George Handlery about the week that was. Talk loud and carry a big pencil. Abuse Bush, handicap America. Obama the Unaware. Dividing true wealth or poverty? Immigrants, integration and resentment. How to be liberal. The goals of economic intervention. Economic illiteracy and its politics.
 
1. The foreign policy aspect of the election of Obama by America and Europe is worth an entry meant to serve for later reference. The winning strategy convinced Average Joe – feeding on trivia he ignores public affairs until his vote is due – that the crises of the last eight years were of Bush’ own making. This makes standing up to “hostiles” into a political error that is now rated close to criminal recklessness. On this level, the consequence for US foreign policy seems obvious. Openly acknowledged crises must be avoided at all costs, as waters without waves were a winning campaign promise. Converting tough going against rough guys into a cakewalk was a campaign promise. In reality, even the magicians of the new administration have no control over who will decide to ruffle American feathers or endanger global security. Therefore, Washington’s way to deal with challenges will be inclined to ignore them, to under react, and to camouflage problems through verbal pirouettes. If unavoidable, the response might include some “talking loud” and raising – but carefully and apologetically – a thick pencil.
 
2. The graceless and mindless way Bush is repudiated in every respect of his international role considerably undermines America’s reputation. The dangerous impression suggests that she is from now on, if confronted, hardly be willing and able to go significantly beyond grunts. Bush tried to act against most comers and, since success was not instantaneous, he and his party were repudiated. It will be a reasonable assumption of those intending to overturn the world‘s order, to draw conclusions about a defenseless self-paralyzed America and to act accordingly.
 
3. Obama the Unaware. Obama was unaware that his aunt lived as an illegal alien in the US. He was also unaware of the “damn America”sermons of his preacher. The same applies to his friendly contact to a (not voluntarily) retired terrorist. (True, Obama was eight when the bombs went off. Nevertheless, he was a bit older than that when he associated with the US-made terrorist.) Thus the question you might also want to pose is: what else is already there and coming at us of which Obama is unaware?
 
4. Awareness. Obama wishes to divide wealth. Let us skip the usual implication. When those who have (legitimately or illegitimately acquired) power can add to it the control of the economy then, what you get is dictatorial power. The President-Elect appears to be unaware that wealth is not created by “distributing” it. “Distribution” is rather a short-cut to ultimate poverty. Wealth is the product of knowledge, skills, diligence, risk-taking and, yes, a bit of luck. Be aware that dividing it can only take it from those who have earned it in favor of the ones who have not.
 
5. True to their dogmas, as a matter of principle, some fundamentalist immigrant communities resist integration. They see the implied adjustment to alien ways as a betrayal of their personal and collective self. At the same time, they take the consequences of their self-imposed isolation for individual careers as a sign of malicious discrimination. This conviction naturally reinforces the wish for segregation. In addition, such communities live by their own laws – oddly enough, these happen to be restrictions they claim to have fled. These clung-to ways of a far-away and failed tradition happen also to be in conflict with the laws of the land harboring them.
 
6. Some categories of immigrants are individuals who have become superfluous at home. In itself, this has little to say about their potential social contribution. If they have to leave, the place they go to is a country that is obviously a second choice. If they are allowed to become successful and are prepared to exploit the opportunities that present themselves there then, the new place will soon become the country of First Choice. There is a new type of contemporary migrant. In his case, the hosting new country remains permanently a second, even a Resented Choice. The failure to rise by riding the wave of new opportunities can be the consequence of the principal rejection of the host‘s way of life that creates such neglected chances. If this is the case then the new home becomes the First Choice for radical rejection.
 
7. Some think themselves in the classical and positive sense of the term “liberal”  if they affirm that all opinions are to be taken seriously and accepted as plausible. In doing so, they are likely to claim that all views are equally deserving and that “tolerating” them implies respect due to those that advocate these ideas. This is not necessarily liberal but rather a sign of unconcern or of the reluctance to defend or challenge any position not shared by an existing vocal crowd. Correctly understood, “liberal” indicates that positions funded on logic are analyzed and subjected to a dissecting examination governed by reason. Liberal does not imply an obligation to suspend reason and to approve or disapprove depending on who advances a position and how vehemently this is being done.
 
8. Iraq and the USA are in an argument involving the definition of the remaining length of US presence and the terms under which American forces contribute to the struggle against terrorists. Regarding the withdrawal of US troops, the disagreement is not substantive. Generally, when you discuss with an occupant his departure his real position will be to stay for ever and, failing that, for as long as possible. Unlike others, the USA does not have to be nudged to leave Iraq. Had Iraqi society been able to take a stand against the dreaded terrorists then, by now, US troop presence would be ancient history. As things stand, Iraq’s government needs American troops to fight the battles it is incapable of waging and even less able to win. This gets us to the second issue. Once this help is resorted to, the immunity of GIs, acting upon the orders of their government, is at stake. It does not seem fair to this writer that American soldiers under American command be made personally responsible before Iraqi courts for what they do in the service of their country that is requested to act in Iraq’s interest. Therefore the solution might be to turn over as many regions to Iraq to police as her government is willing to accept. US interventions from their base-camps should follow upon request. In such cases, US soldiers should be under fully under the command and jurisdiction of their own country. Such operations should be regarded as autonomous US actions.
 
9. Russia’s financial reserves are heading for depletion. The fortunes of the oligarchs are huge and their needs will be corresponding. The politically pliable oligarchy (the stiff-necked ones are in labor camps) will be helped first even though their earlier recklessness will make the bailout expensive.
 
10. For conservatives, the measures designed to combat the financial crisis represent a trap. The danger is that reacting instinctively they might resist what their perennial political opponents support. State intervention, as proposed by the Bush Administration is a short-term tactic. As such, its purpose is speedy retreat from the practice once trust and stability are restored. The economic role the left favors amounts to incremental involvement to achieve as much irreversible control as politically possible. Ergo, the measures advocated might seem to be similar while their purpose is not.
 
11. If we wish to mitigate intelligently those future economic upheavals that have no cyclical origins then the public needs to be educated. This is more easily said than done. The essentials of economic knowledge, the ability to comprehend public information, are not taught in schools. The curriculum is, except for using or playing with computers, determined by an earlier time. The teachers themselves are the product of an even earlier age. Add to this that the way admissions to the profession are handled and the promotion of its personnel make this one of the most stand-pattish occupations around. That teachers like to talk a radical language – always implying that the “revolution” of this or that is to be undergone by others – is more about retaining their privileges than about real change. Experimenting with new ways of teaching – involving more the method than the substance of what is transmitted – is mainly an attempt to have to teach less. This leaves the access and gathering of knowledge up to the efforts of unqualified pupils acting in “collectives”. Nevertheless, as numerous cases demonstrate, economic illiteracy has its benefits. It helps some to win elections.