Ernie :
I am now back online after needing to reboot. Seems that the  site you 
steered me to
took control of my computer and "froze" it. My computer completely stopped  
functioning.
 
Anyway, that has happened before, for reasons I am totally in the dark  
about. When
it happens there is no choice but to shut the system off altogether.  
Needless to say,
no way will I re-visit the site.
 
But as much as you said about the phenomenon of industrial productivity in  
the USA
does raise some worthwhile questions. Is something happening that is  
similar to what
has happened in agriculture ?  The number of farmers in the USA is  less 
than 1 %
of the population, yet there is more food than ever before. 
 
I cannot comment adequately, though. What would be necessary would be
some serious fresh study of productivity and the industrial situation. Very 
 worthwhile
thing to do, but its  a matter of priorities. I'm in the middle of a  major 
study
of Communism in the modern world just now and dropping everything to
investigate industrial productivity and employment, would eat up a lot of  
time
I simply can't spare.
 
But let's say the article is true, or more true than not. This still leaves 
 some 
major questions hanging in mid air. What has happened to whole US  
industries ?
Shoes. Consumer electronics. Wind turbines. Etc.
 
There does seem to be a major problem with technology transfer and for  this
I blame free trade doctrine, now raging among high mucky-mucks like a  fever
among a population infected with a grievous contagion. Near total  absence
of very necessary protectionist measures is , in fact, hollowing out
American industry. And we aren't supposed to care ? ? ?
 
Economics is supposed to be a multi-variable "science." Strict focus  on
one dimension of a nation's economy may have its uses, but to  generalize
TO the whole economy based on single factor analysis seems prima  facie
fallacious. But, then, I'm more of a political economist ( in the sense  of
Political Economy ) rather than an economist, for what that may be  worth.
 
But it does seem to me that you cannot divorce political  /  demographic 
effects
from spreadsheet overviews of industry in terms of $$$ and actually
have a reliable picture of what is going on.
 
Also from the vantage of Political Economy, no bottom line analysis  can
possibly be complete unless you take into account the social costs  
involved.
A business makes a killing, say an Ichan organization, but leaves an entire 
 small city
in shambles, thousands out of work, local firms going under, etc. You may  
actually
end up with a billion dollars worth of damages because Ichan made
a cool profit of $ 100,000,000. 
 
We should allow this because some people regard Adam Smith as the 5th  
gospel ?
I don't think so. But this seems to be one subtext in the material you  
sent.
 
My opinion, anyway.
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 
About Iraq, yeah, "dysfunctional democracy" may be an apt way to describe  
it.
But it seems to have taken root, and that is what is encouraging to  me.
 
I'd also be interested in a report about innovations in Iraqi  elections
that we might learn from here in the USA. Apparently a lot of that
was going on even if, so far, little has been said on the subject.
 
Billy
 
==============================================
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 3/9/2010 10:32:43 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
[email protected] writes:

Hi  Billy,  


On Mar 9, 2010, at 10:28 AM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  
wrote:



My best guess is that this article is overly optimistic and glosses any  
number of problems,
but nonetheless it may well give us good insight into a "new Iraq"  
emerging from
years of carnage and civil war. Very  hopeful.




Yeah.  The violence will not go away, but it appears it will become  "part" 
of the political process rather than an attempt to destroy it.


Like I said earlier, they may be a grossly dysfunctional democracy, but  
you can say the same thing about California. :-P


-- Ernie P.




Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
 
 
 
 (http://www.nytimes.com/) 



 
____________________________________
March 9, 2010
Op-Ed Contributor
For Iraqi Voters, a Dizzying  Democracy 
By BARTLE BREESE BULL
 
Baghdad 
DURING the Iraqi parliamentary elections on Sunday, this city’s main  
thoroughfares presented an almost overwhelming visual mosaic of politics.  From 
the Karada neighborhood in the south to the Adhamiya district in the  north, 
from poor Sadr City to rich Mansour, posters for the capital  province’s 
1,300 candidates hung from almost every tree and lamppost.  Billboards crowded 
medians and roundabouts, promising Change, Justice,  Unity, Jobs, Security 
and more.  
Iraq’s underlying political currents are even more cacophonous: among the  
candidates are soccer stars, TV news anchors, judges and prostitutes. Still, 
 it is the images of Iraq’s big political players that dominate the city’s 
 landscape, especially Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and his two  
predecessors in that post, Ayad Allawi and Ibrahim al-Jaffari.  
Winning the poster contest, of course, may not mean much in terms of the  
actual election. Messrs. Maliki, Allawi and Jaffari are each part of a  
complex cross-sectarian coalition. Each draws support from intricate and  often 
contradictory sources. Given the convoluted “party list” system  employed in 
the balloting, about the only thing certain is that nobody will  win the 
election outright.  
The Kurds, who are likely to win 15 percent of the vote, are open to  
forming an alliance with almost anyone. The provinces and smaller cities —  
with 
no big names running in them — will return an unpredictable grab bag of  
members of Parliament. Influential smaller candidates like Ahmed Chalabi,  the 
one-time American favorite in Iraq, and Bayan Jabr, the finance  minister, 
only add to the complexity. 
We should know the polling results in a few days. Then, once the  
parliamentary seats are allocated, the game will start all over again:  
coalitions 
will crack, new alliances will form, and every seat in the  325-member 
Parliament will have its price as a handful of leaders compete to  build 
majorities.  
Five years ago, in January 2005, when a free Iraq had its first  elections, 
it was not like this. The politics was simpler. The Sunnis  boycotted, and 
the 2005 election posters — many of them remain, faded and  tattered, on 
those spots of wall in Baghdad not blanketed by the current  posters — referred 
mostly to a handful of big parties and emphasized the  religious figures 
who forged them, as opposed to today’s myriad individual  candidates.  
The streets were different, too, in 2005. There were no traffic lights,  
and no solar panels on the lampposts. Drivers did not hurry to put on their  
seatbelts when slowing for a checkpoint. A police uniform was something to  
run from, not to, in a crisis. The Iraqi Army then had none of today’s  
organized, fit, self-confident air. The Americans, invisible today, seemed  
everywhere. A foreign visitor to Baghdad, always in fear at the time of the  
2005 
elections, now waves at the little boys selling Kleenex in the traffic  
jams. (However, the city was less thoroughly wrecked back then.) 
As I revisited old haunts in Baghdad in recent days, it became clear to  me 
that the increasing order on Iraq’s streets and the bewildering scramble  
in its politics are of a piece. In Sadr City, my old acquaintance Fattah  
al-Sheikh, who was elected to Parliament in 2005 as part of the bloc loyal  to 
the extremist Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, is now with the  Baath-tinted, 
mostly Sunni party of Ayad Allawi. In Iraqi politics there is  no more 
extreme conversion than that from Sadrist to Baathist.  
“I’m a patriot above all else,” he told me. “And the Iranians have more  
or less kidnapped Moktada al-Sadr, so I stand against them.” Opportunistic  
as this claim may appear, Fattah’s stand, and his ability to survive in Sadr 
 City as a vocally anti-Iranian candidate, exemplify the post-sectarian  
flexibility that is the hallmark of these elections.  
Salaam Smeasim is another Iraqi I have known for years. She’s now 55, and  
a candidate for the largest Shiite opposition party, the Iraqi National  
Alliance. Salaam wears a veil, and her coalition, which includes many  
Sadrists, has relations with Iran.  
“Would you agree with something like the Iranian system here in Iraq?” I  
asked her the day before the vote. 
“Of course not,” she said, giving me the only angry look I have received  
in recent weeks while talking to Iraqis about politics. “As a Shiite I do  
feel something for Iran. But between Iran and America, only America is  
interested in freedom and human rights in Iraq. There is nowhere like  America 
for freedom.”  
Walking in the spring sunshine up and down the length of Abu Nuwas Park  
along the Tigris — a green and tempting place I had always admired from  hotel 
rooms across the street but had never felt comfortable venturing into  — I 
spoke to a man of about 65 who had a young grandson on his knee in the  
shade of a tree. “That is my son,” he said, pointing at a young man on a  
nearby bench. “One of his brothers I found beheaded in the street. The other  
is 
still missing.”  
The grandfather would not say whether he was a Sunni or a Shiite. I asked  
how he viewed these elections in light of his personal calamities. “The rest 
 of the Middle East is in a stage of political infancy, adolescence at best,
”  he answered. “Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, even Lebanon, they are all  
juvenile. But we are passing this stage of a politics about ‘who you are.’  
This election in Iraq is about the politics of ‘what you want.’ And we want  
an end to sectarianism.”  
I continued my tour of a city that seemed to be enjoying its election  
holiday. A Christian car-parts dealer outside the Syrian Catholic church in  
Karada, which is largely upper middle class, told me he would be voting for  
whoever would end the religious violence. (The deaths of _nearly 40 people on 
Sunday_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/08/world/middleeast/08iraq.html?ref=middleeast) 
 attest to how difficult  that task remains.) Nearby, the 
manager of Baghdad Polling Station No. 7  said voting was normal for Iraqis now 
— “
This is our fifth time in five  years,” he pointed out — and he would be 
voting for security, jobs and  public works, not religion.  
Marwa, a 24-year-old accounting student whom I spoke to on Sunday as she  
voted with her mother, noted that this was her fourth time going to the  
polls, and that while it was no longer exciting it was certainly her duty to  
her country. 
At the Karkh Hospital I met Jassim, a 39-year-old Army sergeant whose  
lower leg had been blown off the day before (soldiers voted on Friday so  they 
could provide security over the weekend). Recuperating in his bed, he  showed 
me a purple-stained forefinger and said Iraq needed a leader to serve  “the 
whole nation.”  
Most Iraqi politicians have caught the anti-sectarian mood. That is why  
Prime Minister Maliki, a Shiite, had the confidence to break with the big  
coalition of his co-religionists that dominated in 2005 and run alongside  
several major Sunni tribal leaders. It is why once virulent Shiites like  
Fattah, the former Sadrist, now see Mr. Allawi’s party as a good bet. It is  
why 
the Iraqi National Alliance includes not only Salaam Smeasim, a  pro-American 
Shiite in a veil, but also Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein, a Sunni  cousin of 
Iraq’s last king and the chief claimant to the long-vacant throne.   
With more Sunnis participating this time even as the old religious  
monoliths break down, Iraq’s coming government-formation phase will be slow  
and 
complex. During the weeks of horse-trading and grandstanding, the  rhetoric 
will occasionally be vituperative, Iraqi leaders from all parties  will be 
accused of unsavory relationships with foreign powers and the  overall winning 
faction may well have an identity-based core.  
Still, as that grandfather in Abu Nuwas Park explained to me, this messy  
process reflects the decline of sectarianism, a necessary and hopeful step  
in Iraq’s political maturation.  
 
Bartle Breese Bull, a journalist in Iraq from 2004 to 2008, is a founder  
of an Iraq-based investment  firm.



_______________________________________________
Centroids  mailing list: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
_http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) 
Archives  at  
http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/



=

_______________________________________________
Centroids  mailing list:  [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives  at  
http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/


_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/

Reply via email to