliferation of junk causes abound to scam money from the gullible and unwary. Fanatics of every religion wield faith as a sword to destroy heretics in the name of their own personal vision of paradise. It has taken generations to reach this point; it may take centuries to recover from trust's fall from grace.
Searching for a causation of declining trust, consider education in the equation. A more literate society with access to more information sources leads to cynical views of the contradictions and absurdity in claims of opinion marketers. This same trend is becoming evident even in the world's backwaters with a rising tide of literate youth.
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Three "R" 042514
As long as one human remains on Earth the 20th century will be known as the American Century. Immigrants from Africa, Asia and Europe laid the foundation for that title and their children became known as the greatest generation.
Of diverse origins from wealth to extreme poverty the immigrants arrived with their cultures. Native American and earlier settlers' culture were welded onto those old world cultures on forges in fields, forest, deserts, mines and factories to create a new distinct culture of what became the greatest generation. Parents wanted only one thing for their children, a good education and a life better than that they left.
Parents demanded good public schools for their children. In one room schoolhouses across the country first generation children learned Reading, Riting, & Rithmetic (three Rs). There were few trained teachers, mostly a literate citizen would be found to teach the basics. Mostly these drafted teachers were dedicated to instilling a love of learning, many children would drop out to help their families. In urban areas a guiding teacher might have a 10/11th-grade education, high learningof the era. There were few colleges and less money to attend, public libraries flourished as young and old went on to teach themselves, from a desire to learn.
Prepared by homespun teachers colleges turned out doctors, lawyers, engineers and preachers. Teachers became professionals by teaching. Students learned because parents and dedicated teachers took an interest in preparing them for the world. When the children left school they knew the three "Rs" and had seen a future. Excited by visions from school the kids went on to mass produce cars, explore the sky, electronically connect the world, build wealth and better schools. Their drive and creativity pulled the country out a great depression and led to their war time victory and led the world. The country was the world's richest with the highest literacy rate, best technologies and medicine. Foreign student's flocked to American Universities for the best education.
Somewhere after their victory schooling took a wrong turn. The three "Rs", parents and teachers had to step aside for Politically Correct (PC) professional educators. Literacy began to decline and many recent graduates could neither read, write nor balance a checkbook. Public education was demonized. Textbooks are often wrong in the pursuit of professional educators' inspiring theories. Classroom teachers no longer are trusted to determine if students have mastered the courses. Parents are cut out the learning process as to stupid to accept the core theories of professional educators. A massive educational bureaucracy has emerged in government and the private sector. A great deal of money is made by an education industry through testing, re-testing, charter schools, educational seminars, theories, consultants, lobbyist and measurement yardsticks at the cost of learning. Teachers remain at the low end of all that cash flow.
Literacy continues to drop while immense amounts of money are siphoned off from an opportunity to create an even greater generation. It's time to get back to the basics, to parents voicing concerns, teachers teaching, inspired students seeking to learn and repairing public education. Educators and government should get out of the way, let the kids love knowledge and develop visions of a better future.
Of diverse origins from wealth to extreme poverty the immigrants arrived with their cultures. Native American and earlier settlers' culture were welded onto those old world cultures on forges in fields, forest, deserts, mines and factories to create a new distinct culture of what became the greatest generation. Parents wanted only one thing for their children, a good education and a life better than that they left.
Parents demanded good public schools for their children. In one room schoolhouses across the country first generation children learned Reading, Riting, & Rithmetic (three Rs). There were few trained teachers, mostly a literate citizen would be found to teach the basics. Mostly these drafted teachers were dedicated to instilling a love of learning, many children would drop out to help their families. In urban areas a guiding teacher might have a 10/11th-grade education, high learningof the era. There were few colleges and less money to attend, public libraries flourished as young and old went on to teach themselves, from a desire to learn.
Prepared by homespun teachers colleges turned out doctors, lawyers, engineers and preachers. Teachers became professionals by teaching. Students learned because parents and dedicated teachers took an interest in preparing them for the world. When the children left school they knew the three "Rs" and had seen a future. Excited by visions from school the kids went on to mass produce cars, explore the sky, electronically connect the world, build wealth and better schools. Their drive and creativity pulled the country out a great depression and led to their war time victory and led the world. The country was the world's richest with the highest literacy rate, best technologies and medicine. Foreign student's flocked to American Universities for the best education.
Somewhere after their victory schooling took a wrong turn. The three "Rs", parents and teachers had to step aside for Politically Correct (PC) professional educators. Literacy began to decline and many recent graduates could neither read, write nor balance a checkbook. Public education was demonized. Textbooks are often wrong in the pursuit of professional educators' inspiring theories. Classroom teachers no longer are trusted to determine if students have mastered the courses. Parents are cut out the learning process as to stupid to accept the core theories of professional educators. A massive educational bureaucracy has emerged in government and the private sector. A great deal of money is made by an education industry through testing, re-testing, charter schools, educational seminars, theories, consultants, lobbyist and measurement yardsticks at the cost of learning. Teachers remain at the low end of all that cash flow.
Literacy continues to drop while immense amounts of money are siphoned off from an opportunity to create an even greater generation. It's time to get back to the basics, to parents voicing concerns, teachers teaching, inspired students seeking to learn and repairing public education. Educators and government should get out of the way, let the kids love knowledge and develop visions of a better future.
Friday, April 25, 2014
Money, money, money 042514
A literary surprise this season is Thomas Piketty's, 700 page tome "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" originally published in French. For xenophobic Americans to rush out and spend "good" U.S. dollars for anything French, except maybe an over-priced bottle of wine, is truly amazing.
I've not read Piketty's work and probably never will, not because of its French origins but because it's a scholarly study of centuries' of economic data. Piketty isn't targeting America in his study but rather the principle capitalism and its impact on inequalities of its outcomes.
Karl Marx condemned capitalism over a century and half ago in a philosophical argument that labor is exploited by the wealthy. Capitalist countries immediately condemned Marx's arguments and even the so-called communist countries never truly embraced Marxism.
By the turn of the 19th century labor began struggling to capture a small share of capitalism. Henry Ford broke from his contemporaries by paying his workers enough so they could afford to drive his automobiles. Ford may have been a capitalist anomaly because his contemporaries hired private armies and pressured legislatures to keep labor poor and subservient. Events however overtook global capitalism in the form of world wars and depressions. For a while in 20th century it appeared that wealth would indeed trickle down as labor could now drive cars to pickup their unemployment checks.
In the 21st century labor is again under attack by wealthy capitalist and wealthier legislators, forcing an even larger wedge between big bucks and a few pennies. Piketty's work quantifies the role of capital and income inequality. True workers make more money but they can't afford to live on one paycheck. The immediate surge of growth after World War Two appears to also be an anomaly (a shortage of labor and greater demands from the near universal destruction.)
Changing the focus of inequity, Piketty looks at the rate of capital return and economic growth. In it simplest form Piketty proves that the rich get richer while the poor gets poorer. The wealthy can use their money and power to churn economies, skimming the cream and ignoring reinvestment for real economic production. This is not only an American phenomenon; globalism has embraced wealth and power as billionaires have now emerged even in former communist countries. The 19th century robber barons are back and much more sophisticated.
Barons now understand how to sell, "What is good for the baron is good for the serf." The deceived serfs then vote even more power to the barons by electing them to legislatures empowered to write serfdom oppression laws.
According to Piketty, "When the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of growth of output and income, capitalism automatically generates arbitrary and unsustainable inequalities that radically undermine the meritocratic values on which democratic societies are based."
Piketty might make a few bucks from his book but he must understand it and invest for capital growth and not squander his workman's wages on more paper and pencils for his next book.
I've not read Piketty's work and probably never will, not because of its French origins but because it's a scholarly study of centuries' of economic data. Piketty isn't targeting America in his study but rather the principle capitalism and its impact on inequalities of its outcomes.
Karl Marx condemned capitalism over a century and half ago in a philosophical argument that labor is exploited by the wealthy. Capitalist countries immediately condemned Marx's arguments and even the so-called communist countries never truly embraced Marxism.
By the turn of the 19th century labor began struggling to capture a small share of capitalism. Henry Ford broke from his contemporaries by paying his workers enough so they could afford to drive his automobiles. Ford may have been a capitalist anomaly because his contemporaries hired private armies and pressured legislatures to keep labor poor and subservient. Events however overtook global capitalism in the form of world wars and depressions. For a while in 20th century it appeared that wealth would indeed trickle down as labor could now drive cars to pickup their unemployment checks.
In the 21st century labor is again under attack by wealthy capitalist and wealthier legislators, forcing an even larger wedge between big bucks and a few pennies. Piketty's work quantifies the role of capital and income inequality. True workers make more money but they can't afford to live on one paycheck. The immediate surge of growth after World War Two appears to also be an anomaly (a shortage of labor and greater demands from the near universal destruction.)
Changing the focus of inequity, Piketty looks at the rate of capital return and economic growth. In it simplest form Piketty proves that the rich get richer while the poor gets poorer. The wealthy can use their money and power to churn economies, skimming the cream and ignoring reinvestment for real economic production. This is not only an American phenomenon; globalism has embraced wealth and power as billionaires have now emerged even in former communist countries. The 19th century robber barons are back and much more sophisticated.
Barons now understand how to sell, "What is good for the baron is good for the serf." The deceived serfs then vote even more power to the barons by electing them to legislatures empowered to write serfdom oppression laws.
According to Piketty, "When the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of growth of output and income, capitalism automatically generates arbitrary and unsustainable inequalities that radically undermine the meritocratic values on which democratic societies are based."
Piketty might make a few bucks from his book but he must understand it and invest for capital growth and not squander his workman's wages on more paper and pencils for his next book.
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
ConCon 040717
The active word here is con (a.k.a.: scam, hustle, the end of America’s great experiment in constitutional government.)
A state representative in California has requested verification that 34 states have petitioned for a constitutional convention (ConCon). The movement for ConCon began in the 1980 for a proposed balance budget amendment. After an initial flurry of petitions the issue moved to state back burners for over 30 years as some states pulled their petition while others applied. In 2014 Michigan added its request to the pile, possibly becoming the 34th call for a new ConCon. The problem is that no one is really sure how many valid petitions are out there.
Congress can make the petitions moot by passing a balanced budget amendment of its own which 38 states then would have to ratify for it to become law. Congress could ignore the issue entirely, violating provisions of article “V” of the constitution, which would increase Congressional power while probably setting off lengthy court battles. Congress could also acquiesce and call the second ConCon, opening Pandora’s box.
Gun-nuts would demand the right of individuals to bear weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Fundamental Christians, the right to crucify non-Christians. The military would order a coup. California would demand exclusive film rights. The southwestern states would annex Mexico. Alaska would rejoin Russia so Sarah Palin could assume her rightful place as Czarina of all seized territories.
A bit far fetched? Consider that the 1787 ConCon of 13 states was called for some minor tweaking and then became a run away horse (before trains) producing a document and government unlike any before. This was produced by a fairly homogeneous lot of like minded individuals but became a squeaker as competing arguments were presented. With a final compromise document it became a hard sell for ratification requiring the promise of protections under a “Bill of Rights” before sufficient states would sign on. ConCons are under no obligation to stick to an issue and can create whatever it can sell.
Today there are 50 states representing nearly 400 million heterogeneous special interest, each loudly proclaiming ideological supremacy. It took four years to produce the first constitution, it might require four decades to produce another. It is probable that the new document will be written by lawyers preventing any public understanding of the nature and powers of government. Congress may promise a new bill of rights but who believes Congress of the 21st century.
The balanced budget issue would disappear under the weight of new demands. Government would come to a stand still as states waited for the new document. Texas would probably secede followed by other regions seeking to protect their turf. Special interest minutemen armed with WMD would revolt in support agendas that didn’t make the cut.
The United States of America would become ancient history as the world cheered.
A state representative in California has requested verification that 34 states have petitioned for a constitutional convention (ConCon). The movement for ConCon began in the 1980 for a proposed balance budget amendment. After an initial flurry of petitions the issue moved to state back burners for over 30 years as some states pulled their petition while others applied. In 2014 Michigan added its request to the pile, possibly becoming the 34th call for a new ConCon. The problem is that no one is really sure how many valid petitions are out there.
Congress can make the petitions moot by passing a balanced budget amendment of its own which 38 states then would have to ratify for it to become law. Congress could ignore the issue entirely, violating provisions of article “V” of the constitution, which would increase Congressional power while probably setting off lengthy court battles. Congress could also acquiesce and call the second ConCon, opening Pandora’s box.
Gun-nuts would demand the right of individuals to bear weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Fundamental Christians, the right to crucify non-Christians. The military would order a coup. California would demand exclusive film rights. The southwestern states would annex Mexico. Alaska would rejoin Russia so Sarah Palin could assume her rightful place as Czarina of all seized territories.
A bit far fetched? Consider that the 1787 ConCon of 13 states was called for some minor tweaking and then became a run away horse (before trains) producing a document and government unlike any before. This was produced by a fairly homogeneous lot of like minded individuals but became a squeaker as competing arguments were presented. With a final compromise document it became a hard sell for ratification requiring the promise of protections under a “Bill of Rights” before sufficient states would sign on. ConCons are under no obligation to stick to an issue and can create whatever it can sell.
Today there are 50 states representing nearly 400 million heterogeneous special interest, each loudly proclaiming ideological supremacy. It took four years to produce the first constitution, it might require four decades to produce another. It is probable that the new document will be written by lawyers preventing any public understanding of the nature and powers of government. Congress may promise a new bill of rights but who believes Congress of the 21st century.
The balanced budget issue would disappear under the weight of new demands. Government would come to a stand still as states waited for the new document. Texas would probably secede followed by other regions seeking to protect their turf. Special interest minutemen armed with WMD would revolt in support agendas that didn’t make the cut.
The United States of America would become ancient history as the world cheered.
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
It’s official 040414
America has a passive court system. Judges don’t get to go out and find issues but rather must wait for just the right case to appear before their bench in order to make their precedent setting rulings.
The founding fathers fully understood the principle that wealth rules, but neglected to include it in the Constitution. It has taken the Supreme Court well over 200 year to find just the right case to firmly establish wealth as the overriding principle of government. It is now official the rich can openly buy the legislation that serves their best interests.
No longer do millionaires, billionaires and trillion dollar corporations have to sneak down dark alleys to buy their legislation. They can finally come into the capitols and dump as much money as they want to insure that under their law they are fully protected from the proletarian concerns of the other 99 percent of the population.
It has been reported that, by percentage, this Congress is the richest in history, wonder how they made their fortunes? The Florida legislators apparently have their hands out for a share of new wealth as they are attempting major liability protections for businesses. They are also on a roll, expanding “Stand your ground (SurG)” legislation. It’s possible that SurG may soon include a self defense plea for legislators who shoot opposition voters. They really do feel their lifestyle is being threatened if they lose their place at the trough.
Law makers know how to protect their prerogatives by freeing government force from public accountability and making it dependent only on legislator protections. The military now has authority to secretly detain citizens indefinitely without charges and in contravention to Constitutional protections. So far the Commander in Chief has not seen fit to exercise this authorization but another president has only to say go do-it before people begin to disappear into the darkness of an area 51 concentration camp.
In some states police activities are already protected from being publicly recorded. Even in states without such police protections, cops seize, even destroy, personal camera phones that may have captured questionable activities. Simple protests lead to arrest and imprisonment on false charges that are eventually dropped after the citizens spend days in jail being sufficiently intimidated. Unions are under government attacks, as terrorist organizations that threaten the wealthy’s ability to earn enough to buy legislation. Remember unions terrorized and brought down 19th century robber barons so they really do pose a significant threat to aspiring barons.
Governments now spend massive amounts of tax dollars telling the populace what to think and justifying even greater restrictions on liberties of the 99 percent.
It is probable that in the future new wave children will ask, “Grandpa, what was it like in the evil old days of democracy when any serf could question government?”
The founding fathers fully understood the principle that wealth rules, but neglected to include it in the Constitution. It has taken the Supreme Court well over 200 year to find just the right case to firmly establish wealth as the overriding principle of government. It is now official the rich can openly buy the legislation that serves their best interests.
No longer do millionaires, billionaires and trillion dollar corporations have to sneak down dark alleys to buy their legislation. They can finally come into the capitols and dump as much money as they want to insure that under their law they are fully protected from the proletarian concerns of the other 99 percent of the population.
It has been reported that, by percentage, this Congress is the richest in history, wonder how they made their fortunes? The Florida legislators apparently have their hands out for a share of new wealth as they are attempting major liability protections for businesses. They are also on a roll, expanding “Stand your ground (SurG)” legislation. It’s possible that SurG may soon include a self defense plea for legislators who shoot opposition voters. They really do feel their lifestyle is being threatened if they lose their place at the trough.
Law makers know how to protect their prerogatives by freeing government force from public accountability and making it dependent only on legislator protections. The military now has authority to secretly detain citizens indefinitely without charges and in contravention to Constitutional protections. So far the Commander in Chief has not seen fit to exercise this authorization but another president has only to say go do-it before people begin to disappear into the darkness of an area 51 concentration camp.
In some states police activities are already protected from being publicly recorded. Even in states without such police protections, cops seize, even destroy, personal camera phones that may have captured questionable activities. Simple protests lead to arrest and imprisonment on false charges that are eventually dropped after the citizens spend days in jail being sufficiently intimidated. Unions are under government attacks, as terrorist organizations that threaten the wealthy’s ability to earn enough to buy legislation. Remember unions terrorized and brought down 19th century robber barons so they really do pose a significant threat to aspiring barons.
Governments now spend massive amounts of tax dollars telling the populace what to think and justifying even greater restrictions on liberties of the 99 percent.
It is probable that in the future new wave children will ask, “Grandpa, what was it like in the evil old days of democracy when any serf could question government?”
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Put-ing 032614
Ancient cold warriors are finally coming in from the cold shouting, “The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming, we told you so.”
The issue is the Ukrainian ouster of a Russian puppet and its courtship of the European Union. Russian president Vladimir Putin seized an instability moment by “liberating”, “protecting” or “supporting” a carefully orchestrated Crimean independence movement.
When the western powers indignantly objected to Russia’s virtual re-annexation of the Crimea, Putin cried “hypocrisy.” Putin has a point; not that it makes his actions anymore palatable. When the Soviet Union began to implode in the late 20th Century a gleeful West was quick to embrace the splintering Soviet republics as independent democratic States. They were neither independent nor democratic and most are still neither.
In an era of instantaneous mass communication the Russians were subjected to decades of denigration by western politicians as the West pushed its influence eastward, ever closer to the Russian heartland. Freed from the moderating Soviet influence the West engaged in a series of interventions, from Eastern Europe, across Africa, the Middle East, Central and South Asia that mostly ended in failures. These failures have led to continuing regional instability. Driven by both left and right politicians’ rhetoric aimed at domestic audiences along with the surrounding interventions and denigration angered the Russians. While condemned by the west, Putin’s actions are playing very well with his own domestic audience.
Unfortunately Ukraine and the Crimea are parts of the Russian historical spirit. The question is when does political history become irrelevant. Robert Kaplan calls events a return to geopolitics (the politics of geography). Russia seized Ukraine in the late 18th century and Ottoman Crimea in the late 19th century. Russians emigrated to both but the Ukrainians remained more or less politically on their own until brought under Soviet control in the early 20th century. Stalin’s purges suppressed independence interest and along with his ethnic cleansing of Crimean Tartars during the war, brought the region firmly under Soviet Control. When the NAZIs arrived in the Ukraine they were first seen as liberators but their heavy hand soon created an effective Ukraine resistance movement later crushed by Stalin in the post war era. After Stalin’s death surviving Tartars returned to find their homes occupied by Russians. Khrushchev handed the Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, which declared independence upon the Soviet collapse.
For both East and West there are lessons to be learned in the Ukraine. Historical political justifications have limited validity in the 21st century. Local political rhetoric has far reaching impacts on international affairs. Free elections aren’t free in the presents of an occupying army. Military force is often counterproductive in the long term. In power politics win-win means you can’t lose, in Asian commerce it means both sides win (a fair deal.) International affairs can find the Asian model less costly with a little more time spent in open negotiations. Ideologues make poor negotiators. States have a place at the negotiation table deciding their fate.
The issue is the Ukrainian ouster of a Russian puppet and its courtship of the European Union. Russian president Vladimir Putin seized an instability moment by “liberating”, “protecting” or “supporting” a carefully orchestrated Crimean independence movement.
When the western powers indignantly objected to Russia’s virtual re-annexation of the Crimea, Putin cried “hypocrisy.” Putin has a point; not that it makes his actions anymore palatable. When the Soviet Union began to implode in the late 20th Century a gleeful West was quick to embrace the splintering Soviet republics as independent democratic States. They were neither independent nor democratic and most are still neither.
In an era of instantaneous mass communication the Russians were subjected to decades of denigration by western politicians as the West pushed its influence eastward, ever closer to the Russian heartland. Freed from the moderating Soviet influence the West engaged in a series of interventions, from Eastern Europe, across Africa, the Middle East, Central and South Asia that mostly ended in failures. These failures have led to continuing regional instability. Driven by both left and right politicians’ rhetoric aimed at domestic audiences along with the surrounding interventions and denigration angered the Russians. While condemned by the west, Putin’s actions are playing very well with his own domestic audience.
Unfortunately Ukraine and the Crimea are parts of the Russian historical spirit. The question is when does political history become irrelevant. Robert Kaplan calls events a return to geopolitics (the politics of geography). Russia seized Ukraine in the late 18th century and Ottoman Crimea in the late 19th century. Russians emigrated to both but the Ukrainians remained more or less politically on their own until brought under Soviet control in the early 20th century. Stalin’s purges suppressed independence interest and along with his ethnic cleansing of Crimean Tartars during the war, brought the region firmly under Soviet Control. When the NAZIs arrived in the Ukraine they were first seen as liberators but their heavy hand soon created an effective Ukraine resistance movement later crushed by Stalin in the post war era. After Stalin’s death surviving Tartars returned to find their homes occupied by Russians. Khrushchev handed the Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, which declared independence upon the Soviet collapse.
For both East and West there are lessons to be learned in the Ukraine. Historical political justifications have limited validity in the 21st century. Local political rhetoric has far reaching impacts on international affairs. Free elections aren’t free in the presents of an occupying army. Military force is often counterproductive in the long term. In power politics win-win means you can’t lose, in Asian commerce it means both sides win (a fair deal.) International affairs can find the Asian model less costly with a little more time spent in open negotiations. Ideologues make poor negotiators. States have a place at the negotiation table deciding their fate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)