Ostracised from Österreich

..is starting to dissolve slowly, but the question is whether what will emerge beneath will be something solid or just another, intentional haze for as long as the Austrian socialdemocrats remain in opposition. Party spokesman Darabos and budget spokesman Matznetter have given an interview [DE] to the Kurier newspaper (see also rather substantial discussion [DE] in the forum there. Wow, I didn't know that the Kurier online reader forums are at least equal to the ones at Standard.)

Less taxation of small salaries, also on the employer side, more taxation of capitals, more reliance on tax income to fund pensions and social insurance. Also, vague hints at a basic income system. The SPÖ website offers a preview in rosy colors [DE] of the tax proposals of the party. The new economic program is scheduled for release in mid September.

Most of the alluded cornerstones of the program can be either positive or negative depending on the details and on implementation. Unfortunately, in addition the party still trumpets its pet idea of European tax harmonisation "to prevent tax dumping", which I still find highly problematic.

(translated from Koha Jone [AL])

Kapshtica – The metallic barrier of the Albanian customs in Kapshtica cannot be passed these days unless you subject yourself to the consecutive procedures of inspection, ranging from documents, luggage and cars to travel bags. Before the barrier, at least 50 cars are waiting in line, and next to them a coach with travellers. An employee of the border police inside of a kiosk type cabin validates the passports of each Albanian citizen by computer, and in the adjacent cabin the customs stamp is fetched. The lined up cars proceed slowly, meter after meter, until the first of the caravan of small cars manages to complete all procedures, and after the final inspection it darts away, breathing in with relief, towards the Greek customs. As if they were exercising an absurd discipline of sports, almost all the drivers get out of their cars and push their vehicles along slowly, advancing immediately as a car passes the barrier. A driver who is overpowered by sleep, with his head supported on the open window of the car, is woken up by the honk of the following car, whose driver seems to wait impatiently to move. The emigrants start like this on their long journey to Greece pushing their cars, most of them with destinations in the neighbouring country, towards those cabins and windows that perform the task of the control point at the border.

The lines created during these last three days in Kapshtica only on the Albanian side have their reason both in the number of emigrants returning to Greece and in the new procedures for their verification, procedures which are dictated also by the security measures of the Olympic Games. “For the first time, the registration and data capture by computer of all the data of the Albanian citizens who enter Greece is accomplished”, explains one of the officers of the border police in Kapshtica. He emphasises that the emigrants have to wait not more than half an hour for completing the procedures and for being controlled entirely. The functioning of the computer system at the customs, the time which is needed for the entry of all data on the identity of the emigrant, and the not-so-quick operation of it by the employees who are not yet as skilled as they should be, has brought some delays for the departures to Greece. … More than 2,000 Albanian citizens have passed the border every 24 hours for the last three days in the direction of Greece, whereas since the beginning of August 27,000 persons of different age groups have returned to Greece in almost 6,500 vehicles. Also the Greek police continues the repatriation of persons caught without documents or residence permit on its territory. During this month, 884 Albanian citizens have been returned, but none of them has ended up mistreated.

The Olympic Games in Greece have brought previously unseen control measures at the customs of Kapshtica. The border police with reinforced numbers, the customs, anti-contraband forces, anti-terror forces, secret service, the CAM mission Albania etc. reportedly all control on their own account the entries and exits of people, vehicles, and of goods at the customs of Kapshtica. The reinforcement of the inspections is said to have forced a part of the criminal elements to try until recently to enter Greece at the customs of Tre Urat. There are reports that one of the police officers at that border control was fired because it was believed that he favoured or did not stop the move of people with criminal records towards Greece. The authorities of the border police in Devoll seem like they want to avoid such an accusation by all means, and they present themselves in a rough manner to every Albanian who leaves for Greece. … The border police of both countries continue to have permanent contacts for coordination of the security measures and for the prevention of any act or deed that would threaten the normality of the Olympic Games.

The Economist has a positive review of a recent book by management guru C.K.Prahalad. I haven't read the book, but the idea seems interesting: Prahalad claims that big businesses can generate a lot of egoistic profits from the 4-5 billion poor in the world, and in the process help the poor to improve their lives more than top-down development aid programmes by governments or NGOs will achieve.

The reason is that the poor often pay higher prices for goods they consume than the well-off, for example because of risks associated with doing business in their vicinity, bad distribution networks and smaller package units. When businesses reengineer their products and distribution channels, they can reach these consumers, often by involving them in entrepreneurial roles, such as for the delivery of goods.

A small excerpt from the Economist-article to give you a flavour of these arguments:

Another challenge will be to persuade development experts to support a profit-driven strategy. Mr Prahalad worries that firms may be deterred from BOP [bottom-of-the-pyramid, ed.] strategies by fear of attracting criticism from activists. If a large international bank were to start lending to the poor at interest rates, reflecting higher risks and start-up costs, of say 20% (compared with around 10% in rich countries), “the whole anti-globalisation lobby would probably be against it. Yet the alternative is for the poor to borrow at 500% from a money lender. Whose side are the activists on?” If you are on the side of the poor, he says, “surely you need to help get rates down from 500% to 20%. After that, you can work on getting them from 20% to 10% like in the rich world.”

UPDATE: More details at Mahalanobis

A long, long time ago, when I was even more arrogant and omniscient than these days, I defended voting for the Greens as follows against people who considered voting useless because of ubiquitous careerism and corruption in politics: yes, there were first signs of corruption and nepotism settling in also among Green parties, but still the Greens were a relatively young movement with an explicit aim of abstaining from the old dirty practices of power politics. Eventually, when the Green movement would get older and more corrupted by power, there would emerge a new competing movement to take its place, which would then represent this appeal of cleanness and principle, but for the time being, people with a certain world-view and desire for morality in politics had to stick with the Greens.

I was reminded of that prediction this morning when I read the interview with Bernhard Amann [DE] in Der Standard. Amann is running with the new party vau-heute in the upcoming regional elections in Vorarlberg. The interview is fresh and vigorous, although it has to be said it's an email-interview, which of course makes it easier to formulate razor-sharp replies. Particularly interesting is the way in which he distances his leftish party from the Greens. Amann challenges the reduction of ecology to a difficult-to-grasp concept of sustainable capitalist development, emphasises the often neglected Green goals of radical direct democracy and pacifism, and chides the Greens for conservative moral imperatives like "Thou shalt separate your garbage properly" ("Du sollst den Müll säuberlich trennen"). Conclusion:

A qualititative change away from conservativism and towards the future -- they do not achieve it.

Most serious of these criticisms is probably the attack on the sustainability concept, concerning which the vau-heute website links to the paper by Saral Sarkar and Bruno Kern, Ökosozialismus oder Barbarei [DE]. I had a look at that paper but was left unconvinced by it, since its authors seem to discard the potential for economic growth in services and information all too easily. Still, the vau-heute platform seems viable, even more so with the support it is receiving from Hans-Peter Martin, the successful critic of the EU parliament.

For months I've been too lazy to add a search function to this blog. One of my ambitious goals for the new season has been to finally get around to this. And what do I find upon return from my holidays? Blogger is replacing the google ads at the top of their free blogs with a nav bar - and that includes a google site search field. So there you are, happy searching.

Meanwhile in politics, reading around I find that people are more aggressive than usual. In the absence of substantive discussions, it seems to be the high season of personal attacks, ranging from political blog comments [DE] all the way to the federal chancellor having a go at deriding "minor political figures" in a recent "News Sommertalk" [DE, excerpt only]. A time to take it slow.

The difference between your typical holiday destination and the population of the Vienna underground: The range and number of different signs. "Let it be" is my first gut reaction. Do cities make us liberals?

Earlier I vented this seemingly crazy idea of a residence fee that intra-EU migrants would have to pay for some period when they move to a new location within the EU. The purpose would be to enable populations to express a social choice on how much immigration (with the associated economic efficiency) they want. Of course I don't really like the aspect of financially penalising poor migrants. Yet, I've returned to this idea for the reason that originally motivated it: The EU as it is now, and even more so with future rounds of enlargement that bring in less-developed economies, is a political programme to the economic benefit of the richer, better educated segments of society, whereas its overall effects on people with a weak standing in the labor market are less clear. To put it bluntly, there are segments of the Austrian work-force that would not benefit from increased competition and immigration of cheap labor. Is one not called, in thinking about politics, to have the benefit of the most disadvantaged members of society in mind first and foremost? Is it alright to neglect the local poor in favor of the European or global poorer (and the local rich)?

If we want to support internationalisation of political perspectives, as represented concretely by the EU in the case of Austria, we must develop political concepts that don't ignore the local poor and their economic interests. It is not enough to say that everybody will benefit from the lower prices and stronger labor market of a more competitive economy if we don't give people who have fears -- sometimes justified ones -- the opportunity to influence how much of these benefits they want to seek.

Here is a refined version of the original idea:

1. Every region in the EU (smaller than a country, in Austria each Bundesland) determines the level of a flat fee that must be paid monthly by EU-citizens holding a job in that region, for the first 15 years of residence in the region. People without a job are exempt from the fee. The fee is deducted from salaries by employers.
   
2. Proceeds from this fee must be transferred by the regions to an EU fund that disburses the money for structural development in the least developed regions of the EU.
   
3. The level of the fee should be set as transparently as possible, e.g. subject to regional popular referendums that can be put up for revision upon popular petition.
   
4. Restrictive 'transition rules' at enlargement that forbid employment in existing EU countries (like the seven-year rules imposed at the recent enlargement round) are disallowed as the new system is introduced.
   

Reason for 1.: Less developed regions that compete for immigration will drive the level of the fee lower. Free movement of people is preserved by linking the fee to employment (this also avoids incentives to leave families behind). The fee should be flat so that it slows down immigration at low salaries, while it will be insignificant at higher salaries.

Reason for 2.: Voters will be aware that a high level of the fee takes money out of their regional economy. Depopulation of marginal regions is countered with subsidies for development.

Reason for 3.: The incentive/disincentive structure for immigration should stop being a taboo decided upon by elite politicians (influenced by xenophobic demagogues). It becomes a simple social choice.

Reason for 4.: Everybody who is ambitious and determined enough can still migrate freely within the EU. No first- and second-class EU memberships.

The system would apply within the EU (think of an EU with 30-35 members), whereas citizens of non-EU countries would still need to apply for residence/work-permits.

I'm off for holidays until 15 August. I'll do my best to stay offline, so instead of reading your blog, I'll read the following titles on paper. I wanted to/should have read them earlier, but weblogs have recently reminded me. Here are my reviews before reading - another episode in my irregular series of predictions that never turn out right:

Hermann Hesse, Das Glasperlenspiel (The Music Bead Game). The disciplinatory reminder was this thread [DE] with comments by ferromonte on Alban Nikolai Herbst's literary weblog. I expect an uneasy reunion with Hegelian speculation, but I'm also looking forward to a pleasant re-examination of the musical quality of Hesse's prose, now that I may be a less easy prey for the metaphysical overshoot than as a Siddharta-devouring teenager. And does it have something to do with weblogs?

Josef Haslinger, Politik der Gefühle (The Politics of Sentiment[?]). An essay from 1987 about the decay of political discourse in Austria[?]. The guilty one here is the Aardvark, who reminded me to finally read this by describing it as 'brilliant'.

Frederic Beigbeder, "99 francs", which had to be re-titled "€13,90", and which I recently bought as a pocket-book with the title "€6". I'm looking forward to an absurdly exaggerated analysis of the destructive effects of marketing on our suffering souls. Beach-read and French-brush-up. Standard online had something about a reading of Beigbeder in Vienna a while ago.

Josh Marshall, the Democrat-leaning A-list blogger, on the ability of the best public speakers to be completely present in a speech, not showing any distance or hesitation of self-consciousness:

In most politicians -- in most public speakers really -- you can always sense a sort of double motion. You can sense their constant awareness of what they should be doing before they do it, and their inability to get the two to match up. Perhaps this is simply another way of saying that you sense their consciousness of self, the visibility of their artifice, like an actor who looks like he's acting, even if the technical points are hit more or less on key.

Clinton was always different. Whether there was artifice or not, it was seldom visible. His rapport with crowds or individuals was (and is) intuitive. The mastery of voice, sound and expression was always complete. And you could see that Monday night.

As it happens, I don't think that quality in a public speaker is something that can be learned. And on a fundamental level, I don't think it's a matter of artifice, though clearly Clinton has a rhetorical bag of tricks he returns to again and again. It's an emotional quality, an element of personality -- part of that undefinable quality of personal charisma. And that was what was radiating from Obama last night.

Yet I was impressed by the speech only by reading it. Marshall links to this analysis of the strength of Obama's speech in the National Review Online, from an apparently Republican perspective. It illustrates how it is the originality of some ideas that makes the speech transcend 'garden-variety political rhetoric'. Coming back to my questions yesterday, some elements of the political pathos that are operating in Obama's speech would not work in Europe because they have become discredited, such as the religious references or maybe even references to a national vocation. Yet there remains a second quality of Obama's achievement, a freshness and vigor of thought, that is admirable and could certainly be implemented in Europe as well, political talent allowing.

The only European who comes to my mind in this context is Tony Blair on a good day, in his early years. With him, the charm seems to have worn off somewhat even though the talent is probably still there. Does charisma also have an expiry date?

Barack Obama, the new star of the Democrats, a 42-year old African-American law professor and candidate for the Senate, delivered a breathtaking keynote speech yesterday at the Convention (which I inconsistently claimed doesn't interest me). It's the stuff that can bring tears to one's eyes if one is a bit of the sentimental kind, go and read the full text. Otherwise, here is the emotional peak close to the end (maybe it doesn't work so well if the tension hasn't been built up by the material before):

In the end, that's what this election is about. Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or a politics of hope? John Kerry calls on us to hope. John Edwards calls on us to hope. I'm not talking about blind optimism here-the almost willful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don't talk about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself if we just ignore it. No, I'm talking about something more substantial. It's the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker's son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too. The audacity of hope!

In the end, that is God's greatest gift to us, the bedrock of this nation; the belief in things not seen; the belief that there are better days ahead. I believe we can give our middle class relief and provide working families with a road to opportunity. I believe we can provide jobs to the jobless, homes to the homeless, and reclaim young people in cities across America from violence and despair. I believe that as we stand on the crossroads of history, we can make the right choices, and meet the challenges that face us. America!

And here is my question to you, dear readers. Why is it that this kind of speech that works on an almost existential level cannot be given in Austria, and possibly not in any other European country either? Is there a flaw in European political systems that detaches politics and political rhetoric from what is really important to each individual? Or could this detachment even be a good thing, a sign of political maturity that shields against fundamentalisms? After reading such a speech, I do feel a sense of loss, of being left behind in the cynical old world. I am suddenly reminded of the Polish emigrants in Susan Sontag's novel 'In America'.

Oxblog is among the blogs invited to cover the Democratic National Convention. 'Thoughts on the Convention of the Blog' titles Patrick Belton on Sunday, faithfully. But on Monday, David Adesnik, another Oxblogger, asks, 'Why do big media suddenly care about blogs?', and he answers (along with some interesting links):

Last night, in a dark wooden corner of an Irish pub, he said to me that journalists now think bloggers are important because bloggers have been invited to cover an event -- the Democratic convention -- that journalists describe as inherently unimportant. Who was "he"? I wish I remember. The only name I remember from last night is Sam Adams. But the point is still valid. If the convention is a pseudo-event produced for the benefit of the media, then by virture of getting invited, bloggers have become newsworthy.

Echo chamber all over then? Frankly, apart from the boring cynicism that the event invites, the Convention doesn't interest me much, it's very 'over there'. Yet this seems to be an instructive example of how many-to-many journalism can go wrong - by snowballing the arbitrary, why not until it all blows up in a big bang of disillusioned collective fatigue. If only it wasn't all so entertaining...

At that event in France mentioned last week, I met a decent bloke who has more or less the same job as I, the same age, the same family situation, the same interest in politics and compatible opinions on it, is planning exactly the same purchases and has now just arrived for holidays in Vienna. It's unbelievable how much we have in common, except that he's originally from India whereas I'm from Austria.  Such discoveries are maybe not a mass phenomenon yet, but it is interesting how neighbourship can sometimes be experienced more intensely in global dimensions than in local ones. Another reason why the internet is needed.

This blog upgrades the European Union from 'Buy' to 'Strong Buy'.
 
Legal disclosure statement: Staff associated with this blog was recently invited by the organization in question to a four-course menu at a beach restaurant in Juan-les-Pins, Côte d'Azur. This may or may not have influenced this upgrade.

and light blogging ahead for the next few days.

My patriotism is probably not typical. Yet it exists. On an underground train yesterday I saw for the first time an Austrian soldier in uniform who was black. I am unfortunately not free of racist prejudice. There were few black people living in Austria when I grew up (probably explained by the fact that it's a landlocked country that didn't have colonies, plus it's not famous for its hospitality to non-tourist foreigners), and only when I started travelling as a teenager, people with black skin ceased to look exotic to me. Still, as I became aware yesterday, somehow I must have always regarded blacks in Austria as foreign immigrants. Yet there was this man wearing the military symbols of the Austrian state, having been drafted as an Austrian citizen like all other males at age 18 who don't opt out to do civilian service. This guy was more in line with the traditional view of a good Austrian citizen than I (who chose the civilian option). This idea made me exuberantly happy and patriotic. Two fair-skinned underclass Austrian teenagers, effortfully dressed in mock-mafia style entered the train (prejudice: must have been political chauvinists). Their eyes almost popped out seeing the soldier, probably just like mine had done a few minutes earlier. They stared at him trying to match their conflicting biases, until finally they too were silently transformed for the better. [In the background the title of a short-story by Margit Schreiner [DE] fed to high-schoolers: Mein erster Neger - UPDATE: As moncay made me realise from a comment to this post, the story I meant is not by Margit Schreiner but by Alois Brandstetter.]

Südwind, an Austrian magazine on 'international politics, culture, and development', to which I have a long-running, sentimental subscription, has a special focus on leisure this month. The attempt by Austrian philosopher Franz M. Wimmer to cope with the vagaries of the concept of leisure or 'Freizeit' (free-time) is online [DE], but not as enlightening as one might hope. Also online [DE] is a critique of the attempts to encroach on leisure under the pretext of globalisation pressures. If you want to read reports on leisure in Brasil and China you must buy the magazine, thereby giving some financial support to the Austrian development agency.

Meanwhile, one of the industrialist campaigners for longer working hours without increased pay has explained that the competitiveness advantages from this are sought for competition within the new EU-25, competition with countries like China or India is not considered. So Austrian workers are supposed to sacrifice leisure for a national goal of slowing down the catch-up of the former-communist neighbours. Nah, won't.