S'appelle «le capitalisme»
La Conscience nous donne cette piece d'opinion sur la nature de l'économique de la RDC, qui démontre la nature fichue de la situation dans la République:Il y a enfin l'exemple des républiques bananières africaines (par exemple le Gabon et les deux Congo). L'État y est le principal pourvoyeur d'emploi, le pays lui-même ne produit rien et ne fait que laisser exploiter par des compagnies étrangères ses ressources minières...Si la RD Congo souffre, c'est à cause d'un système qu'il refuse toujours de s'en débarrasser... [La Conscience, 24 Feb. 2008]C'est le système capitaliste de qui les congolais doivent se débarrasser, c'est ça qui les empêche à développer mieux et plus rapidement. Les régimes capitalistes au Congo n'ont jamais fonctionné pour améliorer le niveau de développement des gens congolais, du Roi Léopold à Mobutu à Kabila, les dirigeants du passé n'ont pas eu pas les outils pour transformer le pays: ils sont responsables de l'exportation des richesses naturelles au monde occidental, sans bénéficier personne dans le pays, sans fournir infrastructure ni soins sociaux pour aider les plus vulnérables. La démocratie est proclamée établie au Congo, mais c'est une grande farce qui passe là-bas, basé sur force brut et démagogues locaux.
Pour transformer le pays, la démocratie de travailleurs doit s'établir au pays, sous le contrôle total des gens communs, avec respecte pour chaque groupe ethnique, chaque groupe linguistique, chaque bande, et assurances que tout vont avoir son place dans la nouvelle société. Mais la démocratie peut pas fonctionner sans une économie socialiste qui peut détruire les divisions entre les riches et pauvres, une économie qui a le but de partager la richesse du pays entre la populace. Une économie qui répond aux demandes de peuple sans les empêcher d'avoir les nécessités basiques (la nourriture, l'eau potable, l'électricité, l'éducation, les soins de santé, l'hébergement décent). Le capitalisme s'est établi au Congo depuis loin temps, il est prêt pour un changement.
Libellés : Afrique, Pauvreté et développement, Politique, Économie
par Borges à 14:02
Air strikes: That'll teach 'em
Commenting on the recent Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip, in response to rocket attacks on the Israeli city of Sderot, which resulted in the death of a student:Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said "terrorists" in the coastal territory would pay a very heavy price for the attacks. [BBC News 28.2.08]And so, in the past two days, the territory has seen a rain of bombs, resulting in a total body count of 21, including at least 4 children and one six-month old baby. Are these children terrorists? Is employing the same tactics as a terrorist organisation (i.e.- the arbitrary bombing of densely populated areas, of which the Strip is the most in the world) a proper manner of conduct for a modern democratic state? One realises the reality that terrorist attacks cannot go without response, but clearly the bombing of innocent children and the taking of lives of dozens of people is not the way to go about stopping the attacks. Is this policy of air strikes actually meant to stop the missile strikes made by terrorist groups in the Strip, or is it motivated by vengeance? One cannot see the logic in the government of Israel fuelling an already angry people by employing the very same techniques that they deplore. Terrorism will never leave the land of Canaan if this sort of tit-for-tat strategy is employed, each side will constantly feel the need for revenge.
Vote on Progressive Bloggers
Libellés : Guerre, Israel/Palestine, La question nationale
par Borges à 09:48
Afghanistan: Karzai controls 30 %, Taliban 10%, Warlords 60%
The U.S. Senate learned yesterday that the latest estimates put the situation in Afghanistan in a very precarious light, as the findings note that the supposedly democratically elected President Hamid Karzai, controls less than half of the nation he is purported to lead. To say nothing of the Taliban which controls 10%.Good thing Canada will be there for another 3 years to stabilise the situation. The force is there to expand the current «progress» there, and so is this the progress Canadian forces are supporting? Does this trend mean years and years to come of warring warlords, fundamentalists and democrats vying for control of ever more land? Seeing as how that is how the modern history of Afghanistan is characterised, one does indeed think so.
Vote on Progressive Bloggers
par Borges à 06:36
You mean not all conflicts can be solved through warfare?!
American Defense secretary gives some wise words of advise to his Turkish allies regarding their offensive into Iraqi Kurdistan in order to defeat the Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK, classified as a terrorist organisation):"They cannot solve the PKK terrorist problem which is a very real one from the Turks' standpoint," he said. A lot of innocent Turks have been killed by these terrorists. But they can't solve that problem entirely by military means and they need to begin thinking about what they're going to do in the non-military arena."If only the same argument could have been made in 2003... (besides the fact that Al-Qaeda was never in Iraq until after the Occupation, and as such that justification is an absolute farce)
Vote on Progressive Bloggers
Libellés : Europe, Guerre, États-Unis
par Borges à 12:22
A Year of Liberal Government in Québec
For the first time since their election last March, Liberals of Québec find themselves in the lead of opinion polls querying the voting intentions of Québécois on the 24th of February*. The PLQ is ahead of the Parti Québécois by just a smidgen, but it has managed to vanquish the ADQ in terms of support. Where once Mario Dumont and his party garnered nearly as much support in the Assembly as the Liberals, and quite a bit more than the souverainiste Parti Québécois.The party is making strides in areas of economic stability and has presided over an opening of discussions long helmed in by fears of social eruption. The Commission Bouchard-Taylor was a breakthrough event in the history of Québec, the first time that immigration and integration were treated as an openly debatable subject, while maintaining an air of respect and tolerance. There was considerable tension surrounding the Commission, as well as doubts about its efficacy in actually accomplishing anything, and its results are yet to be seen.
Economically, in consideration of the very state of crisis that exists right to the south of the Border, the Québec government has done exceptionally well in managing the province's finances. The budget is fair, it gives priority where it is due, and stands up to the scrutiny of the Parti Québécois and their stringent environmental politics as well as the ADQ's family-oriented goals (though the ADQ is still banging on about their 100$ per week per child payment not being realised), both of which have in actuality played a progressive role in helping keep the Liberal party centred on the major concerns of the Québécois.
Besides these two accomplishments, the recently released Rapport Castonguay shows that the Liberal party is committed to the financing of the healthcare system, and is committed to a public-centred Régie which will never be privatised. The Rapport's conclusions were at best a mixed bag, and thankfully Liberal Minister Couillard as well as PM Charest have rejected the idea of allowing doctors to work in the private sector, as well as the fees proposed for use of family clinics. Whatever the direction the debate takes, it is important that the Liberals have the courage and ability to engage in this discussion.
What will another year of Liberal government mean for Québec? Hopefully it will see a more engaged debate over the French language and its role in society, and a Liberal initiative for its protection. Allowing the Parti Québécois to dominate the discussion is pure negligence, and the Liberal response cannot continue to be «NO». The conversion about healthcare should be expanded into the realm of the citizen, and allow the issue so important to Québécois to be talked about openly, about the quality and the sustainability of this prized institution. Furthermore, the economy must be sheltered from the fallout of the sub prime mortgage crisis which is ravaging the financial world market, employment must be protected. Other than that, the ambition must be as it always has been: to protect freedoms and basic rights. The ambition must be to help the most vulnerable, to help make this a more just society, and a more equal and beneficially mutual economic existence, while protecting that which is most important to the Québécois: the land (the environment) and the language.
*Poll Results:
PLQ: 35%
PQ: 32%
ADQ:21% [Reuters, 26.2.08]
Vote on Progressive Bloggers
Libellés : Libéraux, Politique, Québec
par Borges à 08:36
Fuck the budget
Prolific political commentator Michel Vastel has returned to his blog and opens with some advice for the political movers and shakers of today in regards to elections:If you'd like my view, we're stearing ourselves towards the election of a Liberal minority government, if we must hold elections. That is why I don't understand why the Liberals continue to hesitate on bringing down the government. And as for Stephen Harper, I would think twice before provoking the Opposition. The government has gotten what it wanted in regards to the mission in Afghanistan. Their budget plan has been known since last October and the vote next Tuesday will won't change much. And no one is dying to have elections, except for the journalists and those MP's assured of their re-election. [Michel Vastel, 24.2.08, translated into English by oneself]In one paragraph M. Vastel has managed to paraphrase what everyone has known for months, the common knowledge that this brinkmanship is farcical and that all this talk of Spring Elections is meaningless politicking. Liberals are in a position to take on the Conservatives at the poll, more so now than ever. There is a huge amount of scandal circulating among the Conservative caucus, the country is being hit by the United States spiral into (a) recession or (b) some sort of continuation of this economic trajectory through the borrowing of more money that does not exist, Liberal's are doing better than they have for a long time. If they wanted to call an electino they would, but they don't, and they shouldn't keep us holding our breath about it. This author for one will from now on be ignoring this budget-spring election bullshit because frankly, its been months in the coming and will never happen.
Vote for Progressive Bloggers
par Borges à 08:02
The real root of «Balkan aggression»
And it rings true:The weaker and more impotent a small Balkan ruling class is, the more chauvinist and poisonous its rhetoric and actions become. The Serbian ruling class cannot resolve the national question for the Serbian population in the region, nor can it improve the living conditions of the masses. Squeezed by the imperialist powers it uses the same manoeuvre the Balkan ruling classes have used throughout their existence - it bargains with, and vacillates between, the different imperialistic powers, exploiting their opposed interests.
The Belgrade riots must be seen in this key. Far from an "irrational move" of "shooting oneself in the foot" as local liberals bemoan, the burning of the US embassy and the orchestrated terror is a very pragmatic move on the part of a desperate ruling class. On the internal front, it paralyzes the independent movement of the masses with threats of the fascist mobs. In foreign policy, the "unruly chauvinist lynch mobs" serve as a negotiating card in the dealings with the West. The Serbian ruling class is urging Washington and Brussels to loosen their grip and soften their demands, unless they want to see less co-operative nationalist elements in the government. On the other hand, imperialism is also not damaged by these events. The apparent threat of Serbian chauvinism against its neighbours is used to spread fear among the working classes and youth in the region and is thus used to justify the presence of the foreign troops as the protective element. [Editorial Board of Produnjeni Um, In Defense of Marxism 25.2.08]
Libellés : Europe
par Borges à 19:09
Hilary stabs Obama
....No such luck, but this stabbing is hopefully just the beginning of what one hopes will be a violent fight to the death for both Obama and Hilary camps as they are quite annoying. Just another example of what happens when politics is no longer sufficient in order to express discontent.
Libellés : Politique, États-Unis
par Borges à 16:25
Democracy: Always the best option?
As talks stall in what once looked to be a hopeful round of negotiations between the government, led by President Kibaki, and his opponent and camp M. Raila Odinga, it seems that some people do not seem to grasp the situation which has taken place there. It would indeed seem that certain sectors are calling for the ever-useful referendum, on any agreement negotiated between the parties.But some pro-government leaders have cautioned the government against rushing for a quick-fix deal, with some pushing for the final agreement to be put to a referendum for public endorsement [BBC 25.02.08]With a death toll at around 1500 people and an estimated 300 000 people displaced from their homes, one would think that indeed the quickest possible solution would be the preferable one, seeing as how the situation itself has been shown unable to cope with any sort of political upset. This violence was sparked by elections, and once ignited spread throughout the country, being used to expresses economic conditions and contradictions which are still now worse in the country than before the poll took place.
Obviously, popular franchise is not the place for this conflict to be worked out in, as it has been shown inadequate to deal with the pressures of society. It is when democracy no longer seems a viable option that this sort of inter-communal violence takes place, and will happen again until the oppressive nature of the Kenyan economy are resolved, and those most disadvantaged are given the support and guidance and assistance in order to lift themselves out of crushing poverty and again feel as though their tribe, their voice, their vote, matters once again.
par Borges à 13:03
Getting the job done- Afghanistan 2008
via the unbearably partisan, yet still useful AmericablogGirls as young as six are being married into a life of slavery and rape, often by multiple members of their new relatives. Banned from seeing their own parents or siblings, they are also prohibited from going to school. With little recognition of the illegality of the situation or any effective recourse, many of the victims are driven to self-immolation – burning themselves to death – or severe self-harm.
Six years after the US and Britain "freed" Afghan women from the oppressive Taliban regime, a new report proves that life is just as bad for most, and worse in some cases.
Projects started in the optimistic days of 2002 have begun to wane as the UK and its Nato allies fail to treat women's rights as a priority, workers in the country insist. [Independent 25.2.08]
Libellés : Droits, G.B., Guerre, Pauvreté et développement, ROC, États-Unis
par Borges à 07:59
New coalition will change nothing in Pakistan
Clarity:Such is the power of dialectic materialism, that it leaves one speechlessIn a press conference held yesterday, visiting US senators, including John Kerry the Democratic Party candidate in the last presidential elections, called the results of the elections in Pakistan "very positive". They also promised to increase aid if a coalition government is formed between the PPP and PML(N). But at the same time they want the Musharraf presidency to continue! American interference in the internal affairs of Pakistan has become a norm. They dictate the policy of every regime.
At first sight the election result seems to please everybody except the PML(Q). But the reality is that the PML has been the party of the establishment throughout the history of Pakistan. Every dictatorship has used it as a political concubine for the perpetuation of its rule. The PML(N) and (Q) members are the same capitalists and landlords who switch sides to safeguard their power and preserve their plunder. Only yesterday Nawaz Sharif invited PML(Q) members to come back to the parent party.
A coalition government between the PPP and PML(N) would mean the continuation of the status quo. The whole farce of these elections is that all sections of the bourgeois media are calling them free and fair, when the reality is that they were the most manipulated results in Pakistan's history. The Pakistan bourgeoisie media are attributing PML(N) vote to Sharif's strong anti Musharraf rhetoric. However, they are silent about the shady underhand deals the Americans have brokered between Sharif and the Musharaf regime. [Lal Khan, In Defence of Marxism, 19.2.08]
Libellés : Pakistan, Politique
par Borges à 08:56
Liberal government of Québec rejects privatisation!
Le dirigeant du gouvernement libéral s'est taillé sur les proposes du rapport Castonguay, qui a appelé pour une ouvrage du système de santé au marché privé. Le but de ces proposes est pour assurer le financement continuel des soins de santé québécois, dont les couts vont s'augmenter par 6 percent sur un taux de croissance économique à 4 percent sur les 10 ans suivantes. Or, les idées proposés sont très réactionnaires et inclut permission pour les praticiens de médecine à travailler dans le marché privé, une charge annuelle pour l'utilisation de cliniques par les familles, etc. Donc on attendait un déclaration d'opposition véhément de Premier Charest aux idées qui résoudront surement dans la privatisation du système.Well he has delivered, dismissing most points of the report as unacceptable, however he has taken one of the watch-words of the report, efficiency, as his own. Apparently a liberal government, while ignoring the calls for what amounts to, again, the privatisation of the Québécois healthcare system, will implement certain recommendations to improve productivity in order to find more money to finance the prized civic institution which is the Régie.
While a welcomed step, and somewhat a relief to those holding worried about the looming shadow of privatisation that seems to fall over the province from time to time, productivity alone will not allow the healthcare system become sustainable: there must be more done to eliminate inequalities and wait times, prevention must be prioritised, and there must be a firm commitment to the financing of the regime, even if it means raising taxes. This is an institution worth fighting for, worth paying for, worth working for, even if it means tough questions with tougher answers.
Libellés : Libéraux, Politique, Québec
par Borges à 08:16
Kenya's light at the end of the tunnel
As observers hold their breath over the political developments in Kenya, or lack there of, and hint at increased violence if progress is not soon made (and the International Crisis Group warns of remobilizations of armed forces in different tribal groups), and as Opposition leaders stoke the fires of mass anger once more, chief negotiator and former UN chief Kofi Annan has hailed a recent breakthrough as an extremely positive step for Kenya in its road to stability and reconciliation.This solution will involve a broad coalition government which will see the creation of a Prime Ministerial post for a leading member of the Opposition to take up once the government is built. However a critical eye must be cast on any resolution involving coalition, as there are unruly members of all tribes from all sides of the political debate who may see this as a climb-down and decide, once again, that politics has failed them and go on to display the sort of violent responses typical of the recent post election period. And if this deal does succeed, careful attention must be payed towards advancing the plight of those tribes who are most disadvantaged in the current political, social and economic climate, so that this sort of inter-communal backlash is not repeated after the next election does not yield a desired result. The main issue remains poverty and inequality, and as the violence was an expression of anger and dismay at the current situation, the election was simply a catalyst. As such, a political solution alone will not solve these underlying contradictions of the economy of Kenya.
par Borges à 11:18
Well that's Afghanistan sorted...for now
Radio Canada reports that Premier Stephen Harper will unveil a new bill concerning the mission in Afghanistan, which will take into account the proposed amendments by the Liberal Party of Canada. This will mark a political success for both parties as neither was staking much on their exclusive position, which perhaps was the intention all along, as it often is, to simply give each party enough protection to save face in light of the circumstances. The bill will extend the Afghan mission until the year 2011 upon the conditions that:- NATO assures a sufficient rotation of troops in Kandahar and a prioritisation of the humanitarian aspect of the mission
- Government will acquire medium weight helicopters and pilot-less flightcraft with surveillance capabilities in order to add to the effectiveness and safety of the Canadian force
- That Canada inform NATO immediately of its intentions to end its military presence in Kandahar by the end 1 Feb 2011, with all missions outside Kandahar ending in July of that year
Libellés : Guerre, Politique, ROC
par Borges à 08:03
Liberals must defend Québec's healthcare system
Former Liberal heavy-weight and respected Member of the Establishment Claude Castonguay and his panel of researchers have released their report (summary in English) into the necessary changes to Québec's healthcare system, which has caused quite a stir, in recommending steps that are « the sort of irrevocable step towards a two-tier health care system». The four major points of the review are as follows:- Allow Doctors to participate in the private sector health care system
- Raise taxes by 1% to fund a health stabilisation fund
- Forcing families to pay 100$ per annum in order to access family medical care
- 1-2% deductible on income, which they insist is not the equivalent of a user charge
The conservative Opposition Action Démocratique du Québec has promised that the healthcare sector will « be opened» up with or without Liberal approval, but one cannot see how that is possible. The Parti Québécois in the third ring, would never support such privatising measures, despite their erratic stance on tuition fees and various other issues. Liberals need to act decisively and show their opposition to what will lead to the commercialisation of medical care in the province, and the opening up of Québec for vultures seeking riches and profit.
Libellés : Droits, Pauvreté et développement, Politique, Québec
par Borges à 18:06
Barak, I think it's time for a change...
Sometimes I want to ask Obama supporters to describe their motivation without using the words «hope» or «change» (or «Black» as in «Well plus it would be cool to have a Black president»). Does Barak Obama have any actual policy goals besides «changing the nation» and «giving hope». Despite a mind-numbing amount of sound-bytes and speech clips of M. Obama, one still finds it hard to discern what exactly is being proposed.Obama could be a good substantive candidate, if he would for once focus on what he actually believes. A glance through his autobiographies show his wealth of life experience and social concern, so what are they? What does he want to do to change the United States, what makes him the best person for the job, what specific ideas and credentials does this person possess that makes him the right choice, most would argue:
- Independent leadership
- Cross party appeal
- Iraq War Opposition
As for cross party appeal and an ability to reach across the aisle so to speak, is hardly a credible claim, considering his frequent lambasting of the Republican Party and its leadership, to whom a large part of the base are still loyal, especially the policies of M. Bush, who still maintains a relatively high level of support with Conservatives ( excluding the most right wing of course who consider Bush a liberal soft-touch).
Well the war then, surely he is credible there: Wrong. Opposing the war doesn't make you competent to run one, and frankly his only credential in terms of Iraq is that he voted against it. Should he be applauded for doing what everyone knew was the only decent thing to do anyway?
So what exactly is his appeal, what are his stances on the issues. Environment, healthcare, jobs, economy, foreign relations, global justice. What are his views will someone please let the public know. Get buzzwords out there like «single payer healthcare» and «carbon tax» or even just «tax big business». These slogans and ideas don't have to be especially liberal (in the United States sense of the word) they just have to have some substance, something that can sustain both die-hard supporters and on the fence apprehensives through the long election season, and something that can help pull people in the centre who don't know even what party to vote for never mind candidate. People are beginning to tire of the same old rhetoric of «hope for America», etc. etc. and his opponent on the Right, M. McCain, is also seizing on this bankruptcy of policy on the part of M. Obama.
Libellés : Politique, États-Unis
par Borges à 11:42
As a coalition forms in Pakistan, 3 Demagogues Dance
Elections in Pakistan have resulted in the sweep of liberal-secular politicians over those supporting President Musharraf and another competing force, Islamicism, even in the highly radicalised North West of the country bordering Afghanistan. The numbers speak for themselves:- Pakistan People's Party 87,
- Pakistan Muslim League-N(awaz Sharrif) 66,
- PML Quaid e Azm, recalling the memory of Jinnah, Father of Pakistan, party of Musharraf) 38,
- MQM (Muttahida Quami Movement, appealing to the middle to upper class Muhajir population of Sindh) 19
- ANP (Awami National Party, Secular Pashtun Nationalist from Northwest Frontier Province) 10 [Pakistan Electoral Commission 19.2.08]
However the PPP and the PML N are both led by demagogues convicted of swindling the country out of millions of dollars while being Prime Minister (or while husband of another convicted embezzler Prime Minister, like Bhutto's husband) who hate each other as much as they hate Musharraf. They each hold each other in as much contempt as the other, and any working together between any of the three major parties will be seen by the party hardcore base as a climb-down from previous rhetoric.
So we'll see what happens, now that the PPP and PML N decided to work together, they have more than enough votes to censure or impeach Musharraf, though can do nothing to force him out of office, or indeed do anything, they can simply express their disapproval of his conduct as the democratically elected representatives of the nation. So basically, as they say, same shit different day.
(Also, Nawaz Sharrif was threatening protests during the first hours of counting when it didn't look like we could be as resoundingly successful as he was. implying that elections were unfair. There's also the claims of irregularities in various districts, so one wonders how much will be given to those claims where the results were in favour of the former Opposition)
Libellés : Pakistan, Politique
par Borges à 11:30
Décidez rapidement! Decide quickly
On ne peut pas supporter l'oscillation constante de M. Stéphane Dion à propos des élections. On sait que dans une système parlementaire il y aura de conjecture et estimations à propos des nouvelles élections, mais c'est insupportable la manière que les dirigeants libéraux se comportent ces jours. Un jour, ils sont prêts à tomber le gouvernement à cause du budget, l'autre c'est l'Afghanistan, l'autre ils sont prêts le soutenir. On croit qu'un politicien peut changer son avis, mais c'est ridicule!The way in which the party keeps running the electorate around with their posturing and pretending is not helpful to anyone, especially themselves. If the Liberal party cannot make up its mind about these issues, how can they except the Canadian public to have the confidence to vote for them the next time they go to the polls. When in the voting booths, will they remember a principled stand on issues which are important to them and their families, or will they remember a party and a leadership swaying in the wind?
par Borges à 09:23
Goodbye Castro: Recoge te y ponga te to'as las photos en la motete
The departure of Fidel Castro from the Cuban sphere of politics will affect nothing, not the dictatorial nature of the regime, nor the human rights abuses committed. Brother Raul is scheduled to take over immediately from his predecessor and as such there is little question that the Castro-esque style of government will continue. Perhaps the role of the individual in history is oft under-rated, however in this case one would conjecture that it is not.The Cuban nation is often admired by some on the left as some sort of beacon of socialism, however there is much confusion surrounding that contention. The fact is, socialism does not exist in Cuba, there are merely characteristics of a socialist society, such as state-control of means of production and a strong social care system in place to support the population. However one of the pre-requisites for socialism is the participation of the workers, farmers, students, of all sectors of society, in open and fair elections to decide who will lead the country, who will run the economy. As it stands, there is a bureaucratic infrastructure and an atrophied political elite who are clinging onto power with as strong a grip as possible. Let no one be deceived, this is nothing more than proletarian bonapartism.
Libellés : Politique
par Borges à 04:12
Dégel et le PQ confondu
Malgré leur position comme défendeurs du gel des frais de scolarité au Québec, Mme Marois chef du Parti Québécois a annoncé le soutien de son parti pour un dégel proposé par le gouvernement libéral. Elle a appelé aussi pour une nouvelle contrat sociale avec les étudiants de la province, mais on se questionne comment est-ce qu'on peut établir une nouvelle contrat quand les parties ne font pas confiance entre-eux (les étudiants sont trahis par ce changement de position). Le PQ s'est représenté un parti de progrès social, de protection des groupes plus vulnérables, parlant de idéels nobles et l'importance de l'éducation, la santé, l'environnement, etc. Mais en fait, son but est simple: Pour diriger (un jour) le pays à indépendance. Ses priorités sont pas les étudiants, ni les aines, ni les travailleurs, sa priorité est l'indépendance, rien d'autre, donc le parti n'est pas chainé à aucune promise. Quand un parti croit qu'un action très simple (comme déclaration d'indépendance) peut résoudre tous les contentions et contradictions d'un société capitaliste, il n'est pas difficile pour comprendre leur position erratique.Le parti se trahit avec ce changement rapide. Il aurait pu capitaliser sur le mépris du gouvernement vers les étudiants et les attirer au parti, et à sa cause souverainiste. La jeunesse est radicalisée, et le parti qui peut les représenter peut aussi gagner grandement des sections de la population jeunesse nouvellement attirée à la joue politique. Mais en fait ses trahisons plus récentes, ils ont perdu cette possibilité.
Libellés : Pauvreté et développement, Politique, Québec
par Borges à 17:39
(Pakistan Speaks) پاکستان بولتا ھے
Now that polls have closed, will anyone listen? As the opposition political parties, numerous that they are, vied for votes in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, one could already preview the response by those parties to the election results: Disbelief, denouncement, and outrage. Yes, as usual the Opposition in Pakistan will be showing its versatility by supporting and participating in elections that they are surely going to denounce as unfair and unrepresentative of the population if not entirely favourable to their own individual parties. Most in fact, have already started dismissing the polls, before any figures are reported. This is a betrayal of democracy, that the non-governmental parties cannot accept any elections that they will not win overwhelmingly is a gesture of contempt for the will of the Pakistani people. May their voices be heard, whatever they say.Now that polls have closed, largely without incident, although there was a marked lesser turno-out in the largest province of Punjab, along with 5 election related deaths there. Also, the presence of election monitors *though only half the number expected* and the widespread use of unwashable ink being painted on thumbs will hopefully help deter claims (and the practice of) any vote rigging or irregularities. Of course it won't, put one can still be hopeful.
Libellés : Pakistan, Politique
par Borges à 11:34
What is a «valeur québécoise»?
The Bloc has spent over 100 000 dollars in advertising today in Québec's French-language publication market, trying to convince Québécois that the party is apt to represent distinctive Québécois values, as opposed to those of Canada. This is an interesting portrayal of values and principles as being distinctly Canadian or especially Québécois, and indeed it fails to prove the distinctiveness of their moral position, much less demonstrate how exactly they represent these supposed separate values of Québec.This move is typical of the Bloc, to maintain that they are the defenders of Québec's unique interest when in reality they are in the business of division and animosity. Their rejection of the Canadian nation, though political, often take a tone of moral superiority to other parties, as if they are somehow above the party politicking and behind-door deals, as if they represent some sort of higher standard of politician class. The Bloc must stop assuming itself to be the moral, spiritual, and worldly representative of the Québécois nation.
As for values, what precisely differentiates Québécois values from Canadian values. Surely not a sense of liberty, for all of those in the Federation share a common history of struggling for greater representation and say in their affairs. It is not the prizing of the common good, because all provinces and territories provide comparable services to their residents. Perhaps a certain sense of community, of very local democracy, is more Québécois than Canadian, and the resistance to conscription in the War demonstrated a local aversion to violent warfare, but other than that, one is pressed to find any ideological or ethical differences. So what is a Québécois value, one would like to know.
Libellés : Politique, Québec, ROC
par Borges à 08:59
America's new friend: Kosovo
Anyone following the Kosovar pre-independence celebrations will note the proliferation of American flags, being waved and hung all around the capital Pristina with glee. Do the Kosovar Albanian people see America as the garaunteurs of their independence movement, their protection against the looming shadow of Russia and its disapproval? Or is it a hangover from the post 1999 war, when Americans were in large forces in the province. One also notices the British flag flying about, with posters of the Union Jack and the words «Thank you» pasted below. Is Kosovar independence seen as being down to the political movement and shaking of much larger world powers, do Kosovar Albanians congratulate themselves and their foreign friends on their achievements?
What does the Kosovar admiration for the United States and its foreign policy mean for the claims that the United States is part of some world-wide anti-Islamic conspiracy, constantly oppressing Muslims and aiding others in keeping the Islamic community down. Now that America can, apparently, take a large amount of credit for the creation of an independent Muslim-majority state, out from under the suzerainty of the Serbian nation, is there now an argument for support of the United States international actions? Perhaps those that can do nothing but criticize the United States and their conduct can look to this example and see hope, and approval, and realise that any person, or nation, must be judged on actions alone, not based on a set of preconceived notions about their behaviour.
p.s. Who doesn't love the new Kosovar flag (it's the EU flag with a picture of Kosovo in the middle)......?
Libellés : Diplomatie, Europe, États-Unis
par Borges à 11:05
Dion promises massive infrastructure investment
Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, while speaking at the Canadian Federation of Municipalities, has called for a huge investment into the national transportation infrastructure, including the construction of desperately needed roads and highways in the West of the country. His proposals have won acclaim from the group's president, Gord Steves of Winnipeg, and many other members of the federation, as a visionary project for the future of Canada.The proposal includes over 3 billion in reserves for rainy days and emergencies, and an overall investment of nearly 7 billion dollars into the transport network out of the nearly 10 billion dollars surplus in the budget, broken down in the following manner:
- Ontario- 2.6 billion dollars
- - Toronto-600 million dollars
- Québec- 1.6 billion dollars
- Western Canada- 1.9 billion dollars
- Maritimes+N.L.- Several hundred million dollars
par Borges à 09:14
Putin: 12 More Years... and NATO out of Ukraine
Russian President Vladimir Putin laid out his vision for a strong and prosperous Russia... up through 2020. While not the most surprising of speeches, which included comments about Kosovo, economic development, Russia's democratic record, and of course the new U.S. missile defence shield, it is a worrying prospect to think that Putin is planning out his vision for the future 12 years ahead, indicating that he openly believes that he will be a person of most influence in Russia in the next two decades, whether that be as Prime Minister (as he has decided he will after he hands over power to his protégé Medvedev), or simply an economics czar (get it). The speech also touched on the Arctic issue, which prompted M. Harper to commit more military spending (according to the Moscow Times). As for Russia's posturing towards its western neighbours, Russia has succeeded in intimidating Ukraine enough with his comments yesterday, and as such today Ukraine has commited to removing all NATO bases.Libellés : Politique
par Borges à 09:01
Part II: Na-na-na-na hey-hey-hey good-bye
LIberal's did it Tuesday, now Republicans on Thursday. Today House of Representative Republicans streamed out of the Capitol over the Congress' refusal to pass a long-lasting intelligence surveillance bill, actually what is an extension of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which will also give immunity to those telecom companies that followed the Bush administrations lead on illegal wire-tapping before 2006. The House and Senate have been going back and forth with themselves over this bill, attempting to pass more temporary mesures in order to not let the legislation lapse, thereby ending all domestic spying operations, however Bush has declared that he will not sign any temporary mesure: Either the legislation lapses *on the Democrats watch* or he gets everything he wants, including justification for his illegal spying program *on the Democrats watch*.So today, when the House went to pass a motion of censure against White House Chief of Staff John Bolton and Harriet Miers , the House Republican caucus decided to leave, on the principle that the Democrats are putting the nation at risk with their political manoeuvring (so to speak) It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
When the Dems finally made a move to get a vote on the contempt resolutions against White House officials for ignoring subpoenas in the U.S. attorney investigations, the Republicans had a walkout all planned out. As Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) gave a speech haranguing the Dems for "political grandstanding" at a time of dire threats to national security (because work on the surveillance bill has still not been completed). They then filed out onto the steps, where a podium was waiting to complete the photo op. [TPM Muckracker 14.2.08]
Libellés : Politique, États-Unis
par Borges à 19:21
Musharraf now enjoying similar levels of support as Bush... yay democracy works
The comprehensive poll conducted by the BBC World Service in Pakistan regarding people's attitudes towards national politics is revealing, though not shocking. Nearly half are purported to have asserted that peace and stability were threatened by President Musharraf's reign, which while it is not a huge blow to either credibility or popularity (plenty of presidents are viewed in the same way, and one could probably achieve such polling figures in most Western Democracies). However the report also showed a high level of indecisiveness in the country, with important questions polling around 20 percent in the «i dunno/مجھے نین معلوم ھے» category, so there is a lot of ambivalence about politics in the country. About 40 percent think that Bhutto was killed by the security forces, with the same number representing those who believe that elections will be free and fair. One wonders how many of those responses overlap.Overall, the poll can be viewed as somewhat representative of the population, with around half outright distrusting of the government and yearning for its downfall (kind of like the United States) and the other half teetering between tacit approval and reserved criticism. The issues of bread and butter are still present in the election, however the political structure of the country itself is what is most prescient. The ability of the the Opposition to defeat Musharraf in Parliament will come only through compromise, as it is made up of two very distinctive polls: those who support fundamentalism and an Islamicized state of Pakistan, and those, such as they in the Pakistan People's Party, more tending towards a liberal-democratic view of the situation. These two very distinct groups are at odds with each other and as such, one will have to win a clear majority because coalition seems to predicated on the participation of Musharraf's Pakistan Muslim League-Q , which neither could abide after this fevered campaign. One will see what the results are, but needless to say, this will be very interesting to observe.
Libellés : Pakistan, Politique
par Borges à 11:00
Elections Canada 2008!.. also post about Afghanistan
Spring Elections for Canada... can you feel it!!! Liberal leader Stéphane Dion has made his decision: We are going to war the polls.
Back to the scheduled program
Afghanistan 2011: Setting objectives and making promises
Liberal compromise over Afghanistan has been thoroughly tested in the past few weeks, with Harper revealing his plans for an Afghan force committed to the country until 2011, while making it an issue of confidence in the government. Liberals have had much outside stimulus to handle as well as internal divisions as to what course of action should be taken. Stéphane Dion and Michael Ignattief (along with foreign policy czar Bob Rae) stood together at the caucus in hopes of uniting the party in a strong policy on the force in Afghanistan, committed to redefining the very nature of the contingency:
He told his colleagues the amendment did not call for the continuation of a "search and destroy mission" in Afghanistan, but a development and training mission. "The mission must change," Mr. Dion said. "The mission must end and the mission must be more than what it is," he said. [13.2.08 Globe]This is indeed a good move. The moral question of the humanitarian mission can't be ignored, and the Liberal caucus was smart to declare that their primary goal is the creation of a force which is not involved in combat and destruction, but in development and humanity. The Canadian people can't support a mission that is simply sending women and men to die in a devastating and renewed civil war, with flashpoints all over the country. However they can support a limited number of troops in Afghanistan to carry out a well designed plan of action in order to help the Afghan people recover and improve their situation. If a force does have to be committed for the next 3 years, at least it should have a more rigidly defined, humanitarian mandate as opposed to one involving participation in armed excursions and Taliban fighting (although the Army can't help being attacked).
And for some brief speculation, we look to the budget bill, set to a vote for 26 Feb and which has been identified as another issue of confidence by the Conservative government. Liberal fears over its untenability have lead to even greater worries about what a Spring-time election would do to the Liberal's current position, with party faithful voicing concern. If the Liberal caucus decide that the budget cannot be made to work, they should be expected to vote against it rather than doing a walk out or simply abstaining, no matter what risks there are. If Liberal leadership cannot maintain the integrity of the party over the budget, what other issues are there?
Libellés : Guerre, Politique, ROC
par Borges à 07:33
A New American Conservatism and the ends of Hands-Off policy
The New Republic informs us of the new divisions being thrown up in the republican partie, which make the party, though unified, highly fragmented during this presidential race and in general, with sometimes competing objectives:Broadly speaking, one can sense that there are three different forms of conservatism in the U.S. today. One type, perhaps reminiscent of the Old Right that opposed Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal and entry into World War II, believes in individual liberty and an isolationist foreign policy--small government at home and limited intervention abroad. A second group, vaguely descended from Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign, believes in small government domestically coupled with a strong foreign policy that will confront ideological enemies abroad. The third group, that of the neocons, pays lip service to small government--but it wants an interventionist judiciary that will uphold certain values, an interventionist government that will make a "compassionate" use of the budget and an interventionist foreign policy that will promote democracy throughout the world. [13.2.08 The New Republic]Is this a correct assessment of the larger American right. It seems so, although the first group identified, those pre-WWII Republicans, had largely been represented in President Bush, he ran on a foreign policy platform of non-interventionism and hand-off tactics regarding troublesome players on the world stage (like, at the time, Serbia and its actions in Kosovo). 11 September changed all that dramatically, and indeed it would seem that the entire party has moved with him in this respect: It is right and feasible to interfere as much as necessary if it is in America's interest. In a country where the uninsured number more than all of Spain's population, 43 million, the government proposed 500 million dollars on defence, most of it going to foreign operations, awhile trying to justify a disastrous 200 million dollar deficit, entirely created by this «Fiscal Conservative». Only a serious shift in priorities could allow such imprudent financial decisions to be taken by the Bush government, one that prioritises America's foreign economic interests over all other considerations, both moral and practical.
Barry Goldwater, conservative ideologue and former U.S. Representative, would probably turn in his grave if he were compared to M. Bush, as he espoused libertarianism as well as interventionism, and somehow managed to square the two policies against each other, resolving the obvious contradictions that arise between people that want to spend as little money as possible on doing as little as possible with the idea of taking on any foreign venture that seems financially or politically. His foreign policy ideas may have caught on, but I don't think any Libertarian could abide themselves by the sort of infringements on personal freedom perpetrated upon the American people.
That illustrious third group just seems like a mish-mash of the other two. What does compassionate intervention amount to? Use of the budget? How can that be compassionate, while strictly confined. If neocons want certain laws, certain rights upheld, what are they? If anything this last group appears to be the least Republican of all. They have continually increased the power and scope of the government and its various branches, all in the name of protecting freedom. They seem to want a nanny-state stripped of all its principles and simply regulating the life of its inhabitants in an generally arbitrary manner. They, most of all, are to be feared, as they are indeed those who control the machinery of politics and government in the United States- for all the clichés about «The Rise of the Neo-cons» it can no less be maintainted that they have come to dominate the right of centre.
So can one person really represent all of these interests. Simple: American presidents represent business interest, and therefore, the question is mute.
Libellés : Politique, États-Unis
par Borges à 15:04
Conservative Cuteness: Na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye
The Liberal walk-out yesterday over the motion to force the crime bill was indeed interesting, but the Conservative response, was not only cute, but hilarious. Singing as they did "nananana heyheyhey good-bye" while the Liberal caucus streamed out of the House of Commons, they completely managed to steal the show from the Liberals somewhat melodramatic action. As for the Crime Bill itself, the Liberals can't just keep lapsing into their default position of abstaining on any difficult issues. If the Liberal caucus decided that they object to bill C-2, they should have made their case to the Canadian public, put forward an alternative proposal, and then after those steps taken, the caucus should have voted against the bill, on principle, despite the government's threats to dissolve parliament over its passage.If yesterday was a a preview of what actions will be taken over the budget, or Afghanistan, it will become increasingly difficult for Liberals to maintain any credibility with the wider Canadian public, let alone its traditional voter base. The Conservatives stand on principles, and act according to them, fights for them, however incorrect they may be. The Liberal stance over such contentious issues is frankly embarrassing, and seems to amount to the abdication of political authority, which isn't the best image for the leading party of the Opposition.
Libellés : Libéraux, Politique, ROC
par Borges à 08:39
Quizas, Quizas, Quizas
What seems like a good idea to some, isn't always appealing to everyone. What does everyone think of 2011 for the end of the Afghan mission? Conservatives seem to think that is a reasonable compromise on the always looming problem surrounding the Afghan mission in the Opposition. While all parties of the Opposition have threatened to topple the minority government over this contentious issue, who can know the real motives behind their refusal of submission: moral, economic, vote-culling?The moral question seems very ambiguous. On one hand, there is a humanitarian consideration, despite the increasing amount of combat Canadian forces seem to be involved in. Is it the place of the Canadian government to help one of the poorest countries on earth (in the last 5)? Absolutely. Is sending in thousands of troops the way to go about it, perhaps not. The main moral argument against it is the one against any sort of military intervention, which is valid, and also the great danger that Canadian women and men are put in while serving in Afghanistan.
Financially, the Conservatives have no leg to stand on. If they can't win the moral argument, they are done, there is no way to justify the kind of expenditure predicted on carrying out HUMANITARIAN aid if tax dollars are going towards financing combat, which is what is happening, despite the huge contributions made to the development of Afghanistan. As for vote-culling, that is dependent on the earlier two issues, and how cynical you are. We will soon see what will come of this latest Tory proposal.
par Borges à 16:07
Nord-est du Congo, dangereuse encore
On note les dernières nouvelles de la République Démocratique du Congo qui démontrent l'inefficacité et impuissance de l'accord entre les milices ethniques et l'armée régulière dans la province de Nord Kivu au Congo. Émeutes récentes ont fait blessés et plusieurs morts dans les aires voisins de Nord Kivu, dont peuple ont souffrent la douleur de la guerre perpétuel. Dans Ituri et Sud Kivu la violence est présente encore, avec toute la brutalité qui est caractéristique de la guerre là-bas. Donc voyons que Nord Kivu est entouré de conflit, le même conflit qui y a affecté , le reste de la guerre civile du Rwanda entre les Hutus et Tutsis du pays. Ce conflit peut pas se container hors de Nord Kivu, la violence apparaitra encore quand les milices voisins décident qu'ils sont prêts pour attaquer la province de Nord Kivu, maintenant défendu seulement par une force onusien faible. C'est quand les signataires de l'accord de Nord Kivu prend l'action encore, et le conflit y répand, et commençons encore.par Borges à 10:12
Israeli Arabs to be target of 100 million investment by government
The plight of Israeli Arabs (be they Muslim, Christian or Druze) is often one of alienation and deprivation, as is well illustrated in the figures concerning the dillapitaded state of most non-Jewish schools in the country. The Israeli government is attempting to remedy the situation that many of its Arab citizens find themselves in: towns without basic public services, discrimination, and sometimes malice from their fellow countrymen. The strategy is to designate 400 million New Israeli Shekels in order to fund the development and equalization of these Arab communities as a way to win the «hearts and minds» of its non-Jewish population and stop the process of radicalisation that has been going on since the creation of Israel and the subsequent inequalities which developed after its founding. The government of Israel has neglected its priorities for far too long: the provision of freedom and an equal opportunity for all its citizens, such as is guaranteed in its constitution.Hopefully this can start to bring a section of the Arab population, perhaps the young, towards a more moderated (and placated) point of view in regards to their Jewish compatriots. This is extremely important if only for demographic reasons. The Arabs in Israel will continue to grow as a proportion of the population, and within 20 years it is very possible that the balance of power in the Knesset will easily lye with Arab members and their parties. This increasingly numerous group of people cannot afford to be lost to the Israeli authorities, Arab-Israeli cooperation with the state is essential for the stabilization of the state of Israel. Currently rebellion exists outside the Israeli state, led by Arabs who identify as Palestinian, but it could very soon become the case that Arabs-Israelis themselves become a sort of opponent within. If Israel is to survive, it must engage its most vulnerable and alienated citizens, for if Israel is not united within, it can never stand attacks from without.
P.S.- You know whats interesting, there is a Farsi version of the Israeli government's Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. Diplomacy in action?
Libellés : Israel/Palestine, Politique
par Borges à 10:17
Thousands of honour crimes in Britain every year
Shocking estimates from the Association of Chief Police Officers in Britain over the number of girls who have experienced honour related violence, upto and including murder. There are also reportedly at least 30 girls each week being repatriated from Islamabad alone after fleeing an arranged marriage. These sorts of statistics are frankly upsetting, to imagine that the sort of problem that has plagued France and Germany for years has finally, and truly taken root in Great Britain (although the nature of these crimes are secret and as such have probably been going on in large numbers for quite a while). The Association of Chief Police Officers also claims that girls from a South Asian background are 35 times more likely to commit suicide,which is chilling. It is almost vomit inducing to hear the nature of these crimes: Fathers murdering their daughters, beating them senseless, hiring groups of men to rape their daughters, as retribution for some sort of recompense for a crime committed. Though one is not a scholar, the rules are extremely clear, and this sort of behaviour is absolutely unIslamic, the Quran and ahadith stress the illegality of forced marriage (though not arranged marriages) and any sort of crime, including those of the flesh, are required to have at least 4 witnesses in order to convict someone, so even if these fathers feel they have a reason to seek vengeance, they are not equiped to dole out justice. These fathers are infact themselves criminals, perpetrating violence against their own family. One wishes that Sharia could apply to them.Libellés : G.B.
par Borges à 14:08
Rockets damage Israeli PM's position
As fire falls from the sky over Sderot near the border with the Gaza Strip, we turn to youths burning trash cans and tires while yelling wildly, denouncing the Israeli government for their pain and suffering, calling for its end. This is not a scene in Gaza City or Ramallah, but in fact in the 99.8 percent (according to CBS poll via Wikipedia) Jewish Israeli city of Sderot, the main target of the recent rocket attacks from Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The people of Sderot do not protest against Hamas, or terrorism, their demands are simple: The resignation of the Premier Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. These citizens of the Jewish state are in no way unpatriotic, and as their numbers grow, their message is clear: They place fault with the government for these attacks. While a silly notion, blaming the government that spends billions defending them, it is none the less a signal of the increasing discontent over Olmert's conduct in regards to the Palestinian situation. Hundreds of miles away, M. Ehud Olmert and his government in Jerusalem face public humiliation as the main artery between the Holy City and Tel-Aviv is blocked by more protesters.Mr. Olmert himself has indeed interesting notions about blame and responsibility. His Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has declared that a Palestinian state is impossible until rocket attacks stop. The Israeli government negotiates with the Palestinian Authority that rules the West Bank, not the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip where the rockets come from. So essentially he is asking a blameless player *the Palestinian Authority* to take responsibility for something over which it can exercise control, just as the residents of Sderot blame him for the rocket attacks and would expect him to stop them. It's funny how things happen.
The watchword remains blame, as it always has. Blame for the past , blame for the future. People want justice, they want change, but they need someone to blame. Whether that emotion is misdirected or not, it expects resolution, it demands vengeance. And so actions are taken, negotiations halt, channels of communication closed, attacks are launched, hatred spreads, violence consumes, and lives continue to be destroyed. This blame leads to mistrust, and anger. That is what many people in Israel and Palestine want: someone to blame. Someone to say to : You did this to my people, you shall now pay. It is just unfortunate , for both sides, that the price is so high.
Libellés : Israel/Palestine, Politique
par Borges à 10:06
War-time amnesia
Perhaps several years embroiled in a devastating war of occupation in a South-East Asian jungle is not enough to convince the American military of the importance of «hearts and minds». That is obviously the case as the military has now released a new training manual that will focus on conflicts «of the 21st century», and the social and cultural dimensions that are entailed in such an approach. The preposterous notion that Iraq could still be won is amusing enough, but to imagine that the soul of the Iraqi people could be reconciled with an American occupation is quite laughable. Vietnam comparisons do indeed seem tired, and a bit of a stretch, however the obvious similarities cannot be ignored, and so one must ask, how on Earth they forgot. In a simliar, if independent step, the British army will be issuing «"cultural appreciation" manuals explaining how the war on terror and Western imperialism have alienated the Arab world and how they can avoid making matters worse.» (Independent, 10.02.08), which will also educate troops about aspects of Arab culture and Islam. That should do the trick...Libellés : Diplomatie, Guerre
par Borges à 07:51
Liberal Sensibilities
The threatening overtures of Madame Marois of the Parti Québécois have drawn some criticism from M. Jean Charest of the Parti Libéral du Québec, who has invited Mme Marois to please work with his government on the issue of the budget and aid for ailing industries and those worst affected by the looming recession south of the border.M. Charest a finalement invité Mme Marois à collaborer à l'élaboration d'un budget bénéfique pour l'économie du Québec, comme l'exige le gouvernement de cohabitation que l'électorat québécois a imposé à l'Assemblée nationale, plutôt que de faire des menaces. [Cyberpresse 8.02.08]That is the sign of a truly flexible and conscious government that is willing to work with the opposition when it voices its concerns. The PQ wanted a confrontation and fortunately Premier Charest did not engage the party in petty squabbling and the trading of insults. The party has been invited to «collaborate» on a budget that is acceptable to all, adopted by a National Assembly very recently elected. Hopefully the PQ can get some of its good ideas about the importance of prioritisation of developing regions and vulnerable populations, along with education and the environment, into the province's financial plan. M. Charest has extended his hand in cooperation, let us hope the PQ will grasp it. If they do not, they are in contempt of their own principles and exclamations, because as the Chief of the Opposition and leader of the ADQ Mario Dumont has said:
«On sent vraiment une volonté du gouvernement de travailler avec les partis d'Opposition», a indiqué M. Dumont. [Cyberpresse 8.02.08]P.S.- Also to be reported is a 200+ million dollar aide package secured by Charest during his meetings with PM Harper over the last day or so.
par Borges à 14:09
Victory with Vigilance: Elections in Burma!!!!!
The oppressive Burmese regime has announced that it will be holding a constitutional referendum in May, with national elections following a few years later. This move is unprecedented, and absolutely shocking, as well as joy provoking for those who have watched with sadness the way events have unfolded in Burma over the years. The Burmese government has waged an economic, political, and very real physical war against its own people for years, especially since the taking power of the current ruler, Than Shwe. The government seems to have made an about-face turn towards democracy and respect for its people:"It is suitable to change the military administration to a democratic, civil administrative system, as good fundamentals have been established," the regime said. The country's basic infrastructure has been built, although there is still more to do in striving for the welfare of the nation." [ BBC News 9.02.08]These are indeed promising statements from a regime that just a few months ago was killing and arresting protesters
Libellés : Birmanie, Droits, Politique
par Borges à 10:09
Auditor General to New Brunswick: Don't mess about
As the province of New Brunswick continues its economic development, with its recently adopted strategy of immigration, education, and good government, the Auditor General of the province has issued a warning that the province should get serious and define «what is enough» for self-sufficiency, in terms of services, standards and transparency. If the government is not going to pursue the aims of its plan it must do so with the same enthusiasm throughout. He wants to make sure that in in the next two years, New Brunswick will become one of the richer provinces, and no longer need Ottawa's financial contributions in order to survive (it is currently more than 35 percent of the province's income).The governments plans will mean nothing if the shadow of the recession is ignored and enterprises are allowed to continually fail and disappoint their workers. As with Québec, retraining is essential, and this is so for New Brunswick in particular where there is a keen interest in developing service-IT-oriented industries to replace the fading natural resource extraction and refinement industries. The devastated Atlantic coastal area of the province will not revive itself, and many of the men and women who have depended upon the sea for their livlihood simply slip into inactivity once the jobs leave their community. Education has rightly been made a key part of the province's strategy, but it should not be with an eye to just retrain people as quickly as possible and get them into any work available: Quality jobs that give quality of life must be invested in, by the province, and not leave the most shaky sections of New Brunswick in peril.
*one is impressed that one was able to keep from spouting unrelated, socialist talking points, for an entire first paragraph!
Libellés : Pauvreté et développement, Politique, ROC, Économie
par Borges à 11:32
PPP on Bhutto's death: You can't tell us nothing!
Not even an independent team of investigators of an international (well British) nature can convince the PPP (Pakistani Prat's Party, who claim that she was shot) that Benazir Bhutto died of hitting her head *from when she stood up triumphantly despite repeated warnings given to her by the government that her safety could in no way be secure in that venue and situation*. She stood up from her sun-roof/escape hatch, and being as it is half-escape hatch, it had a thick metal «lip» on which she hit her head after explosives were detonated in the courtyard where she was appearing. The Pakistani government has several suspects, and the man leading the group believed to be responsible for the attacks has offered Islamabad the olive branch, Baitullah Mahsud, so that will be an interesting situation, will they be able to negotiate with the man that killed a woman who was so important to many people in the country?P.S.- Why does it matter whether she was shot or hit her head on something after a bomb, she was still murdered
Libellés : Pakistan, Politique
par Borges à 07:06
Tough Guy Marois
Madame Marois of the Parti Québécois is threatening to topple the government over the provincial budget. The PQ has made aide for ailing industries and devastated one-factory towns their pet issue for the past season and are now threatening a vote of no confidence regarding such provisions in the financial plan, which gives more importance to tax cuts than it does helping the most vulnerable sections of Québécois society today, nor does it quel fears about the looming U.S. recession devastating the province's economy.The PQ is right in their opposition to the budget in that it does indeed place too much emphasis on reducing the tax burden of families rather than helping, again, the most vulnerable sections of society: the young, the old, the unemployed, the underpaid. Québec's work-force, especially with its still large section of population working in extraction and industrial production and therefore having highly specialised and largely non-transferable skills suited to this economy, must be prioritised for purposes of training and finding quality, well paying employment for those who find themselves without a job. Every week sees the closure of an essential factory or establishment whose shut-down will effectively destroy its surrounding community. Unions are still forced to fight tooth and nail for the benefits of their members, despite their supposed «strange-hold» on the entire Québécois economy.
Continued under-funding in the post-secondary education sector means a constant flight across the Ottawa River of would-be sciences to Ontario's well funded science and research facilities, and more importantly, a growing sense of discontent among students and faculty. In fact just recently did the UQAM Human Sciences faculty decide to hold an unlimited strike, not to mention the barricades and émeutes seen in Autumn's student-strikes. Beyond that, we find that many graduates find themselves in low-paying temporary work, as well as students trapped in poverty cycles despite a tuition freeze for so long.
The Charest government has not shown disregard to these issues, however the lack of swift action on many of these issues, and the sometimes half-natured appearance of certain measures does make it appear so. The PQ should work with the PLQ to include as much as possible the necessary funding to secure a stable and prosperous society, not act in such a confrontational manner. While a budget would be a more worth-while issue to topple the government over than School Commissions, which was the last time such a threat was made, that time by M. Dumont., no reshuffle of parliament will solve the problems that prevent parties from reaching compromise on nearly anything... Also, Marois and her party occupy third place in the government, and therefore do not command enough seats to end a government, and the ADQ will hardly risk their still coveted position as official opposition over this (as they are behind in the polls).
par Borges à 18:03
You don't want to do this Part II: Budget and the Criminal Code and Afghanistan
A row in the Senate over C-13, the Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal procedure, language of the accused, sentencing and other amendments), one of the Harper administrations key law projects for the coming year may indeed escalate. The Liberal controlled Senate is being rather uncooperative with the government, little surprise after its passage in the House of Commons, and now M. Harper is saying that his party will trigger a no confidence vote over this issue.In other «no confidence measure» news, the government minister for Finance has announced that this years budget will indeed be a "conservative" one, in terms of spending. Despite pleas from Québec and Ontario to give continued sufficient help to their ailling traditional and manufacturing industries as well as the constant threat to the Maritimes economy as it struggles to modernise and maximise its economic output. This budget, which the Liberals and the Bloc (and surely the NDP) have all threatened to vote against and topple the government over, will not include generous tax cuts and special funding, despite threats from the Opposition of a looming election. In general, this is a pretty respectable measure for the Tories to take considering their self proclaimed crumudgenliness in regards to budget, going soft would be an obvious power ploy and seen as a betrayal of principles. Of course the huge tax rebates already doled out to curry favour with the public counters the principle of sound economic management, just a bit.
So that's the budget, the Criminal Code, and the Afghanistan mission all looming heavily over the Harper government. Is this having any effect on the Canadian public, or is opinion changing independent of the workings of Parliament? And will any of this ever come to pass?
par Borges à 11:45
Silence qui parle
Le projet du terminal méthanier à Rabaska, sur la banc sud de la St. Laurent à Lévis, ne progresse jamais sans conflit avec les groupes opposants qui sont concernés avec les effets environnementaux et touristiques du projet à l'aire autour du projet proposé. Le gouvernement de M. Charest a assuré le public québécois que son appuie était prudente et seulement reçu après une consultation compréhensive avec touts les départements concernés. Or, maintenant 6 ministres (cela inclut le ministre des ressources naturelles et le ministre d'agriculture) du gouvernement se taillent à propos du projet appuyé par leur dirigeant, un réponse qui n'évoque pas de confiance dans la grande évaluation qui est dit être déjà tenu. La silence, il n'est pas préférable dans le politique, parce qu'il suggère que n'y a pas de consensus et qu y a de peur pour se parler. Néanmoins, comme on dit en anglais «if you don't have anything nice to say it, don't say anything at all».Libellés : Environnement, Politique, Québec
par Borges à 08:10
It IS because i'm black!
As previously stated, race does indeed play a role in the United States election (which, although hypocritical, one must complain of the constant, un-escapable buzz of U.S. primaries, Canadian, British, even Desi media are saturated with interest, its unbearable and somehow drowns out all other news). Obviously his support in the country as a whole is huge and in large part due to charisma, his race will remain a factor that works in his favour.Libellés : Politique, États-Unis
par Borges à 19:26
You don't want to do this...
Harper apparently wants to show his own confidence in his party by threatening a vote of confidence over his government on the issue of Afghanistan and the extension of the mission past 2009. The most recent polls show a dead heat in terms of percentage of votes between Liberals and Conservatives, but we all know that matters little, as polls change weekly and percentages don't guarantee seats anyway. What is interesting about this is that Liberals have been threatening for months to topple the government over the budget vote, and the Bloc and the NDP have already given their untenable demands for support of the government, so is Harper attempting to route a Liberal surge by taking on the offensive? And will this strategy convince anyone?Prime Minister Stephen Harper is ready to put the future of Canada's mission in Afghanistan to a confidence vote, a move that could trigger a federal election, says a report published Wednesday. [CBC 6.02.08]The issue of Afghanistan itself, if that is what this Parliament is toppled for, will not secure a conservative win, however it is likely that the mission itself will be forgotten in favour of closer and more conspicuous issues for Canadians, such as the economy. Can Conservatives convince Canadians that they are to be trusted again with control of the government, considering the economic situation everywhere east of Saskatchewan and the huge deficit that they have accrued for the treasury. Have Conservatives managed to make good on their campaign promises? The answers seem apparent.
par Borges à 09:40
C'est l'économie, stupide
Deux bonnes sources analyse sur l'actualitéPremièrement, le blogue de Northeastern Federation of Anarchist-Communists Montréal nous donne une évaluation compréhensive de la situation en Tchad, et affiche le vrai raison de toutes les guerres battus depuis le commencement d'histoire: l'économie
Vous voyez déjà le topo. Une guerre économique entre 2 puissances qui tentent à tout prix de contrôler les ressources pétrolières de cette région. Cette région deviendrait en fait une région pétrolière satellite étasunienne, signifiant ainsi la marginalisation de la France et la main-mise des compagnies américaines sur une majeure partie des réserves de pétrole de cette région Africaine. Et comme si toute cette merde n'était pas suffisante, la tente de consolider sa main mise sur cette région en allant chercher des ressources pétrolières au Nigéria. Ce qui devrait encore ajouter à l'horreur et au génocide hélas banalisé de ces régions..Et le journal socialiste français Rouge, explique la crise américaine économique:
Le capitalisme tente par tous les moyens d'accroitre sa croissance et sa courbe de profit. L'Afrique subit donc actuellement sa deuxième vague de colonialisme et son lot de guerre et d'horreurs. Les pays en voie de développement qui n'étaient pas à priori rentable économiquement sont devenus des enjeux importants pour les impérialismes au plan stratégique, militaire, géopolitique et deviennent maintenant, une fois les rapports de forces établis, des enjeux économiques cruciales pour les pays impérialistes qui tentent d'imposer leur domination par le biais de leur transnationales. Le changement ne pourra se faire que par une prise de conscience collective de ces peuples et par la lutte des classes....[La Commune, 2.2.08]
L’économie américaine joue le rôle de locomotive pour le monde entier, et il n’y en a pas d’autre. C’est dire ce que serait l’impact d’une récession américaine. La fabuleuse croissance chinoise n’est pas un recours : elle est en réalité largement dépendante du niveau d’activité américain, et ainsi en est-il pour nombre de pays émergents. La relation risque même de fonctionner en sens inverse, l’affaissement de l’activité américaine entraînant une chute de leur émergence, en révélant toutes les faiblesses cachées de pays qui pratiquent à outrance le modèle déséquilibré du « tiré par les exportations ».
Le passé a montré de quoi un capitalisme aux abois était capable. Préparer la mobilisation des travailleurs est donc une priorité de tout premier plan. Au-delà, c’est le moment ou jamais d’expliquer partout la nécessité absolue d’en finir avec ce système. En effet, la preuve est faite : quand il marche, c’est au profit d’une minorité, aux dépens de ceux qui produisent les richesses. Quand il ne marche pas, il entraîne toute la population dans sa chute. [Isaac Joshua, Rouge, 31.01.08]
Libellés : Guerre, Pauvreté et développement, Économie
par Borges à 15:04
Le manque de principes économiques par le régime Bush
Le budget dévoilé par Monsieur le président George Bush [Summary tables]trahit complètement les principes du parti républicain. Les buts du parti sont pour réduire les impôts quand toujours protégeant les essentiels du gouvernement: la défense, le stimulus économique et la création d'un gouvernement responsable et saine, un qui limite les interférences de l'état dans les vies privées des citoyens.Quand Bush a pris le pouvoir, les fonds gouvernementaux américains était en bon état, pas de déficit et une balance acceptée entre la désir pour forger un meilleur état américain et le besoin de réduire les couts d'opération. Depuis la commencement de la guerre contre le terrorisme et l'invasion d'Afghanistan, les États-Unis étaient venus à connaitre un grand déficit. 7 ans plus tard, le déficit augmente à plus de 400 milliards dollars. C'est un grand échec pour un conservateur à faire un déficit, mais en fait M. Bush a achevé ses buts: il a baisé les taxes pour les plus riches, en espoir que tel mesure résultera dans une croissance économique, propellé en plus par les dépenses de américains en dette. Il est consacré milliards plus que nécessaires pour la militaire. Les fonds dépensés pour la défense est plus de 500 milliards dollars. Et tout même il a achevé son programme d'extermination et limitation de nombreux programmes sociaux (plus de 150 programmes coupés par le budget). M. Bush devrait être heureux de sa compétence, mais on ne doit pas oublier les 400 milliards dollars en déficit.
As we enter this New Year, our economy retains a solid foundation despite some challenges, revenues have reached record levels, and we have reduced the Federal deficit by $250 billion since 2004 [note: un déficit créa par lui]. Thanks to the hard work of the American people and spending discipline in Washington, we are now on a path to balance the budget by 2012. Our formula for achieving a balanced budget is simple: create the conditions for economic growth, keep taxes low, and spend taxpayer dollars wisely or not at all. [Bush 4.02.08]Comment justifier tel budget, où centaines de programmes sociaux sont arrêtés pour financer une guerre étrange, les baises d'impôts importent plus qu'un déficit des centaines de milliards des dollars. Est-ce qu'on ne voit pas de contradictions entre le plus grand taux de dépense miltiares jamais connu aux É.U. depuis la deuxième guerre mondiale et un déficit énorme? Qu'est-ce que les partisans républicains pensent à ce budget astronomique?
Libellés : Guerre, Politique, Économie, États-Unis
par Borges à 08:43
What does a Liberal Conservative tie mean? Not much unfortunately
The results of the UniMarketing poll concerning voters intentions (had the vote been held tomorrow) are much more interesting than usual, and speak loudly about the leftist consensus in Canada:Conservatives : 33%
Liberal Party: 33%
New Democratic Party: 18%
Bloc québécois: 8%
Others: 8%
[Cyberpresse 4.02.08]
The New Democrats and the Liberal Party of Canada and the Bloc québécois would report nearly 60 percent of the vote. That is an amazingly hopeful apparition on the political scene, when it was seeming as if there was a conservative slump that was about to take hold for a very long time, to see that the 3 parties representing the left and its ideals would make up a strong majority in Parliament makes one smile. However the reality of the results is that these parties might as well be fascists and socialists when it comes to their relations between each other, the current opposition treats its own homologues like an enemy. If a vote were held tomorrow, despite claiming a clear majority, we can be no more sure of a Left-wing government than we were a week or a month ago.
Libellés : Libéraux, Politique, ROC
par Borges à 16:39
United States financing Burmese Army
United States House Bill 2764 includes a 16 million dollars aid package for Burma, ostensibly to aid its fight against separatist terrorism in the further reaches of the country. This is an appalling use of funds by any government purporting to support democracy and human rights, especially the United States, which has been among the most VOCAL opponents of the Burmese regime. The war on terror should be no justification for the funding of an oppressive, murderous armed force such as the Tatmadaw, as the Burmese military is known. Any Americans reading this should contact their representative (just enter your zip code and they will set up a letter to your representative) about this bill and tell them that this is unacceptable.Libellés : agissez-vous, Birmanie, Diplomatie, Droits, Guerre
par Borges à 12:20
Into the West- A woman's journey into Darfur
For a first hand account of the situation in Darfur in the West of Sudan, listen-again to Radio 4's Book of the Week , Heart of Darfur, the true story of an aid worker who treks from Sudan's capital Khartoum into the dangerous and desolate region of Darfur, plagued for years by fighting between African cultured Muslim rebels and government backed Arab Muslim proxy forces over control of the precious land and water resources. Each of the 5 parts is available for 7 days after broadcast.par Borges à 09:31
A sigh of releif is heard across Europe
Everyone can rejoice in results today's presidential election in Serbia. M. Boris Tadic, has reported a win with 51 percent of the votes in his name. M. Tadic is breath of fresh air for Serbia and is a strong supporter of democracy, stronger ties to the EU, and most importantly, he has promised not to use the military, which he will be commander in chief, when Kosovo declares its independence. His opponent was a leading ideologue of the Serbian right, Tomislav Nikolic, a key player in the formation of the Serbian Radical Party *think Milosevic-lite*, whose banner he ran under, and whose close hardline approach to Kosovo independence would have left a looming shadow over the region.
Of course, the absurdity of the entire race is apparent. Serbians are fooled into thinking that they are rulers of their future, when the truth is that it has already been decided for them. The presidential poll simply gives regular Serbians a feeling of control over the situation. The petit politics of the nation-state which have plagued this region for centuries needs to be jettisonned if Serbia is to prosper. Once Albanians and Serbians realise that their interests are linked: those of economic development, the provision of basic servies to all, and the ending of oppression, they can accept life in a federation of sovereign states that can deliver democracy and protection to this incredibly diverse regino of the world.
Libellés : Europe, La question nationale, Politique
par Borges à 21:08
Sarzoky warns the U.S. of a multilateral world
First a congratulations are in order for M. Sarkozy. The chef de la France has been going through a world-wind engagement but has managed to push forward his political and foreign agenda all the while. The merit pays for teachers, raising of University fees, the deregulation of taxis and cabs, just to name a few, are some of the choice battles M. Sarkozy has taken part in after announcing some of his most recent ideas. The huge economic changes proposed by Sarkozy are far from a reality, but the propoals have become the subjects of hot and haute debate over the future of France.On the diplomatic front, M Sarkozy has continued his recent push towards multilateralism. After offering army bases and nuclear power stations to Gulf-rich states, parading around Paris with President Gaddafi of Libya, his various forays into the areas traditionally outside the influence of the French nation. All this is further enforced by M. President's comments at a diplomatic celebration of the Chinese New Year of the Rat.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently addressed an audience of diplomats at the traditional New Year Reception, reinforcing that the Post-Cold War world, dominated exclusively by "super powers," will give way to multipolarization. The world's wealth will encounter unprecedented "redistribution;" and the world will be more likely than ever to embrace multilateral politics. He added that international economic institutions are in urgent need of reform; and in the next 30 or 40 years, the world will enter the era of "relative super powers." [People's Daily, 1.02.07 ]The comments themselves are incredibly naive, to imagine that an unprecedented redistribution of wealth will come about through the nature shifts in the world economy is absurd. However his remarks on the nature of the future of economic diplomacy are very interessting, if not actually credible. China is fast becoming one of the largest investor's in the world's last truly underdeveloped market: Sub-Saharan Africa. India will soon be in a position to look to the outside world to export its technological and material innovations that are being made daily. The Eurozone economy is almost bigger than NAFTA, let alone the United States.
With these three new powers coming to light: India, China, and the EU, could they become the international powers which are on par with the United States, much like 4 super power nations dominated the world for much of its pre-war colonial period: Britain, France etc. Are we at a crossroads where the developing populations of the world are given unfettered choice as to who is their patron, who is their new coloniser, and are no longer forced to take the handouts of the United States and its various branches of control (IMF, World Bank etc) and can utilise all the help offered to them, by different nations and organisations, in order to develop their economies and societies in the best way possible, without suffering under any nations hegemony.
If you need proof of this growing trend, just look at this editorial report taken from Le Potentiel, a DRC based newspaper, on the industrialisation of Africa:
Dans le même ordre d'idées, Alpha Oumar Konaré, a indiqué mardi que l'UA attache toujours une grande importance à sa coopération avec la Chine. C'était au cours d'un avec l'envoyé chinois Zhai Jun, actuellement en visite à Addis-Abéba, le président Konaré a hautement apprécié les relations de coopération amicales entre la Chine et l'UA et les pays africains. Il a ajouté que ces relations se sont bien développées après le dernier sommet du Forum de coopération Chine-Afrique, tenu en novembre 2006 à Beijing. Il a affirmé que l'UA, comme toujours, adhère à la politique d'une seule Chine, ajoutant que l'UA travaillera avec la Chine afin de développer davantage les relations Afrique-Chine.[Le Potentiel via Allaffrica.com , Godefroid Ngamisata, 2.2.08]
And a great section from Radio Canada titled: Chine la conquérant
Libellés : Diplomatie, Europe, Sarkowatch, Économie
par Borges à 13:01
L'ADQ s'échoue
À la veille des élections de printemps, l'Action démocratique du Québec a semblé vainqueurs et vedettes d'une nouvelle situation politique dans la belle province. Rien de tout, si on m'aurait demandé. L'ascendance de l'ADQ à la position de opposition officiel dans l'assemblée n'a servi rien que pour démontrer que ce parti «en vedette» n'est plus qu'un autre apparition de l'Union Nationale ou conservateurs, qui evoque la peur dans le cœur de chaque libéral. Leurs politiques gémissants n'ont achevé rien pour avancer leurs buts de protection de la classe moyenne et l'avancement de leur programme politique. L'ADQ n'a pas porté les changements que ses souteneurs veulent, ni ses députés n'ont pas joué un rôle progressif dans les débats dans la chambre, toujours interrompre les discussions pertinents avec leurs gémissements fréquents qui ne contribuent rien à la polémique currente. s'échouerL'ADQ s'est présenté le parti de change: pour une nouvelle autonomie à la scène fédérale, pour un changement dans les moyennes de relations entre le gouvernement et l'économie, une nouvelle réponse du gouvernement aux besoins des citoyennes, plus choix pour les consommateurs . Mais non, les adéquistes ne sont pas réussis dans leur rôle comme opposition saine et efficace. L'ADQ a échoué avec cette mandat lui donné par les citoyennes du Québec, on peut espérer que le part n'aura tant chance la dernière élection.
Pour un meilleur analysis, cheque-toé Cent Papier
par Borges à 10:19
Is a more centralised federation the answer for Canada
Is the answer to Canada's continued issues surrounding the distribution of power *and money* and the relationship between the provinces and the government in Ottawa a stronger federalism, where the competencies in education, immigration, and health care are under nearly full control of the confederation's government? Perhaps, as it seems that most of Canada's internal battles relate to this wrangling over the règlementation of these political contradictions, which see some provinces advancing leaps and bounds, others floundering and struggling to stay afloat, and a completely unfair difference between the levels of essential services such as education and healthcare.So far these inadequacies have been worked on under the presumption that a more perfect formula could be created in order to ensure a greater equality among powers and resources in the different parts of Canada. The billions upon billions transferred between the federal government and the provinces, and back and forth and to another, are a constant source of contention as each contributor and recipient feeling slighted. Some provinces have shinning educational models which lead the western world in policy and provision of instruction, others struggle to provide each student with an appropriate education.
Now think about what would happen if the constitution were changed to share the powers of education and healthcare between the provinces and the federal government, where Ottawa would have real power to give and take money, to regulate important services and industries, and implement an equal standard of living throughout the country. Provinces would lose some of their autonomy, but also escape the fighting and contradictions which appear at every budget. No longer would the Atlantic Canada look to the West with envy, no longer would the West look East and see thieves. If Ottawa could regulate the standards of education and health, and enforce them throughout the country, then this nation could perhaps finally see itself as one of equals.
par Borges à 08:31
