Shaking Off

The following is an unproven hypothesis that I nevertheless consider to be very likely.  Either that or it was serendipity.

Georgia’s entry to Eurovision 2009 was the most genius diplomatic manœuvre I have ever seen.  Faced with a militarily humiliating (but diplomatically empowering) defeat at Russian hands, Georgia was not too keen to be attending any contests hosted by Russia.  Adding to that is the possibility that should Georgia perform especially poorly on Russian soil would be to add insult to injury.

But at the same time, Georgia wants to take the high road and not look like they’re chickening out.  Enter “We Don’t Wanna Put In”: a song whose political connotations (i.e. “We don’t want a Putin”) are obvious enough to ensure disqualification, but yet subtle enough for Georgia to claim Russian interference.

As for the song itself, it’s not bad but it sounds a lot like “Disco Inferno” by The Trammps.

* * *

Speaking of the Eurovision Song Contest, this year was quite a disappointment.  I found the overall quality of the songs to be much lower.  But I did enjoy the winner, Lena:

I mean, isn’t she just ridiculously adorable?  Especially with that fucked up faux‐English accent that mysteriously disappears whenever she’s speaking German.

But most importantly, thanks to Lena’s victory, her grandfather, a former West German diplomat, now has his own Wikipedia page.

So it’s down to Yulia Tymoshenko and Viktor Yanukovych. The gas princess and the thug. Technically speaking you could call Mrs. Tymoshenko the liberal candidate and Mr. Yanukovych the conservative one but such labels are misleading. So are their respective designations as “pro-Western” and “pro-Russian.” Both see EU membership as a goal. Mrs. Tymoshenko has hinted at NATO membership but unlike Georgia, Ukrainians are largely against this and seeing that Mrs. Tymoshenko is a populist above all else it’s unlikely she’ll try to push this issue too forcefully. And, believe it or not, I think it’s actually a good idea.

NATO has an important role to play tempering Russian influence over the former Soviet Union but I foresee Ukraine playing a key role in maintaining security and cooperation in Europe and and joining a U.S.‐dominated military alliance would result more in just pissing Russia off than anything constructive. The Ukrainians are strong‐willed people—not malleable like the Belarusians—so the danger of Finlandization is really not an issue.

So who’s it going to be? I really have no idea, it’s, as they say, “too close to call.” But my support is behind Yulia Tymoshenko all the way. But my exact reasons for that support are hard to explain. I’ll be the first to admit that part of Mrs. Tymoshenko’s allure is decidedly non‐political. She has down pat that whole “Amazonia, Queen of the Slavs” look that intrigues men and empowers women. Not to mention the fact that she counts among her supporters real life Amazon Ruslana. And if I spoke Ukrainian I’d probably be able to also appreciate Mrs. Tymoshenko’s charismatic authority versus Mr. Yanukovych’s clunky turns of phrase. She’s definitely more experienced but that same experience, as prime minister during the recession, may be her downfall.

Honestly I don’t know what I’m going on about. The eastward march of the European Union cannot be stopped. Though corruption in Ukraine is a reality, it still pales in comparison to Central Asia. Either candidate would be good for Ukraine. Maybe they can form a coalition. Everybody will be happy. Well, everybody except Viktor Yushchenko.

I just wanted to point out that despite many already existing Tymoshenko-Yanukovych images, I made this one all by myself, WITH THE MOST RECENT IMAGES. Yup.

I meant to post this two weeks ago. But better late than never:

Although it’s unlikely it’ll ever gain the prestige of the Nobel Peace Prize the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize has become a more credible award. There’s a couple reasons for this. One has to do with the criteria. The Nobel Peace Prize is generally awarded for specific deeds, actions, events, etc. This is in contrast to all the other Nobel Prizes which are essentially lifetime achievement awards. So this means that a person who facilitates a major peace treaty will likely get the award even if he has a highly dubious track record. Henry Kissinger and Yasir Arafat are the two names most often brought up.

The Sakharov Prize on the other hand doesn’t tie itself to particular events. Take for example Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng, winner of the 1996 prize. Wei’s big claim to fame is his 1978 essay “The Fifth Modernization” that he posted on Beijing’s Democracy Wall. Wei hasn’t done anything as well publicized since then but he’s never relented in his fight to bring democracy to his country. That’s why he deserves the recognition the Nobel Committee hasn’t given him.

And then we get to the second, more troubling issue surrounding the Nobel Peace Prize. Recently there has been a phenomenon that I like to call “Nobel activism” in which awards are given based not just on the merits of the recipient but also to send a message and influence future events. In the last decade the prize has been awarded to three influential members of the United States Democratic Party: Jimmy Carter in 2002, Al Gore in 2007 and now Barack Obama in 2009. It’s really hard to read this as anything other than a “fuck you” to George W. Bush. And there are much better / less sacred avenues to send that message.

The European Parliament’s award doesn’t get caught up with celebrity recipients. This year’s winner is Memorial (Мемориал), a Russian-based organization that fights for human rights and press freedom in the former Soviet Union. That the Sakharov Prize should go to Memorial is both fitting and troubling. Fitting because Andrei Sakharov himself helped found the organization in 1988. Troubling because while Memorial was formed to fight for democracy in the USSR, nearly two decades after its dissolution, the organization is still as busy as ever.

Wei Jingsheng’s “The Fifth Modernization”
Sakharov Prize at the European Parliament’s official website
RFE/RL article on prize-winner Memorial
Memorial official website

Imagine some Canadian soldiers were transferred from Ottawa to New Brunswick and as a result of these actions Finland declares war on Canada.  Sounds pretty ridiculous, right?  Well, this scenario actually happened, albeit with the two parties swapped…

I’m too tired to finish this thing tonight.  I’ll do it tomorrow.

I agree that Stephen Harper’s policy towards China has been poor.  In fact, Canada’s relations with China have been poor since October 13, 1970.  That was the date we broke diplomatic relations with Free China and threw in our lot in with Red China, then led by Mao “What Are Human Rights?” Zedong.  I think it would be great if Mr. Harper were to visit the Free Area of the Republic of China and meet with the esteemed Chinese president, Ma Ying-jeou instead, of that loud-mouthed, unelected usurper Hu Jintao.

Premier Wen Jiabao criticized Mr. Harper for not coming sooner.  Of course Mr. Wen hasn’t been to Canada since 2003, before Harper was even PM.  You see, Canada usually changes it’s leadership more frequently because we have this cRaZy thing called democracy goin’ on.  But we all know democracy is bad news for the Chinese people.  I mean just look at how the poor people of Hong Kong are starving to death while the mainlanders are livin’ off the fatta the lan’.

But we really want to be BFF with Red China apparently.  It’s no coincidence that our former Governor-General Adrienne Clarkson just published a book on Norman Bethune this past spring. Bethune, who has been lionized for his field work in the Spanish Civil and Second Sino-Japanese Wars, infamously refused to treat many soldiers who didn’t share his communist beliefs.  We really need to stop worshipping this guy just to suck up to Red China.  But they’ve has gotten to that stage where, like the U.S., they can do whatever they want and there’s nothing we can do about it.  Goliath dispatches David with a flick of the wrist.

But the People’s Republic of China does boast one major “achievement.” They’re behind Iran but ahead of Egypt in their ability to take thousands of years of glorious civilization and turn it into TOTAL FUCKING SHIT.

I think the character of Mao in John Adams’s opera Nixon in China summed it up best:

“We no longer need Confucius. Let him rot” (Act I, scene 2)
“History is a dirty sow: If we by chance escape her maw / She overlies us” (Act I, scene 2)

Czech president Václav Klaus’s arm finally being twisted into signing it, the Treaty of Lisbon came into force today.  I’m still not completely sure what all is contained within that treaty but I know it furthers the EU’s mission of European integration.  Culturally, economically, spiritually, politically… Europe is far more integrated than any other continent on Earth.  And with the possible exception of South America, no other continent will ever come close.

North America’s problem is obvious: the U.S. is far too dominant in every sphere.  Sure Germany’s 80 million people towers over Luxembourg’s 500,000 but there are plenty of other states in between.  A similar problem exists in Asia with Red China (population, land mass, economy, military), Japan (economy) and India (population, land mass).  Not to mention a whole lot of countries in Asia outright hate each other.  Sure Switzerland is stuck up and Russia’s real smug but that doesn’t compare to the animosity between India and Pakistan or Israel and everybody.  Human rights are also abominable in Asia with Japan and Israel-proper being the only states really up to snuff.

Africa already has the African Union but I’m still not clear as to it’s actual purpose.  I mean they’ve had a few missions in Darfur and Somalia but for the most part it’s been too little too late.  Not to mention shady characters like Mugabe and Gaddafi are still hailed as heroes.  And the goals of the different countries can be so, well, different.  It would appear a disdain for colonialism is not enough to base a regional integration-based intergovernmental organization on.

Australia’s already united.  And it dominates that “continent” known as Oceania.

South America’s the most promising with Unasur, just so long as crazy man Chávez doesn’t hijack it for his personal whims.  I really wish Canada could get in on that but I know our policy on abortion (or lack thereof) has been a roadblock in past discussions with Latin American nations.

Catharina Hagen was born and raised in East Berlin.  A child prodigy in a variety of disciplines she ultimately chose to persue a music career and adopted the stage name Nina Hagen.  In 1974, at age 18, she released her first album, Du hast den Farbfilm vergessen, with her band Automobil.  It’s an album full of crazy pop music with fun, brassy arrangements.

Complications led the Hagen family to defect in 1976.  Nina promptly got herself hooked up with a major label who sent her to London to be educated in the ways of Western music.  Upon her return Hagen formed a new band that was named after herself and transformed into Germany’s answer to Debbie Harry (with some Lydia Lunch aesthetics thrown in for good measure).  The Nina Hagen Band released their first album in 1978.  It was completely absent of any crazy/fun pop music and instead filled with second rate New Wave, the kind of which was sweeping the free world at the time.  The rest, they say, is history.  Today her early work is largely forgotten and she’s known only as Germany’s priestess of punk (which I believe in German is “das Deutschepunkenrockenpriestess“).

Nina Hagen is an anomaly.  West Germany gave us krautrock and for the most part delivered far superior music.  But it does illustrate that, when the wall fell 20 years ago and GDR culture was completely overrun by “Western decadence”–something was lost.  Some former East Germans feel what’s known as ostalgie (”eastalgia,” more or less), a nostalgia for those positive elements of life behind the Iron Curtain.

Chancellor Angela Merkel noted yesterday that the reunification process still isn’t complete.  Economic disparities are still very real.  It makes you wonder: if Germany has had such a hard time with it, is there a hope in hell for countries like Korea or China?

I happened to glance at a “Dear Ellie” column in the newspaper (one of those myriad Ann Landers knock-offs) and it ran something like this: “Dear Ellie, I’ve been dating a married man, blah blah blah, etc.”  And then she replied with something like “Well your problem is a communication issue…”

No, your problem is your dating a fucking married man, you slut! Don’t get me wrong, I disapprove of his actions even more but it was the lady who happened to be writing the letter.

It’s really pissing me off how borderline acceptable adultery has become.  In fiction particularly it’s often portrayed as some sort of character flaw.  No, just no.  Drug addiction is a character flaw, rage is a character flaw, being a workaholic is a character flaw; unilaterally shattering the bond with the person you pledged your all to, till death you do part: that’s a failure at life.  Murderers, rapists, pædophiles: I put adulterers in the same category.  What’s the point of a marriage vow if there’s no consequences to breaking it?  At the very least I think infidelity should be regarded as tantamount to waiving child custody.  How the hell are you supposed to be a role model?  Yet in some countries adultery isn’t even taken into consideration in divorce proceedings.  For people in abusive relationships I guess I can understand it but that still doesn’t justify it.

They had their priorities straight in the olden days.  The affair of Sir Lancelot and Guinevere leads to the downfall of Camelot, the deaths of Arthur and Gawain and ends with the two lovers adopting celibacy.  Now that’s some seriously righteous consequences.  Now this is not to say that the folks of the middle ages were perfect.  In particular, kings seemed to be somehow immune to the no adultery rule.  Of course the best monarchs (Edward the Confessor, Richard the Lionheart, Henry V, Henry VII) curiously don’t seem to have had mistresses.

The Human League - Human

[Ed.--In retrospect I think comparing adulterers to murderers, rapists and pædophiles was a bit harsh.  Nevertheless I do think there should be some form of punishment for what is, essentially, the breach of a contract.  However, I believe the emotional devastation caused by adultery can be comparable to those previously mentioned heinous crimes.]

It can be easy to forget that “Lisbon” is the name of a city in Portugal.  It’s the capital city, in fact.  However, it’s now become short hand for the treaty that was signed there in December of ‘07.  The Treaty of Lisbon, of course, is the comprehensive reform package designed to make the European Union run more smoothly, clearly and democratically.  The treaty itself is a 272 page beast, the PDF of which can be downloaded here (if you have far too much time on your hands you can check out what the Rome and Maastricht Treaties will look like as amended by Lisbon, a 329 page document).  What it all boils down to is that these are complex and confusing documents meant to be dealt with my politicians.  If the citizenry had the time and energy to understand everything about governance we wouldn’t need representative democracy.  MOST European states agree with this model.  Ireland, not so much.

Due to having an extremely rigid constitution the polls on the Emerald Isle are set to open in under an hour.  They rejected it last time they voted on it but it took them two tries to ratify the Treaty of Nice, too.  Maybe next EU treaty the Irish government should just set forth dates for two referendums right from the get-go.  I sure hope they vote yes.  Dear Lord in Heaven I really hope they vote yes.  They’re lucky they have such a wonderful institution like the EU* and they shouldn’t take it for granted.  It’s just that the “No” campaign has been particularly effective with its lies helpful information propaganda lies.  Like the one about how Lisbon is going to legalize abortion in Ireland, that’s particularly LOLable (the illegality of abortion in Ireland is constitutionally enshrined).

So I’ve been surfing about lisbontreaty2009.ie, which is both informative and entertaining.  But informative is boring.  Upon arriving at the website, the welcome lady, err, welcomes us and we begin our journey.  We’ll be seeing more of her later.  Oh, also in English.  The site is mostly informative but I keep getting distracted by this scary old guy.  I am informed the treaty would not affect Ireland’s neutrality policy.  Which is pity because that’s the one real black mark that country has.

On to the movies! The welcome lady makes a comeback along with a strapping young shamrock with a terrible haircut.  Incidentally, the designers must have decided that Qualified Majority Voting and “The European Council” are more risqué issues because our man let’s his chest hair peak out while the lady displays some cleavage.  These movies are all available in Irish as well which makes these two actors notable as being the only people on the entire island who can actually speak Irish.

In the event the referendum does pass, Polish president Lech Kaczyński needs to get his act together and sign and deposit the Polish bill and then we watch with deep anxiety and hope that the legal challenge brought forward by Czech president Václav Klaus and some uppity senators is finished with before the next UK general election at which point David Cameron has promised to hold a referendum on the issue.  Gordon Brown, you’re still good for something.

* For the record, it would never work in the Americas.  We’d disagree with the US over capital punishment and with Latin America over abortion.

I first became interesting in the subject of whaling when I ate whale (admittedly, quite tasty) in Akureyri, Iceland. The Lonely Planet guidebook took a decidedly anti-whaling stance and not without good reason: whale watching is actually a much more profitable industry than whaling and unsurprisingly the two are somewhat mutually exclusive.

Whaling is one of those things we’re just instinctively opposed to without knowing why. The “I love the animals” argument doesn’t hold water because considering the amount of fish whales eat you actually save lives by killing them. The endangered species argument is valid but misleading. And finally the argument that whales are uniquely intelligent creatures is not backed up by any real science with the possible exception of the sperm whale which nobody hunts anymore. Dolphin hunting (dolphining?) is related but not the same.

Back to the endangered argument: “whales” is a very broad term that envelopes dozens of different species, many of which are not endangered in the least. Of the whale species that are endangered probably the most famous are the blue whale and the right whale. Nobody hunts these species anymore. Not even Japan, and that’s saying something.

Enter the International Whaling Comission (IWC), a well-intentioned but emasculated body. In 1986 the IWC voted to impose moratorium on commercial whaling. However, not being a formal treaty organization this is all non-binding. The chief whaling states–Japan, Iceland and Norway–have largely ignored the moratorium. Canada’s response was the most hilarious: we just simply left the organization.

Japan is the strongest defender of whaling on the IWC, its anti-whaling counterpart has been the United States. Both have been accused of using trade or other outside influence to buy votes within the organization.

This is getting too long, which means there will inevitably be a part two.