Do the Eurocrats fear their own people? Public opinion and the values of the Political Class. What defines a public figure? Lower prices by higher taxation. How equal can equality make us? Failed modernization and violence. The hoped failure of civilization and its beneficiaries. A “free lunch” for Iran?

1. In commenting the Irish rejection of the basic law that “Brussels“ tried to smuggle into Europe, the International Herald Tribune had an interesting finding. It thought that the significance of the vote was that the fate of 500 million Europeans has been “decided by a country with less than one percent of the total European population“. Other interpretations are possible. By design the majority of the populations of Europe‘s countries were prevented by their rulers to express directly what they thought of the treaty. Not so in Ireland. If allowed, the masses tend to resist their leaders in this matter. No wonder that these elites fear their peoples.

2. Democracy is when those who govern reflect the opinions and values of their people. Often the suspicion arises -see the spreading judicial activism- that some assume that the people should reflect the views of the Political Class.

3. A candidate‘s core need not be the equivalent of an otherwise accidental trait he carries. Sarkozy is not Sárközy, that is a Magyar. Napoleon is hardly a nice Italian boy who became a nasty Frenchman. Was John Philip Sousa Portuguese? Hitler was not pursuing an Austrian agenda and Stalin is misclassified if described as a Georgian. The problem with Obama is that he allows himself to be perceived as wrapped around an often backward-looking ethnocentrically Afro-American issue. This does get “very white“ votes among those that either do not notice or who wish to prove that they are beyond race. All this might be a reason to vote for anyone else. Not unlike the writer, some of these would be happy to support a Powell, a Rice or a Thomas Sowell. Even to the casual observer they all share a significant trait: unlike Obama, in their substance they are all reasoned conservatives.

4. Obama has a, for his leftism typical, response to the high price of energy. Tax it! Taxing oil profits will achieve many things. Except these two: it will not raise output and it will not lower the price of energy. Has a tax on anything ever reduced its price? If so, to feed the poor, how about a tax on grains, corn and rice?

5. Prior to the elections, the US is unlikely to begin to utilize her fallow energy resources. The Democratic majority‘s interests and occasionally a genuine ecological commitment speaks for that. In case of a Democratic victory, after the election when the new governors will be blamed, this might change. In some time to come you will see publications arguing that the US has, by shrewd design, managed to withhold from exploitation her own resources. This enables her to be well positioned at a time of general need. It also makes her the beneficiary of having bought up the reserves of those whose holdings are being depleted. Meanwhile she managed, through the impact of relatively high energy prices, to slow down the growth rare of competitors such as China and India.

6. “Progressive“ circles are inclined to regard criminality as a product of society‘s condition. Therefore, they tend to advocate leniency in the sanctioning of anti social behavior. This approach of being mostly in doubt and then, when in doubt, to be in favor of the culprit, knows few exceptions. One is the case when some form of tax avoidance, legal or illegal, raises its ugly head. A case of inconsistency? Not if you drag into the picture a third component. The progressives operate the institutions that implement their design of an ideal
society. Such projects and those who run them need money. Low taxes and taxes avoided through loopholes means less of the money on which they depend.

7. Educated immigrants contribute their applied capabilities to the improvement of their lives and thereby facilitate their hosting society‘s advancement. They are also more motivated and qualified for an integrative adjustment (language, diversified knowledge, successful careers) than low-skilled new settlers in dead-end jobs are.

8. The just social order does not produce equality -only a dictatorships can do that. It does, however, create conditions in which equity, determined based on ascertainable societal contributions, can be achieved by all.

9. An assorted batch of anti-modernists show typical reflexes to failure under conditions created by a changing world. Once a society internalizes an ideological rejection of the “new“, it is saddled by a prejudice that will determine its response to challenges. Since the view raised to the level of a dogma is misguided, it guarantees continued under performance in the face of tests. The frustration following from this programmed failure triggers a tantrum that will resort to explain failure by alleging a diffuse conspiracy. This pseudo-explanation will resonate well with the losers and is likely to prompt them to react violently to their mistreatment by the world.

10. Theories that forecast the unavoidable downfall of civilization are attractive. The idea appeals especially to those who presume that they are predestined to erect on the ruins the new City on the Hill. Nazis, Marxists and their ilk have in the past and are now, joyously pointing to what they consider cracks in the dam. The worse things get the better for them. A contemporary movement with equivalent expectations is that of the militant Greens. They, too, envision a new civilization with a man in it that does not yet exist. The need to re-educate the survivors of the coming crash is crucial for the project‘s success. It explains why all such model societies aiming to save mankind of its vices are dictatorships run by armed virtuous Redeemers.

11. The “cracks“ mentioned incite those that hope for a dam to break to enlarge them. The past few days have produced illustrations. On an intercontinental basis, all is done to shut down nuclear power stations and to prevent new ones from being built. Concurrently, access to existing traditional energy supplies is blocked. A case in point is the prevention of oil drilling. The problem with that is that it would enhance energy independence and lower the price on the global market by increasing the expected supply.

12 Solana presents (June 14) a proposed deal to Iran. Concessions are offered for the suspension of the enrichment program. Iran reacts with a firm “suspension is not negotiable.“ If there is no tit for the tat then Iran must seriously be expecting a concession in lieu of no return. Talk about free lunches! For Iran ldquo;preconditions are unacceptable.“ In plain English: at the servant‘s entrance the gift shall be deposited with an apology attached for its limited extent by the donor. Why does Iran do this? (Reject valuable concessions in exchange for dropping an armament program it pretends not to pursue.) The reaction of the supplicants gives us a hint. It is that “the conversation continues“. It would have been more appropriate for Solana to leave Tehran ahead of schedule.

13 June 17. Now we know more. Iran might accept “some“ suggestions forwarded by Solana. However, suspension is still not negotiable. The gist is that Tehran is willing to take gifts but will not return favors. Given the proven weakness of the resolution of the petitioners, the Mullahs‘ attitude does is not devoid of some logic.

14. We were told that the Iraqi – US talks regarding the status of American troops have reached am impasse. Iraq‘s concept of sovereignty prevents her from exempting US troops from local jurisdiction and from allowing continued independent US military operations. The situation is confusing. Sovereignty implies a monopoly of power within the confines of a state. US troops are in Iraq precisely because the government is unable to exert its monopoly of power without American help. At this moment, sovereignty without US help is a fiction. For that help to be effective and politically supported at its source in America, subjecting US forces to local command is not practical.

15. The vice-chairman of Hungary‘s “Workers‘ Party“ has been fined for wearing a “totalitarian symbol.“ In this case, that is a red star. The convicted will appeal to the Human Rights Court in Strasburg. Failing there he will ask for “political asylum“ in the region. Apparently, he will not try Lithuania. On June 18, she passed a law that forbids the display of National Socialist and Communist symbols.