Everybody is welcome, this blog is highly political, it represents my views, wishes and dreams. It will contain topics about culture, politics, E.U. issues, social comments and everything else that I find the need to share and pass on, from the country I come from originally (Greece) to the country I found my home (Ireland),Europe and the world.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Populism in Europe. Always a setback to progress?
There has been a rather disappointing event recently, as Holland blocks Romania's and Bulgaria's Schengen Area entry. They are not ready apparently and there are concerns form the Dutch side, that they will be unable to implement the agreement.
They think that these two countries will be unable to control their borders, so that the rest of Europe will have to suffer with uncontrolled immigration and high criminal rates.
The issue of course is only technical, because the Romanian and Bulgarian citizens can already travel throughout Europe like the rest of us. Also, some of the Baltic states have disputable borders with Russia and it is well known that their borders "leak.," but they were allowed to join the Agreement area.
Wouldn't be better instead of demonizing and stereotyping those two countries, to take a united European approach to deal with the problem of illegal immigration? Bulgaria and Romania are the poorest member states and they have huge problems with corruption. But they are not the only EU states who have to battle with this issue.
The problem lies with our Governments' reluctance in taking a united front and showing some solidarity with the least fortunate EU member states, because that would mean that they would have to give up some of their national interests. The easiest option to calm the concerns of the nation's voters down, is to smear and portray a country as unable to implement EU laws.
Instead of course to tackle the problem of illegal immigration in Europe united, providing funds, knowledge, staff and equipment to their partners and the outer borders of Europe. The Dutch never had to guard the outer borders of EU and they were not threatened by another nation, illegal immigrants, smugglers or other criminals. Some other countries are less fortunate and they need our help.
The real issue for such decision, is that the citizens of Holland and many other countries of Europe are turning against the multicultural mantra that we were brought up with, they are becoming more xenophobic and take even EU's expansion with discomfort. Nationalism has never really left Europe and it won't in the near future, as long as the European Project fails to deliver real and permanent solutions to the citizens' problems.
Of course Holland is not the only one to blame, as Denmark, France and many other countries agree with the Dutch in suspending the Schengen Agreement. Why do we keep this divisive culture of the rich core and the peripheral countries in Europe and poison the minds of our citizens with populism?
As if the real problem for the Dutch will be the Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants and not their Governments failure to establish a clear immigration policy, that will be in coordination with the rest of Europe's. It is that fear culture of when a new state joins the EU, that makes people believe that most of its citizens will pour into the richer ones, "taking their jobs."
The European project is not about allowing the workers of the poorer states to travel freely in Europe, filling job positions that the natives do not want to do anymore. It is also about lifting these states from poverty and political instability and that can only be beneficial for the citizens of the richer states, as it will limit the immigration flow from these countries in the future.
During this process of course there will be an immigration flow from the new EU states, to the old ones. It won't necessarily be permanent one and definitely not a negative development. These people bring new skills in the country and boost its economy by working hard. And if the European project succeeds in creating similar living standards and equal opportunities for all citizens across Europe, then the flow won't always be from the new states to the old, but vice versa as well.
The case of the City of London is another example. They seem to want to be totally independent from not just EU, but from the rest of the British citizens and reality as well. They hate so much any EU regulation that they will prefer to be under a total control of the Markets and the global Corporations, than give their citizens a better deal and a stronger voice and influence in EU and Europe.
It is no wonder that London has also lower tax rates that the rest of Europe and the UK itself, in order to allow all foreign corporations to be established there. The British Government, media and the elites that dominate them, are brainwashing of the population with arguments that are partly or not at all true, in order to keep the anti-EU sentiment among them and avoid all EU regulations.
In fact, some of these regulations are beneficial for the ordinary workers of the country, like the 50 hour work week debate for example. The British media who are owned by people like Murdoch are playing an important part in this and we have seen the results, but also their true face and practices.
And so the British public remains always strongly opposed to any EU regulation, or the idea of a united Europe. In that way, they become an obstacle for any real progress and development in the continent and Britain as well.
Sadly the European citizens fall victims of the populist propaganda by many conservative groups and political parties, that oppose any development, change or reforms. Because it harms the established status quo that they thrived on. Or they simply want to grasp their chance to promote themselves into the political prominence in their country, by exploiting the confusion or hardships that any economic crisis or political and social change bring to all citizens, across the EU.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Norway's tragedy, Are Europe's values and views on multiculturalism the real victims?
The recent tragedy in Norway, brought upon the Norwegian people by Anders Behring Breivik, sent shock waves across Europe and the World. The media portray him as a Christian fundamental right winger, that sees himself as a hero and a fighter for Norway and Western Europe. To free them from the curse of multiculturalism and the expansion of Islam. The reality might be exactly that or something so much different.
Is he just a crazy man like Hitler, or does he belong to a more well thought and organized group of people? Is Islam and multiculturalism his real enemies, or is he just a disturbed and lonely attention seeking personality? Do people like him pose a threat to us? Will we see more of people like him copying his actions and how can we prevent another disaster like that? Is multiculturalism working and are we really as open or tolerant as we think we are?
Perhaps our ruling elites wants us to believe that all is working fine in our societies, but perhaps we leave out a few voices that are never being heard. These few or great numbers of people that do have other views or opinions that can not address them as in a real democracy they would, find way in dangerous circles of fundamentalists, not much different than the Islamic ones. And the result is the tragedy in Norway. Are they really as open society as they thought or wanted to portray their country to be?
We must notice that groups and people like him flourish lately in Europe because of irresponsible immigration policies of our Governments for decades. How about the True Finns party in Finland? In many other European countries we see a turn towards right wing and conservative parties or groups, simply because they are having enough of everything.
We have the same "right" mix of elements like we had back in the '30s-'40s; immigration issues, economic crisis, unemployment. All we need is another "gifted" right winger to offer solutions. And people will follow him simply because they need and are desperate for solutions. If that can happen in a country like Norway, imagine what can happen in other less tolerant countries.
In Europe we are in a way being forced to accept everyone else, but have you ever seen an anti-racism rally that would actually target the immigrant communities themselves? Have you ever seen an Indian being happy for his daughter to marry an African? A Nigerian Muslim woman has more chances to marry a European Christian man than a Pakistani Muslim one.
Yet the issue of racism is only focused on the relations between the native population versus the immigrant, usually the non Christian or white. Are we preconditioning ourselves for any feelings like Breivik's? Does racism has to be dealt only on a "white on black" or "Christian on Muslim" aspect? And because anyone who will even think to address issues like immigration and integration or multiculturalism is being snubbed ,then people like Breivik take the "initiative!"
I always dreamed my country to be more "colorful", but when I saw how this is being done in other countries then I had second thoughts to be honest. Still my nightmare became reality and Athens has ghettos, like Paris, London and Brussels. I can never understand why we must create ghettos and second class citizens that inevitably will turn against the state or will rely on social welfare because of discrimination.
They will feel alienated, they will be unemployed, they will rely of benefits, they will contribute nothing to the state, they will be abused and exploited; why? Wouldn't be better to have functional immigration laws that will allow people entering our countries, but also prevent the alienation and encourage integration of all communities?
Some countries can absorb more immigrants because of their industries and economies; some are not. We can not all be modeled after the UK or France, since we do not all have similar economies. Yet if you are not a multicultural country those days in Europe, you are treated as if you are being banal. Multiculturalism means a progressive and developed nation.
Then why Cameron, Merkel and Sarkozy declared that multiculturalism has failed? We need to get over our complexes on immigration, race and racism, religion and multiculturalism, and have a open debate on what kind of society we want. I for one want a multicultural Greece and Europe for example, but not the mess of Brussels or Paris or other big cities of Europe.
Policies that work and encourage the communities to come together, are fair to all, and reflect the wishes of the nation. Some states will be able to absorb more immigrants because of economic and cultural reasons, some less. Nothing wrong with that.
Greece for example, handles its immigration policies badly like most European states. While multiculturalism is good and it has its benefits, our Governments treat it the wrong way. Greece especially needs it a bit, to open up the minds of its population and break the gridlock that the country is in , under the Greek Orthodox Church and corrupt political elites.
If you have only one ethnic group, one religion and one culture it is easy to manipulate the people using ethnic greatness bubble gums and populism. A diverse community supposedly has dialogue and new ideas are flowing around. The problem is that this is not happening. We lock the immigrants in a ghetto, they feel alienated and instead of caring for their host country they turn against it. Or perhaps we allow too many , more than a country can take or integrate, so that some firms can have cheap labor and people to exploit.
An illegal immigrant or an immigrant who can hardly get a decent job legally, will get any job under any conditions, something that a native would not do. And that is the point. Our ruling elites do not want multiculturalism to enhance our communities, rather to have always people to exploit; modern day slavery in a way.
So multiculturalism like anything else potentially good, fails in Europe; but we still refuse to talk about it. In result we have a rise in far right groups and people fall for them because they feel alienated in their own country, and are hoping for a change.
We need to find a solution, that will respect those immigrants who were born here and perhaps curve the flow for a while until we work things out. Otherwise many more incidents like that of Norway will happen, once we alienate not only the immigrant populations, but the natives too in their own countries. The man who did that in Norway possibly had a lot of anger in him.
Perhaps from his family background or other reasons. He obviously had chats with like minded people on the internet. It is a case of when the cult becomes reality for some. Imagine if others in other countries get inspired and act like him in Stockholm, Brussels, Paris, London...
That does not mean that the idea of multiculturalism is wrong. We simply messed it up big time and we need to rethink what we are doing. Having Christian fundamentalists in Europe? That's all we needed, as if we did not have enough of it in the past. Breivik's view on democracy, bombing his government's buildings because he did not agree with its policies, then killing youths on a gathering of the ruling socialist party,is absurd. And this coming from Norway? They are supposed to be a model society up there.
Migrants and EU citizens largely agree; language, employment, respect for the local culture and a clear legal status are the most important factors influencing integration, according an EU Commission research. I will add, dialogue. We should get rid off the taboos and hang ups, and let's have an open communication. I particularly like the clear legal status argument.
Illegal immigration is offering nothing to nobody apart the human traffickers and the ones who employ illegal immigrants to exploit them. The ruling elite must listen to the worries and opinions of the citizens. The European project can not work without their support.
Remember you can make someone give his/her consent about something or gain their support, only if you hear what they have to say and find a common ground. If you keep ignoring them, the issues won't go away; they will just be masked and come up to haunt you at some stage with a big bang! (aka Norway).
Is he just a crazy man like Hitler, or does he belong to a more well thought and organized group of people? Is Islam and multiculturalism his real enemies, or is he just a disturbed and lonely attention seeking personality? Do people like him pose a threat to us? Will we see more of people like him copying his actions and how can we prevent another disaster like that? Is multiculturalism working and are we really as open or tolerant as we think we are?
Perhaps our ruling elites wants us to believe that all is working fine in our societies, but perhaps we leave out a few voices that are never being heard. These few or great numbers of people that do have other views or opinions that can not address them as in a real democracy they would, find way in dangerous circles of fundamentalists, not much different than the Islamic ones. And the result is the tragedy in Norway. Are they really as open society as they thought or wanted to portray their country to be?
We must notice that groups and people like him flourish lately in Europe because of irresponsible immigration policies of our Governments for decades. How about the True Finns party in Finland? In many other European countries we see a turn towards right wing and conservative parties or groups, simply because they are having enough of everything.
We have the same "right" mix of elements like we had back in the '30s-'40s; immigration issues, economic crisis, unemployment. All we need is another "gifted" right winger to offer solutions. And people will follow him simply because they need and are desperate for solutions. If that can happen in a country like Norway, imagine what can happen in other less tolerant countries.
In Europe we are in a way being forced to accept everyone else, but have you ever seen an anti-racism rally that would actually target the immigrant communities themselves? Have you ever seen an Indian being happy for his daughter to marry an African? A Nigerian Muslim woman has more chances to marry a European Christian man than a Pakistani Muslim one.
Yet the issue of racism is only focused on the relations between the native population versus the immigrant, usually the non Christian or white. Are we preconditioning ourselves for any feelings like Breivik's? Does racism has to be dealt only on a "white on black" or "Christian on Muslim" aspect? And because anyone who will even think to address issues like immigration and integration or multiculturalism is being snubbed ,then people like Breivik take the "initiative!"
I always dreamed my country to be more "colorful", but when I saw how this is being done in other countries then I had second thoughts to be honest. Still my nightmare became reality and Athens has ghettos, like Paris, London and Brussels. I can never understand why we must create ghettos and second class citizens that inevitably will turn against the state or will rely on social welfare because of discrimination.
They will feel alienated, they will be unemployed, they will rely of benefits, they will contribute nothing to the state, they will be abused and exploited; why? Wouldn't be better to have functional immigration laws that will allow people entering our countries, but also prevent the alienation and encourage integration of all communities?
Some countries can absorb more immigrants because of their industries and economies; some are not. We can not all be modeled after the UK or France, since we do not all have similar economies. Yet if you are not a multicultural country those days in Europe, you are treated as if you are being banal. Multiculturalism means a progressive and developed nation.
Then why Cameron, Merkel and Sarkozy declared that multiculturalism has failed? We need to get over our complexes on immigration, race and racism, religion and multiculturalism, and have a open debate on what kind of society we want. I for one want a multicultural Greece and Europe for example, but not the mess of Brussels or Paris or other big cities of Europe.
Policies that work and encourage the communities to come together, are fair to all, and reflect the wishes of the nation. Some states will be able to absorb more immigrants because of economic and cultural reasons, some less. Nothing wrong with that.
The problem is not only against Muslims. From what I know with most Europeans that we talked about issues like that, the majority of them had similar thoughts. An Irish colleague of mine years ago, opened up and expressed his worries about immigration in his country. "No offense" he said, " I am not against immigration, but equally so I do not want us (the Irish) to lose our national identity."
No malice in his words, no racism as he commented in immigration in general not only against Muslims blacks or Asians. He only expressed his genuine worries, he did not spoke against any specific group. People from many other nationalities spoke in similar manner.
No malice in his words, no racism as he commented in immigration in general not only against Muslims blacks or Asians. He only expressed his genuine worries, he did not spoke against any specific group. People from many other nationalities spoke in similar manner.
I do not think that Europeans are more racists than Africans or Asians themselves. It is just that we do not dare to discuss openly about some issues, simply because of our shameful past. Some groups count on that to push for policies that will allow this immigration mess with many loopholes, so they can import and exploit people in our lands.
Why Japan does not import so many people, even though it is expected together with Russia, Germany and Italy to have the greatest population decline in the near future? Here is the ageing population myth being debunked. Because if Europe did need to import people because of it, then Japan should try to import as many immigrants as well. They do not!
Why Japan does not import so many people, even though it is expected together with Russia, Germany and Italy to have the greatest population decline in the near future? Here is the ageing population myth being debunked. Because if Europe did need to import people because of it, then Japan should try to import as many immigrants as well. They do not!
If you have only one ethnic group, one religion and one culture it is easy to manipulate the people using ethnic greatness bubble gums and populism. A diverse community supposedly has dialogue and new ideas are flowing around. The problem is that this is not happening. We lock the immigrants in a ghetto, they feel alienated and instead of caring for their host country they turn against it. Or perhaps we allow too many , more than a country can take or integrate, so that some firms can have cheap labor and people to exploit.
An illegal immigrant or an immigrant who can hardly get a decent job legally, will get any job under any conditions, something that a native would not do. And that is the point. Our ruling elites do not want multiculturalism to enhance our communities, rather to have always people to exploit; modern day slavery in a way.
So multiculturalism like anything else potentially good, fails in Europe; but we still refuse to talk about it. In result we have a rise in far right groups and people fall for them because they feel alienated in their own country, and are hoping for a change.
We need to find a solution, that will respect those immigrants who were born here and perhaps curve the flow for a while until we work things out. Otherwise many more incidents like that of Norway will happen, once we alienate not only the immigrant populations, but the natives too in their own countries. The man who did that in Norway possibly had a lot of anger in him.
Perhaps from his family background or other reasons. He obviously had chats with like minded people on the internet. It is a case of when the cult becomes reality for some. Imagine if others in other countries get inspired and act like him in Stockholm, Brussels, Paris, London...
That does not mean that the idea of multiculturalism is wrong. We simply messed it up big time and we need to rethink what we are doing. Having Christian fundamentalists in Europe? That's all we needed, as if we did not have enough of it in the past. Breivik's view on democracy, bombing his government's buildings because he did not agree with its policies, then killing youths on a gathering of the ruling socialist party,is absurd. And this coming from Norway? They are supposed to be a model society up there.
Migrants and EU citizens largely agree; language, employment, respect for the local culture and a clear legal status are the most important factors influencing integration, according an EU Commission research. I will add, dialogue. We should get rid off the taboos and hang ups, and let's have an open communication. I particularly like the clear legal status argument.
Illegal immigration is offering nothing to nobody apart the human traffickers and the ones who employ illegal immigrants to exploit them. The ruling elite must listen to the worries and opinions of the citizens. The European project can not work without their support.
Remember you can make someone give his/her consent about something or gain their support, only if you hear what they have to say and find a common ground. If you keep ignoring them, the issues won't go away; they will just be masked and come up to haunt you at some stage with a big bang! (aka Norway).
Thursday, July 21, 2011
This is how it works in Capitalism, isn't it?
When Ireland and Greece were stricken by the economic crisis, everyone tried to understand how both nations ended up in this mess. Especially in Ireland that they used to be one of the best examples and success stories of Europe. They needed answers, someone to take responsibility and perhaps someone to blame.
Hence their Governments told their citizens that everyone is to blame, everybody has responsibility for the mess their countries are into because they spent more than they could afford to repay. In Greece, Mr. Pagalos MP even dared to blame every each one of the public, for allegedly helping to waste all those billions of euro who went missing from EU subsidies.
So they promoted consumerism, capitalism, open free market and economic style. They encouraged their citizens to spend and keep buying to support their country's economy. They have encouraged them to accumulate debt, use credit cards and buy all those things they thought were important for their happiness.
Because that is how capitalism works and what it needs, on a personal, national and international level. They have bombarded them with advertisements everywhere, from their TV sets, radio and internet, to newspapers and the magazines. Programs selling property, cars and the good successful lifestyle modeled after the American dream and social style.
They encouraged them to invest in property at home or abroad, to upgrade and buy new cars, mobile phones, the latest gadgets. All movies and TV series supported and promoted this life style. For decades they brain washed them with TV programs that they could win loads of cash and be happy, or reality programs that they could become rich and famous.
In fact if you had different political views or life style, you were considered a hippy, an out-sider and an odd ball. Then, when Capitalism failed and its faults and weaknesses were exposed, not only it was the citizens that were called to pay up and bail out the Banks to save their countries' economies, but they were blamed as well for over spending and being greedy.
Suddenly they had the finger of the politicians pointing at them, while the rich and upper classes avoided the cuts and austerity measures. In the case of Greece, not only they were deprived of a true sustainable economy and equal opportunities like the other European citizens for decades, but they were consistently lied upon on the true condition of the country's economy.
The rich elite of Greece and many European nations, are making profit out of the deals that all our Governments are negotiating and promoting in order to solve the problem. Thus they profit on the cuts that the ordinary worker must accept.
So, if this is how Capitalism has evolved and what our relationship with the Markets and the Banks has come to, then perhaps we need to rethink what we want. Not only they owe us and are the ones to blame for the risks they took for the sake of the Capitalist system, but we pay for those risks and we are being told off as well.
Can Europeans rethink and change their life style, or is it already too late and they do get what they deserve in the end? How can we achieve real change, when Europe is still a very conservative continent and its citizens themselves support Capitalism? It is only when they come to deal its real side effects when they protest, let's face it.
Hence their Governments told their citizens that everyone is to blame, everybody has responsibility for the mess their countries are into because they spent more than they could afford to repay. In Greece, Mr. Pagalos MP even dared to blame every each one of the public, for allegedly helping to waste all those billions of euro who went missing from EU subsidies.
So they promoted consumerism, capitalism, open free market and economic style. They encouraged their citizens to spend and keep buying to support their country's economy. They have encouraged them to accumulate debt, use credit cards and buy all those things they thought were important for their happiness.
Because that is how capitalism works and what it needs, on a personal, national and international level. They have bombarded them with advertisements everywhere, from their TV sets, radio and internet, to newspapers and the magazines. Programs selling property, cars and the good successful lifestyle modeled after the American dream and social style.
They encouraged them to invest in property at home or abroad, to upgrade and buy new cars, mobile phones, the latest gadgets. All movies and TV series supported and promoted this life style. For decades they brain washed them with TV programs that they could win loads of cash and be happy, or reality programs that they could become rich and famous.
In fact if you had different political views or life style, you were considered a hippy, an out-sider and an odd ball. Then, when Capitalism failed and its faults and weaknesses were exposed, not only it was the citizens that were called to pay up and bail out the Banks to save their countries' economies, but they were blamed as well for over spending and being greedy.
Suddenly they had the finger of the politicians pointing at them, while the rich and upper classes avoided the cuts and austerity measures. In the case of Greece, not only they were deprived of a true sustainable economy and equal opportunities like the other European citizens for decades, but they were consistently lied upon on the true condition of the country's economy.
The rich elite of Greece and many European nations, are making profit out of the deals that all our Governments are negotiating and promoting in order to solve the problem. Thus they profit on the cuts that the ordinary worker must accept.
So, if this is how Capitalism has evolved and what our relationship with the Markets and the Banks has come to, then perhaps we need to rethink what we want. Not only they owe us and are the ones to blame for the risks they took for the sake of the Capitalist system, but we pay for those risks and we are being told off as well.
Can Europeans rethink and change their life style, or is it already too late and they do get what they deserve in the end? How can we achieve real change, when Europe is still a very conservative continent and its citizens themselves support Capitalism? It is only when they come to deal its real side effects when they protest, let's face it.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
My story as an EU citizen...
Growing in a typical working class family from Greece, I would have never thought that one day I would live where I am living right now. In our family we did not have many bold and adventurous individuals. But I got the "bug" while working in Greece's hotel industry and meeting people from all over the world.
I came in contact with youths from Germany and Austria and soon befriended them. We kept in touch for a while and suddenly I got an invitation from them to visit them at Christmas. I guess all things happen for a reason in life. I accepted their invitation and that resulted in having one of the best experiences a 20 year old can have: traveling alone in Europe!
It gave me the opportunity to see and experience new things, taste new food, meet new people, see new places and towns. Get to know a new way of life, discover new cultures, architecture and broaden my horizons. That was it; I was hooked!
Few years passed and it settled in. I knew what I wanted and needed to do. I needed to expand as a person, travel and explore more countries. Learn more about Europe, its history, its people and all its different cultures. And perhaps while doing this, find myself as well.
Fate once again played its role and in the right time a friend and colleague of mine told me about EURES. An E.U. funded project that helps young people to work abroad, learn a new language, gain professional experience or simply have fun. It was exactly what I needed, so I wasted no time and I applied for it.
The officers in the Greek unemployment center asked me about the languages I could speak, my working experience and my qualifications. Since I spoke English and German and I was a hotel employee, the told me that the only country in E.U. that back then needed hotel staff was Ireland. So Ireland "chose" me in a way. I translated my CV in English, they faxed it to the Irish Hotel Association and that was it. The next day I got a call from Ireland to attend to my first interview.
When I announced my decision to my friends and family, it seemed to me at first that they were doing anything to prevent me from leaving. Later I realized that they had simply no knowledge of how things have progressed in Europe. Since the times that the Greeks were migrating to work in the German fabriks, making money is not the only reason to migrate.
Studying, learning a new language, upgrading your working skills, expanding your professional portfolio, or simply becoming more competitive. Things that a lot of people in Greece were not familiar with a few years ago.
I also found out that people simply did not know how E.U. worked or even their rights as EU citizens. They asked me questions like: "are you going to lose your pension contributions if you leave Greece now? Will you be able to bring back you Irish contributions if you decide to move back? Do you have to inform the Police that you are leaving the State? Will you need a visa?What if you become unemployed in Ireland, how can you claim any benefits? Will you be eligible for health services?"
That forced me to research and learn more about things before I make the bold move, so when I arrived in Ireland I was fully informed about my rights. And I was more than happy to share my new found knowledge with others.
My life in Ireland went from good to better, and now I am a home owner and I have discovered eventually what I want to do with my life: travel and become a journalist. So after 7 years in the Emerald Island, I now study while working full time in the Public Sector. And I still share my enthusiasm with others about traveling, writing, Europe and the European project.
I came in contact with youths from Germany and Austria and soon befriended them. We kept in touch for a while and suddenly I got an invitation from them to visit them at Christmas. I guess all things happen for a reason in life. I accepted their invitation and that resulted in having one of the best experiences a 20 year old can have: traveling alone in Europe!
It gave me the opportunity to see and experience new things, taste new food, meet new people, see new places and towns. Get to know a new way of life, discover new cultures, architecture and broaden my horizons. That was it; I was hooked!
Few years passed and it settled in. I knew what I wanted and needed to do. I needed to expand as a person, travel and explore more countries. Learn more about Europe, its history, its people and all its different cultures. And perhaps while doing this, find myself as well.
Fate once again played its role and in the right time a friend and colleague of mine told me about EURES. An E.U. funded project that helps young people to work abroad, learn a new language, gain professional experience or simply have fun. It was exactly what I needed, so I wasted no time and I applied for it.
The officers in the Greek unemployment center asked me about the languages I could speak, my working experience and my qualifications. Since I spoke English and German and I was a hotel employee, the told me that the only country in E.U. that back then needed hotel staff was Ireland. So Ireland "chose" me in a way. I translated my CV in English, they faxed it to the Irish Hotel Association and that was it. The next day I got a call from Ireland to attend to my first interview.
When I announced my decision to my friends and family, it seemed to me at first that they were doing anything to prevent me from leaving. Later I realized that they had simply no knowledge of how things have progressed in Europe. Since the times that the Greeks were migrating to work in the German fabriks, making money is not the only reason to migrate.
Studying, learning a new language, upgrading your working skills, expanding your professional portfolio, or simply becoming more competitive. Things that a lot of people in Greece were not familiar with a few years ago.
I also found out that people simply did not know how E.U. worked or even their rights as EU citizens. They asked me questions like: "are you going to lose your pension contributions if you leave Greece now? Will you be able to bring back you Irish contributions if you decide to move back? Do you have to inform the Police that you are leaving the State? Will you need a visa?What if you become unemployed in Ireland, how can you claim any benefits? Will you be eligible for health services?"
That forced me to research and learn more about things before I make the bold move, so when I arrived in Ireland I was fully informed about my rights. And I was more than happy to share my new found knowledge with others.
My life in Ireland went from good to better, and now I am a home owner and I have discovered eventually what I want to do with my life: travel and become a journalist. So after 7 years in the Emerald Island, I now study while working full time in the Public Sector. And I still share my enthusiasm with others about traveling, writing, Europe and the European project.
Monday, July 18, 2011
What Ancient Greece and Modern Europe have in common?
The situation in modern Europe with a crisis threatening to destroy all the achievements the continent has achieved, reminds me of similar political dramas in the ancient times. Perhaps Europe borrowed more than democracy, philosophy and theater from Greece; it borrowed as well all the negative aspects of the Greek culture: Disunity!
Like the ancient Greeks were debating and pontificating of who is true Greek, or who is barbarian and they were in constant wars and struggles between them, the modern Europeans are doing exactly that! What it means to be European and who is a true one? An identity search indeed. Remember how many of the Athenians, who always boasted about their supremacy not only over barbarian nations but among all Greeks themselves, rejected the Macedonian dominance and their Greek unification attempt, by calling them barbarians and questioning their Greek roots.
The ancient Greeks were not one nation, one united ethnic group like we know Greece or most European states today. They were a group of Greek tribes much like the Celtic ones, never united. So similar but so different. Some of them have assimilated native pre-Greek populations as well (Crete) creating a unique ethnic group of Greek heritage and culture, but with elements of the previous inhabitants.
The Macedonians of course were Greeks of either Dorian or Aeolian or mixed stock. They spoke one of those two dialects or a hybrid between them, but as their kingdom expanded to other neighboring tribes like the Illyrians and the Thracians, they got many elements from them in their culture and language.
Most likely they were of mixed stock, with many Greek and later non Greek tribes making up their population. Prompting the Athenians and others who hated them and resisted their ever growing influence in the Greek world to call them barbarians and question their place and influence in it. A political position that even today is causing problems, since many scholars from FYROM and their supporters are using this as a proof of a different Macedonian ethnicity!
Nevertheless the Macedonians were accepted to participate in the Olympic games and as we know only men of Greek origins could do that. Perhaps the Athenians and other Greeks of the south resented the Macedonians so much because they wanted to take over the Greek world and unite them.
The Epirotans and Thessalians had so much in common with the Macedonians but they were never hated as much, perhaps because they never attempted to unite Greece and rule all the Greek nations. Enter the dark side of ancient Greek politics!
But look what the Greeks united have achieved. Without the legacy of Alexander the Great, the Greek culture, influence and power would not reach as far as India. And perhaps without the Hellenistic times that occurred as a result of Alexander's conquests, the Greek culture would not have had the same impact in the West either.
When the Romans conquered all the Hellenistic kingdoms and came in contact with their culture, they were conquered instead by the Greeks culturally, prompting to the creation of the Western and European civilization! Had the Greeks remained small city states divided and at war with each other, they would probably have wrecked their culture themselves and the Romans would not be as inspired.
And not only that, but the legacy of Alexander created concepts like multiculturalism, that we in Europe are inspired from and trying to achieve! He was the first that dreamed to create a community of nations, with the "white skinned" Greeks being equal with the "dark skinned" barbarian nations that he had conquered. Another reason that the snub Greeks hated him!
Sparta never became part of his empire even though they were defeated, they refused to participate with the rest of the Greeks in Alexander's vision. They remind me of states like Norway or Switzerland that refuse to be part of the European dream and remain stubbornly outside. Unlike Sparta though, they fare better. Sparta declined and never played any role in the Greek or international political scene during the Hellenistic or Roman era, and until today it is only a small provincial town in southern Greece.
Athens reminds me of Britain. They did become part of Alexander's vision but they were not comfortable with it. They always considered themselves better, their culture supreme and they never swallowed the fact that they fell under the Macedonian rule. They were not the ones who ruled or conquered as much as Alexander did. While their culture was indeed impressive and very advanced, they were never able to expand it to non Greek nations as they focused mainly in trading with them. A bit of snubs and delusional really.
After Alexander's death the Greeks went back to what they knew best! Divisions, civil wars, power struggles and intrigues between them. They fell under the rule of the Romans and Greece was never able to recover politically or culturally again. If Alexander had not died, perhaps he would conquer Europe, Arabia and North Africa as well. We can only imagine what the Greek culture and influence could achieve with that.
Europe's history is full of ancient Greek drama! So many wars, divisions, a continent devastated by two World wars, yet we still do not learn! We have already fell under the political control of other superpowers present and past, like USA and USSR during the cold war. We still are unable to unify and revive or even expand Europe's culture and influence in the World. We have yet to achieve our full potential and as things in the World are shifting and new emerging powers are making their mark, we are unable to put our differences behind and cooperate.
Europe you will say is not one nation or a country. But neither the Greeks were back then. I guess all we need is a modern Alexander in Europe, a leader with a vision and might to make our continent reach its full potential.
But as the Macedonians and Alexander were hated by the Athenians and Spartans back then, the current European powers will definitely oppose and loath any nation or politician who will take such initiative. No wonder it is so hard for someone to come up with a plan. Will Europe follow Greece's fate and a new World power come and put our continent out of political map of the future world?
It has happened in the past, after WW2. Europe was divided and a subject of the two major powers that emerged. Will we be spared again and get a second chance? Why must we always be divided into rich and poor, West and East and recently into Northern and South. For once I hope that Europe does not imitate Greece on this.
Like the ancient Greeks were debating and pontificating of who is true Greek, or who is barbarian and they were in constant wars and struggles between them, the modern Europeans are doing exactly that! What it means to be European and who is a true one? An identity search indeed. Remember how many of the Athenians, who always boasted about their supremacy not only over barbarian nations but among all Greeks themselves, rejected the Macedonian dominance and their Greek unification attempt, by calling them barbarians and questioning their Greek roots.
The ancient Greeks were not one nation, one united ethnic group like we know Greece or most European states today. They were a group of Greek tribes much like the Celtic ones, never united. So similar but so different. Some of them have assimilated native pre-Greek populations as well (Crete) creating a unique ethnic group of Greek heritage and culture, but with elements of the previous inhabitants.
The Macedonians of course were Greeks of either Dorian or Aeolian or mixed stock. They spoke one of those two dialects or a hybrid between them, but as their kingdom expanded to other neighboring tribes like the Illyrians and the Thracians, they got many elements from them in their culture and language.
Most likely they were of mixed stock, with many Greek and later non Greek tribes making up their population. Prompting the Athenians and others who hated them and resisted their ever growing influence in the Greek world to call them barbarians and question their place and influence in it. A political position that even today is causing problems, since many scholars from FYROM and their supporters are using this as a proof of a different Macedonian ethnicity!
Nevertheless the Macedonians were accepted to participate in the Olympic games and as we know only men of Greek origins could do that. Perhaps the Athenians and other Greeks of the south resented the Macedonians so much because they wanted to take over the Greek world and unite them.
The Epirotans and Thessalians had so much in common with the Macedonians but they were never hated as much, perhaps because they never attempted to unite Greece and rule all the Greek nations. Enter the dark side of ancient Greek politics!
But look what the Greeks united have achieved. Without the legacy of Alexander the Great, the Greek culture, influence and power would not reach as far as India. And perhaps without the Hellenistic times that occurred as a result of Alexander's conquests, the Greek culture would not have had the same impact in the West either.
When the Romans conquered all the Hellenistic kingdoms and came in contact with their culture, they were conquered instead by the Greeks culturally, prompting to the creation of the Western and European civilization! Had the Greeks remained small city states divided and at war with each other, they would probably have wrecked their culture themselves and the Romans would not be as inspired.
And not only that, but the legacy of Alexander created concepts like multiculturalism, that we in Europe are inspired from and trying to achieve! He was the first that dreamed to create a community of nations, with the "white skinned" Greeks being equal with the "dark skinned" barbarian nations that he had conquered. Another reason that the snub Greeks hated him!
Sparta never became part of his empire even though they were defeated, they refused to participate with the rest of the Greeks in Alexander's vision. They remind me of states like Norway or Switzerland that refuse to be part of the European dream and remain stubbornly outside. Unlike Sparta though, they fare better. Sparta declined and never played any role in the Greek or international political scene during the Hellenistic or Roman era, and until today it is only a small provincial town in southern Greece.
Athens reminds me of Britain. They did become part of Alexander's vision but they were not comfortable with it. They always considered themselves better, their culture supreme and they never swallowed the fact that they fell under the Macedonian rule. They were not the ones who ruled or conquered as much as Alexander did. While their culture was indeed impressive and very advanced, they were never able to expand it to non Greek nations as they focused mainly in trading with them. A bit of snubs and delusional really.
After Alexander's death the Greeks went back to what they knew best! Divisions, civil wars, power struggles and intrigues between them. They fell under the rule of the Romans and Greece was never able to recover politically or culturally again. If Alexander had not died, perhaps he would conquer Europe, Arabia and North Africa as well. We can only imagine what the Greek culture and influence could achieve with that.
Europe's history is full of ancient Greek drama! So many wars, divisions, a continent devastated by two World wars, yet we still do not learn! We have already fell under the political control of other superpowers present and past, like USA and USSR during the cold war. We still are unable to unify and revive or even expand Europe's culture and influence in the World. We have yet to achieve our full potential and as things in the World are shifting and new emerging powers are making their mark, we are unable to put our differences behind and cooperate.
Europe you will say is not one nation or a country. But neither the Greeks were back then. I guess all we need is a modern Alexander in Europe, a leader with a vision and might to make our continent reach its full potential.
But as the Macedonians and Alexander were hated by the Athenians and Spartans back then, the current European powers will definitely oppose and loath any nation or politician who will take such initiative. No wonder it is so hard for someone to come up with a plan. Will Europe follow Greece's fate and a new World power come and put our continent out of political map of the future world?
It has happened in the past, after WW2. Europe was divided and a subject of the two major powers that emerged. Will we be spared again and get a second chance? Why must we always be divided into rich and poor, West and East and recently into Northern and South. For once I hope that Europe does not imitate Greece on this.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Επιστολή στον Δήμαρχο Θεσσαλονίκης.
Αξιότιμε Κύριε Δήμαρχε,
Είμαι Έλληνας πολίτης και Θεσσαλονικιός, αλλά διαμένω μόνιμα στο Δουβλίνο της Ιρλανδίας!
Πρόσφατα ξαναεπισκέφθηκα την πόλη της καταγωγής μου με έναν φίλο απο Ιρλανδία! Με λαχτάρα τον γυρνούσα στην πόλη μας προσπαθωντας να του δείξω την πλούσια ιστορία μας που έχει αφήσει την πόλη μας διάσπαρτη απο μνημεία!
Επισκεφθήκαμε τα τείχη της πόλεως και περπατήσαμε μέχρι το Γεντί Κουλέ! Τα σχόλια του φίλου μου με έβαλαν σε σκέψη. Είπε θα ήταν πολυ όμορφα αν αξιοποιούνταν αυτο το κάστρο, αλλά έτσι όπως το έχουν αφήσει δεν λέει τίποτα!
Κύριε Δήμαρχε έχω επισκεφθεί πάρα πολλές χώρες της Ευρώπης και όχι μόνο της μεγάλες μητροπόλεις της Δυτικής Ηπείρου μας. Στην Μπρατισλάβα της Σλοβακίας και στην Λιουμπλιάνα της Σλοβενίας, δύο πρώην Σοβιετικές δημοκρατίες που μόλις πρόσφατα μπήκαν στην Ε.Ε. και αναπτύσονται, τα κάστρα από ερείπια έχουν μεταμορφωθεί με κονδύλια της Ε.Ε. σε τουριστικά κέντρα.
Έχουν αναστηλωθεί στην αρχική τους όμορφη αρχιτεκτονική, και έχουν ανοίξει εστιατόρια, καφέ-μπαρ και μαγαζιά με τουριστικά είδη και σουβενίρ! Φανταστείτε πόσο τουρισμό και χρήμα θα προσέλκυε το συγκεκριμένο κτίριο, ενώ εμείς το αφήνουμε και ρημάζει! Έχετε πεί οτι θέλετε τα προσελκύσετε τουρισμό απο Τουρκία και Ισραήλ, ε ας έχουμε και κάτι να τους εντυπωσιάσουμε κιόλας!
Έχετε ταξιδέψει σε αλλες Ευρωπα'ι'κές πόλεις του ενός εκατομμυρίου σε πληθυσμό? Η πόλη μας δεν είναι μια επαρχιακή πόλη, είναι μία από τις πλουσιότερες σε σημαντικότητα και ιστορία πόλη στην Ευρώπη, αλλά και τον Κόσμο, και εμείς αφήνουμε τα Κάστρα να χορτιαριάζουν Κύριε Δήμαρχε?
Ακόμα το Δάσος του Σε'ι'χ-Σου θα μπορούσε να αξιοποιηθεί, να χτιστούν μνημεία, εστιατόρια και μαγαζιά, να διακοσμηθεί με δέντρα, άνθη, συντριβάνια και αγάλματα, ώστε να γίνει ένας χώρος αναψυχής και για τους κατοίκους της πόλης μας αλλά και για τους τουρίστες που τόσο θέλετε να προσελκύσετε! Έχετε έρθει στο Φοίνιξ Πάρκο του Δουβλίνου Κύριε Δήμαρχε? Μέχρι και ελάφια βόσκουν ελεύθερα στα πάρκα του!
Τί να έρθει να δει ο τουρίστας μόνο τον Πύργο τον Λευκό και την παραλία μας? Δεν έχουμε πάρκα, δεν έχουμε πράσινο στην πόλη, την έχουμε μπουκώσει με μπετόν! Τουλάχιστο ας αξιοποιήσουμε αυτά τα πάρκα που έχουμε, και ας αναδείξουμε τα μνημεία που μας έχουν απομείνει! Ίσα με τους Σλοβάκους και τους Σλοβένους δεν είμαστε?
Τί λέτε?
Μετά τιμής,
The Eblana European Democratic Movement
Είμαι Έλληνας πολίτης και Θεσσαλονικιός, αλλά διαμένω μόνιμα στο Δουβλίνο της Ιρλανδίας!
Πρόσφατα ξαναεπισκέφθηκα την πόλη της καταγωγής μου με έναν φίλο απο Ιρλανδία! Με λαχτάρα τον γυρνούσα στην πόλη μας προσπαθωντας να του δείξω την πλούσια ιστορία μας που έχει αφήσει την πόλη μας διάσπαρτη απο μνημεία!
Επισκεφθήκαμε τα τείχη της πόλεως και περπατήσαμε μέχρι το Γεντί Κουλέ! Τα σχόλια του φίλου μου με έβαλαν σε σκέψη. Είπε θα ήταν πολυ όμορφα αν αξιοποιούνταν αυτο το κάστρο, αλλά έτσι όπως το έχουν αφήσει δεν λέει τίποτα!
Κύριε Δήμαρχε έχω επισκεφθεί πάρα πολλές χώρες της Ευρώπης και όχι μόνο της μεγάλες μητροπόλεις της Δυτικής Ηπείρου μας. Στην Μπρατισλάβα της Σλοβακίας και στην Λιουμπλιάνα της Σλοβενίας, δύο πρώην Σοβιετικές δημοκρατίες που μόλις πρόσφατα μπήκαν στην Ε.Ε. και αναπτύσονται, τα κάστρα από ερείπια έχουν μεταμορφωθεί με κονδύλια της Ε.Ε. σε τουριστικά κέντρα.
Έχουν αναστηλωθεί στην αρχική τους όμορφη αρχιτεκτονική, και έχουν ανοίξει εστιατόρια, καφέ-μπαρ και μαγαζιά με τουριστικά είδη και σουβενίρ! Φανταστείτε πόσο τουρισμό και χρήμα θα προσέλκυε το συγκεκριμένο κτίριο, ενώ εμείς το αφήνουμε και ρημάζει! Έχετε πεί οτι θέλετε τα προσελκύσετε τουρισμό απο Τουρκία και Ισραήλ, ε ας έχουμε και κάτι να τους εντυπωσιάσουμε κιόλας!
Έχετε ταξιδέψει σε αλλες Ευρωπα'ι'κές πόλεις του ενός εκατομμυρίου σε πληθυσμό? Η πόλη μας δεν είναι μια επαρχιακή πόλη, είναι μία από τις πλουσιότερες σε σημαντικότητα και ιστορία πόλη στην Ευρώπη, αλλά και τον Κόσμο, και εμείς αφήνουμε τα Κάστρα να χορτιαριάζουν Κύριε Δήμαρχε?
Ακόμα το Δάσος του Σε'ι'χ-Σου θα μπορούσε να αξιοποιηθεί, να χτιστούν μνημεία, εστιατόρια και μαγαζιά, να διακοσμηθεί με δέντρα, άνθη, συντριβάνια και αγάλματα, ώστε να γίνει ένας χώρος αναψυχής και για τους κατοίκους της πόλης μας αλλά και για τους τουρίστες που τόσο θέλετε να προσελκύσετε! Έχετε έρθει στο Φοίνιξ Πάρκο του Δουβλίνου Κύριε Δήμαρχε? Μέχρι και ελάφια βόσκουν ελεύθερα στα πάρκα του!
Τί να έρθει να δει ο τουρίστας μόνο τον Πύργο τον Λευκό και την παραλία μας? Δεν έχουμε πάρκα, δεν έχουμε πράσινο στην πόλη, την έχουμε μπουκώσει με μπετόν! Τουλάχιστο ας αξιοποιήσουμε αυτά τα πάρκα που έχουμε, και ας αναδείξουμε τα μνημεία που μας έχουν απομείνει! Ίσα με τους Σλοβάκους και τους Σλοβένους δεν είμαστε?
Τί λέτε?
Μετά τιμής,
The Eblana European Democratic Movement
Saturday, July 9, 2011
The Unholy Alliance.
Recently a flotilla that was aiming to reach Palestine packed with aid, was stopped by the Greek authorities. There is a general ban and condemnation of such flotillas by the UN, EU, USA and Russia since last year's tragic death of the Turkish activists on a similar boat, trying to break Israel's embargo and supply with aid to the Palestine territories.
Have we reached the point of forbidding aid to people in need, just because they are on the other side of an argument? The Palestinians suffer for so many decades now, with the shameful tolerance and approval of the West, just because our desire to support the state of Israel.
It is undeniable that the Arab nations must accept that the Israeli state will continue to exist and stop any attack or provocation. But that does not entitle Israel to ignore all agreements and human rights and continuously expand the occupied territory, with the threat of a terror attack as an excuse.
They prevent giving aid to people deprived not only of our standards of living but if we think about it, living in a huge concentration camp. I wonder if the ancestors of the modern Israelis, would approve the existence of their so much desired state on the misery of other people?
The fact that the Jews were so badly treated in the past by many European states, does not justify their behavior towards the Palestinians today. A nation can show virtue in their culture by not treating others as others have treated them.
The need for Israel to exist is supported by Europe, America and most of the World. They will never win over the Arabs with new occupied lands and blockades of the Gaza strip. They won't find peace while continuously expanding their settlements in Palestine.
If they feel threatened by the Arabs, they have America's and Europe's support. There is no need to use their power and influence in the American lobbies to continue the bullying and the impoverishment of over a million people.
The aid is a sign that people outside the region of Middle East are empathizing with the Palestinians on a humanitarian level, not a sign of antisemitism. And what is Israel telling them? The Israelis think that they can use their powerful allies and manipulate the European public opinion and our leaders continue their tolerance of Israel's blockade.
Other nations suffered deaths by their millions, torture, abuse, and genocides over the recent history of Europe. The Greeks that suffered huge loses during the Balkan wars, the Asia Minor disaster and the two World Wars. The Armenians were massacred by the Ottomans, the Ukrainians by the Soviets and the Polish by the Nazis in WW2.
If any of the above nations committed the actions that Israel is committing on any other ethnic group, I am sure that America and the European elites would be condemning them and put pressure or sanctions against them. The example of Serbia leaves no doubts.
Israel on the other hand not only enjoys their support, but they can virtually do whatever they want and even America itself can not control them. Many times they were criticized by a number of American Presidents, notably President Obama, about the new settlements but nothing really changed.
They withdrew from one place only to start establishing their settlements elsewhere. So the Palestinians are remaining poor and the poorer they remain, the more angry and fanatical will become against the Israeli occupation.
When people from other countries want to offer some relief to the Palestinians, not as support of their political beliefs and actions rather as purely humanitarian assistance, Israel comes and acts in such barbaric demeanor. A number of Turkish activists were killed last year yet they continue to insist they are on the right side.
They continue to insist that those flotillas are a threat to them and their national security. Those flotillas do not support the Palestinians, their leaders and the crimes they commit towards Israel, rather offer relief to people that are being caught in the line of fire.
The West has created the Jewish state after centuries of antisemitism in Europe,so its existence is our responsibility too. But we also have responsibility towards the Palestinians, or any ethnic group that lost out so we can settle our problems. In the way we are allowing Israel to take advantage of our support, we are not helping.
Things would be very easy if politicians would not play their games. The problem should have been solved ages ago, if all sides would tick to the original agreement. One side should stop the expansion of the settlements, the other must accept the right of the Israelis to have a country. This generation of Israelis is born and raised there, that is their only home they know. There is no way to move 7 million people anywhere else.
The land belongs to both populations, it is wrong for either of them to claim it as their own. The Palestinians have been living there for centuries, they are natives to these lands. The Israelis were given the right of creating their state, by the United Nations General Assembly. Perhaps instead of partitioning the solution would be uniting the territories and the peoples of the region, which form a multicultural society.
We should examine as a possible solution, the creation of a federal state. Israel sharing power and wealth with the native Palestinians and it could be a win win situation. The Israelis get their peaceful state and the Arabs will be free to have some of their lands back, wealth and prosperity. But this time it is the Israelis that reject it.
Have we reached the point of forbidding aid to people in need, just because they are on the other side of an argument? The Palestinians suffer for so many decades now, with the shameful tolerance and approval of the West, just because our desire to support the state of Israel.
It is undeniable that the Arab nations must accept that the Israeli state will continue to exist and stop any attack or provocation. But that does not entitle Israel to ignore all agreements and human rights and continuously expand the occupied territory, with the threat of a terror attack as an excuse.
They prevent giving aid to people deprived not only of our standards of living but if we think about it, living in a huge concentration camp. I wonder if the ancestors of the modern Israelis, would approve the existence of their so much desired state on the misery of other people?
The fact that the Jews were so badly treated in the past by many European states, does not justify their behavior towards the Palestinians today. A nation can show virtue in their culture by not treating others as others have treated them.
The need for Israel to exist is supported by Europe, America and most of the World. They will never win over the Arabs with new occupied lands and blockades of the Gaza strip. They won't find peace while continuously expanding their settlements in Palestine.
If they feel threatened by the Arabs, they have America's and Europe's support. There is no need to use their power and influence in the American lobbies to continue the bullying and the impoverishment of over a million people.
The aid is a sign that people outside the region of Middle East are empathizing with the Palestinians on a humanitarian level, not a sign of antisemitism. And what is Israel telling them? The Israelis think that they can use their powerful allies and manipulate the European public opinion and our leaders continue their tolerance of Israel's blockade.
Other nations suffered deaths by their millions, torture, abuse, and genocides over the recent history of Europe. The Greeks that suffered huge loses during the Balkan wars, the Asia Minor disaster and the two World Wars. The Armenians were massacred by the Ottomans, the Ukrainians by the Soviets and the Polish by the Nazis in WW2.
If any of the above nations committed the actions that Israel is committing on any other ethnic group, I am sure that America and the European elites would be condemning them and put pressure or sanctions against them. The example of Serbia leaves no doubts.
Israel on the other hand not only enjoys their support, but they can virtually do whatever they want and even America itself can not control them. Many times they were criticized by a number of American Presidents, notably President Obama, about the new settlements but nothing really changed.
They withdrew from one place only to start establishing their settlements elsewhere. So the Palestinians are remaining poor and the poorer they remain, the more angry and fanatical will become against the Israeli occupation.
When people from other countries want to offer some relief to the Palestinians, not as support of their political beliefs and actions rather as purely humanitarian assistance, Israel comes and acts in such barbaric demeanor. A number of Turkish activists were killed last year yet they continue to insist they are on the right side.
They continue to insist that those flotillas are a threat to them and their national security. Those flotillas do not support the Palestinians, their leaders and the crimes they commit towards Israel, rather offer relief to people that are being caught in the line of fire.
The West has created the Jewish state after centuries of antisemitism in Europe,so its existence is our responsibility too. But we also have responsibility towards the Palestinians, or any ethnic group that lost out so we can settle our problems. In the way we are allowing Israel to take advantage of our support, we are not helping.
Things would be very easy if politicians would not play their games. The problem should have been solved ages ago, if all sides would tick to the original agreement. One side should stop the expansion of the settlements, the other must accept the right of the Israelis to have a country. This generation of Israelis is born and raised there, that is their only home they know. There is no way to move 7 million people anywhere else.
The land belongs to both populations, it is wrong for either of them to claim it as their own. The Palestinians have been living there for centuries, they are natives to these lands. The Israelis were given the right of creating their state, by the United Nations General Assembly. Perhaps instead of partitioning the solution would be uniting the territories and the peoples of the region, which form a multicultural society.
We should examine as a possible solution, the creation of a federal state. Israel sharing power and wealth with the native Palestinians and it could be a win win situation. The Israelis get their peaceful state and the Arabs will be free to have some of their lands back, wealth and prosperity. But this time it is the Israelis that reject it.
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Greece for sale.
While the European media are focusing on what must Greece do to fix its economy and save the euro-zone from collapsing, on the faults of the Greek economy and how to avoid bankruptcy, I wonder how many people care of what impact will all these have to an ordinary household in the country.
There are some widespread feelings between the Greeks right now like fear, anger, disappointment and frustration. But the economists care only about the measures that the Greek Government must take, to save the European economy from collapsing.
As we speak salaries in Greece are slashed for up to 40% and bonuses are cut. Employers are paying their workers when they have money and only as much as they can give them at the time. There are no jobs, the social stability and coherence are disintegrating, people are committing suicide because they are unable to pay their debts. Employees are forced to work unpaid overtime, every worker's right that has been won over the decades is more and more irrelevant.
The youth is emigrating, leaving the country poorer in workforce and their knowledge. Nobody spends, travels, invests or make any plans for the future as they do not know what tomorrow brings. Some of you might think that it is time for the Greeks to pay up for their irresponsible spending and finances of over all those years.
As if the rest of Europe did not live on credit and borrowing. Nobody realizes that all countries in Europe are in a bad shape, Greece is only used as a scapegoat and asked to pay up to secure the other European states' bank shares and bonds.
European countries are using the Greek crisis to cover up their own economic problems. Greece is just unlucky to be small and insignificant enough to be bullied into conformation. The Greeks are far from lazy or lame. They were building the German economy with hard work in their factories and every Greek that has migrated in other parts of the World has progressed and prospered.
European leaders knew, as Luxembourg's PM Mr. Juncker admitted, that the Greek economy was in bad shape, so why did they allow it to collapse? It would be better to support and help it reform earlier, saving Europe from the crisis, plus the spending of billions of euros. Could it be that they wanted Greece to go bankrupt so that they can transform its economy and benefit from the sale out that would follow?
The crisis started during the late '80s and early '90s, mainly under the Mr Simitis and PASOK Government. Many in Greece now realize that the reforms that this particular Government made, lead to the inevitable current situation. Large Greek companies were sold off, and others were allowed to relocate elsewhere.
Since the introduction of the euro, Greece was also forced to keep a large expenditure to keep up with a strong economy such as Germany. And by doing so it helped Germany's economy itself, because it was German goods that the Greeks were consuming, such as cars.
The Greek state started borrowing a lot in order to keep up with the expenses and the payments of the public sector, but the Greek Governments since that time kept it hidden from the public and encouraged the capitalist system: excess borrowing and sustaining the economy with credit from the Markets.
Today they blame the public for doing the same, while it was the country's leaders that encouraged this economic style. They are supposed to work for the betterment and progress of the nation and ideally lead the people by their example.
Scientists in the University of Joannina in Northern Greece, found that the region of Epirus and Macedonia are rich in uranium and submitted their research to the then Greek Government, but nothing was done about it. A former MP Mr Papoutsis was in the opening of the uranium mines in Epanomi village in the Thessaloniki county, the plan that was suddenly stopped as it started.
People in the Greek islands, notably Crete regularly are witnessing evidence for the existence of gas and oil in the region, but still no action has been taken to exploit this potential source of revenue. Our Government either denies the existence of oil in Greek territory, or blames our rocky relationship with Turkey for our inability to exploit our oil reserves in the Aegean.
Now it is the Norwegians who want to exploit our oil reserves, just as the Canadians will do with our gold in the northern region of Macedonia. This is a typical example of European vulture culture: bring a country to its knees and then rush in for the kill.
Many European countries demand to get a hold on to Greece's national assets. From islands and national companies, to the Acropolis itself. Although we help the rich Northern European countries become richer, by selling our goods to them with no tax as the common market requires.
Western capitalist media and economists of course put the blame on Greece's unions for the dysfunctional public sector and companies. They claim they are too strong that hinder any progress and development. True, Greece has a very large and powerful public sector but what else can the Greeks do, since there are no factories, no productivity or development and the only sector that anybody can have a secure career is the public one.
If Greece was allowed to produce and exploit its natural resources, there would be more jobs and a variety of careers for the young Greeks to follow. These facts led to a super-sized public sector and because all political parties were using the promise of a job in the sector as a carrot for votes and support, the situation was going nowhere.
Greece is forced to take one bail out package after another, condemning its future generations to pay up for these bail outs for decades to come. Some analysts say that it will take Greece until the year 2060 to pay off its debts. Three generations of Greeks will pay to save not just their economy, but the European and American economies and the euro-zone too.
A friend of mine is working as public servant, in the revenue offices. Her salary was 1800 € before the bail outs and it is already cut down to 1400 €. It is expected with the new Government austerity measures to go down even further and settle at around 1100 € with the new public sector harmonized salaries.
That is a 700 € deduction, while there more and more taxes put on the Greek households and the taxes on all basic goods will go up from 11% to 23%. How would a Swede, a German, a Brit or a Austrian respond to such cull of their incomes?
The Greeks are expected to grin and bare it and to force them to accept the new measures, they slander a whole nation as lazy and corrupt, to justify the brutal enslavement and sell out of their country. Because Greece looks indeed more like an enslaved nation than a developed European country, a member of EU and NATO.
While many analysts claim that austerity is wrong for Greece, that we need to keep producing, allow people to spend thus putting money in our market, export and reform our economy while we heal it, Mr. Papandreou and his Government think otherwise. No doubt they listen their foreign advisers that demanded Greece to take two bail out packages.
What is the point of having a Parliament even when it does not serve its people? A Greek MP from Thessaloniki Mr. Rompopoulos, admitted on national television that three days before the vote in the Greek Parliament on the second bail out package, he had not yet read what he was voting for. He was encouraged and threatened by the leader of his party Mr. Papandreou and his advisors to vote YES because the country would not have the money to pay its bills and the salaries of the people.
Greece's Parliamentarians had the nerve not to take any cuts themselves while they were voting for such brutal austerity measures for the people they are supposed to serve. Mr. Papandreou hired more advisers and Parliament staff, while all around the country people are losing their jobs.
The rich are not asked to pay or bare the same austerity measures and even the Greek Orthodox Church once again avoids taxation. If the Church sold of half its property that it holds in Greece, the country's debt would be paid.
Our partners in the other European nations are happy to make business with the corrupt Greeks, seemingly are only doing so because they avoid taxation too. The German company that built and exploits the new Athens "Venizelos" airport, has not paid its taxes it was meant to pay to the state since the building of the airport and they owe the Greek state about 1 billion euros in taxes.
We need a political reboot in Europe, the European citizens need to take the situation and our continent in our hands united to achieve justice. But with the comfortable and well off northern Europeans being so ignorant of how their wealth is being supported by the misery of other nations, how much hope should I have?
Our media keep bombarding us with the Arab revolution, while they totally ignore or alter what is happening in Spain and Greece. Remember that what goes around comes around. Greece maybe facing difficulties today, tomorrow it might be your country's turn.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Women in Europe.
I have been reading a lot about gender equality lately, and two particular cases got my attention; the European Women's Lobby for Democracy 50/50 (www.5050campaign.wordpress.com) and of course the criminalization in Sweden of men purchasing sex services from prostitutes. In general the overall effort to ban prostitution completely.
I absolutely support and agree with the 50/50 European Women's Lobby effort. I think it is about time women saw their role in the society we live in as a more active and influential, rather than a passive one.
Women have been manipulated and silenced for centuries, and their role was seen only as a mother and a home keeper. This role was enforced on them funny enough by religion; both Christianity and Islam inherited the rather conservative southern Greco-Roman mentality on the role of women in a society.
While other European tribes and pagan religions treated more equally males and females (perhaps because of the harsh climate and living conditions in places like central and northern Europe- everybody was relying on everybody), the Mediterranean cultures were predominantly male dominated with few exceptions of some priestesses and queens.
Free thinking women were hunted down by the Church as witches. Women were blocked from any education, inheritance, political and social rights and this situation lasted until only a few decades ago. Their struggle is still on in most parts of the World. But only now we see a movement not only to allow women the right to vote, but to also have an opinion and be active in the political life of a nation. I applaud.
In the pagan traditions perfection and balance are achieved by the unity of the male and female, either in the physical or the mental and emotional nature of human beings, either between them or within them. So perhaps if we want to have a balanced society we will have to allow women to have an equal voice with men in politics.
But that does not mean that we have to do what many so called feminists believe we should ; take power from men. Because simply then we have the same situation but reversed. In fact I think modern women suffer from what all previous suppressed communities suffer from, like the gay and black people; a loss of direction in their struggle for total equality.
Just like the gay people who after so many decades of discrimination and suppression now feel that being gay is to be "out and proud." That they should follow the role models that our media and society are portraying of gay people; behave in a certain way, listen to certain type of music, like certain type of things and have a certain type of lifestyle.
When we look back at history and we see some of the greatest writers, composers, poets, painters, dancers, athletes, thinkers and artists being homosexuals, do we really think that being gay is to listen to Madonna, wear pink and parade your sexuality once a year in the city center? Vengeance towards the former oppressors does not better your situation in a society; freedom, equality and respect is.
I realize that young people need role models, someone to look up to and to be inspired from, so young girls and gay or black youths look at popular stereotypes that the media promote. What if we show the life of Tchaikovsky (a homosexual and one of the greatest composers) instead of certain TV presenters as a gay role model, Marie Curie (a woman scientist) instead of any glamor model in reality TV as a role model for young girls?
Women have a lot to offer but first they need to change themselves. Feminism is not trying to make men do women jobs! It is rather women prove that they can do men jobs as well as them. In fact not even that! It is to show to women themselves that they can be as good and as useful as men in a society. Empower them.
I was working in a hotel as a receptionist once, and most of my colleagues were female. While they expected me to do "women tasks" like decorating, hoovering, dusting the reception and washing the cups we were using, when one had to go up in a room and check what was wrong with the electrics or the plumbing, it was always me who had to go.
As if because I was born a man, I was given with my birth certificate an electrician's and a plumber's diploma! I wonder what the women during WW2 would think of them. They had to do men jobs in industries since all men where fighting in battles all over Europe. It is the women in most cases who raise their kids with this stereotype of the girls staying with mama and do what she does, while boys follow their dads in their activities. And that is true for most modern families in most countries.
So how do women expect that they deserve full equality, when it is themselves that need to re-examine their role in a society and become active? I would love to see more women in any national Parliament or indeed the European Parliament, but then again when I talk with most women about politics they are rather indifferent.
No my ladies politics are not like foot-ball! They affect you directly! Also, most women that already are in politics or other male dominated professions think that they must behave like their male counterparts to succeed. They become equally aggressive and competitive. Perhaps they are right; but then what is the point of having a woman who behaves like a man in politics? What we need is more femininity in our politics, more creativity, less aggression, more nurturing and care for the people!
The other thing that strikes me is that there is a movement especially in Northern Europe to ban prostitution. That is a noble pursue but they seem to be interested only in the poorer and deprived street prostitutes. What about the professional escorts of the rich class? They claim that women are forced into this shameful act by the brutality and abuse of men, often by a family member and it is degrading to women.
Well if you see it this way of course it is! But if you take into consideration that prostitution always existed (it is called often the most ancient profession on Earth) and it is not only a female activity but there are a lot of male prostitutes (gigolos) offering their "services" to rich women (and men) then why no one is trying to protect them?
Why do they think that being immoral is only a male trait? That girls who end up in prostitution are always victims of male brutality and abuse, and they are emotional unstable. What about the so many young men who were equally abused when they were young either by their mother or father and they have developed a disturbed sexuality that can be only satisfied by a prostitute? Because no woman will tolerate such sex acts in a formal sexual relationship!
Aren't there women that become prostitutes by choice or "immoral" women at all, that do this profession out of pleasure or the need of money? Then why in a move in South Korea to ban prostitution recently it was the prostitutes who protested against such laws? Perhaps it is time to stop seeing prostitution as something immoral and shameful?
How many young men first had sex with a prostitute? How many emotional unstable young men found refuge in a "relationship" with a prostitute? How many physically unattractive men are forced to have sex with prostitutes simply because few women will chose to be their lovers? How many men in a sex deprived marriage (either because of illness of their wife or simply a marriage that is held together because of the children, property, family or other "obligations") are finding sexual pleasure with a prostitute? Why do we care more about "unstable" and "abused" women in our societies than the equally unstable and abused men?
Isn't it a fact that the majority of homeless young people are young men? Simply because our social welfare services give priority to single mothers, families and older people while they think that a young man should be able to fend for himself. While it is acceptable for a young woman to have a child and rely on a man for their welfare.
The opposite is just laughable! So you see the problem are the different stereotypes that we ourselves have put there for the two genders and other minorities. If the women want men to understand them and respect them, they should do the same for them too. Men possibly need sex more than women, or it is simply another taboo that a strong and a successful man is the one with many women or with a very active sex life.
Or perhaps as some women with emotional issues end up in prostitution as they claim in Sweden, the same goes for men that seek perverted and kinky sex and only with prostitutes. Perhaps maybe they lack the confidence to find a real female lover? Human sexuality is not just black and white. It has all shades of grey and we should not dismiss anything.
In Sweden they claim that their new laws are highly successful and prostitution fell dramatically when compared with other Scandinavian countries. In fact in Finland are thinking of introducing similar laws. Prosecute the men that pay for sex, while prostitution remains legal and prostitutes are not convicted. I wonder if they take in consideration the rape rates and other violence in formal heterosexual relationships.
As many of the Sweden's prostitutes have admitted, the "decent" customers now stay away and they have to deal with the "rougher" perverted ones and often they are forced to have sex without condoms. Thus there is a rise in HIV cases among them. The girls sadly need to take those "customers" because they need the money. Most of them are drug addicts so perhaps that is the real problem.
Another more realistic root to the problem of prostitution is poverty, inequality and illegal immigration. I can not accept that a girl that is trafficked illegally from a poor country by a man that she barely knows, thinks that he has her best interests in his consideration. Desperation, poverty and perhaps problems at home, drive those girls to choose a risky path in knowledge that they may have to get sexually involved with the man who promised them a better future, or work somewhere like in a bar.
Only to find themselves in a vicious underworld. It is not just girls that are victims: how about young boys, drug addicts that become dealers to earn money for their next dose exactly as many female addicts end up in prostitution. Don't they get violently physically abused, beaten up or even killed? The problem is not male violence against women here. It is drug and poverty related. End up poverty and you solve many problems!
Prostitution should be legalized and regulated by the state and police and doctors appointed by the state. I do not think it will ever go away unless we end poverty in the world and change our point of view on human sexuality, sexual relationships and marriage! But I do not see this happening anytime soon. If you ban it or impose sanctions on the individuals involved, it will simply go underground and who will control it?
What annoys me is that the so called "high-class" escorts that most certainly do this profession by choice and for the financial benefits that it brings sleeping with the rich and powerful of this world, are not mentioned in the Swedish "research".
The role of the migrant women in Europe, especially those coming from a Islamic background must also be discussed! They must be equal to all other women in the continent, and their rights secured. But with such strong Islamic influence and male dominated culture how do they feel about their position in our societies? Being a modern European woman does not mean that you have to bear all. But certainly not hide yourself behind a veil or be submissive to your husband's, father's or brother's will. It will be very interested to see how they will position themselves in a modern European society n the future.
I absolutely support and agree with the 50/50 European Women's Lobby effort. I think it is about time women saw their role in the society we live in as a more active and influential, rather than a passive one.
Women have been manipulated and silenced for centuries, and their role was seen only as a mother and a home keeper. This role was enforced on them funny enough by religion; both Christianity and Islam inherited the rather conservative southern Greco-Roman mentality on the role of women in a society.
While other European tribes and pagan religions treated more equally males and females (perhaps because of the harsh climate and living conditions in places like central and northern Europe- everybody was relying on everybody), the Mediterranean cultures were predominantly male dominated with few exceptions of some priestesses and queens.
Free thinking women were hunted down by the Church as witches. Women were blocked from any education, inheritance, political and social rights and this situation lasted until only a few decades ago. Their struggle is still on in most parts of the World. But only now we see a movement not only to allow women the right to vote, but to also have an opinion and be active in the political life of a nation. I applaud.
In the pagan traditions perfection and balance are achieved by the unity of the male and female, either in the physical or the mental and emotional nature of human beings, either between them or within them. So perhaps if we want to have a balanced society we will have to allow women to have an equal voice with men in politics.
But that does not mean that we have to do what many so called feminists believe we should ; take power from men. Because simply then we have the same situation but reversed. In fact I think modern women suffer from what all previous suppressed communities suffer from, like the gay and black people; a loss of direction in their struggle for total equality.
Just like the gay people who after so many decades of discrimination and suppression now feel that being gay is to be "out and proud." That they should follow the role models that our media and society are portraying of gay people; behave in a certain way, listen to certain type of music, like certain type of things and have a certain type of lifestyle.
When we look back at history and we see some of the greatest writers, composers, poets, painters, dancers, athletes, thinkers and artists being homosexuals, do we really think that being gay is to listen to Madonna, wear pink and parade your sexuality once a year in the city center? Vengeance towards the former oppressors does not better your situation in a society; freedom, equality and respect is.
I realize that young people need role models, someone to look up to and to be inspired from, so young girls and gay or black youths look at popular stereotypes that the media promote. What if we show the life of Tchaikovsky (a homosexual and one of the greatest composers) instead of certain TV presenters as a gay role model, Marie Curie (a woman scientist) instead of any glamor model in reality TV as a role model for young girls?
Women have a lot to offer but first they need to change themselves. Feminism is not trying to make men do women jobs! It is rather women prove that they can do men jobs as well as them. In fact not even that! It is to show to women themselves that they can be as good and as useful as men in a society. Empower them.
I was working in a hotel as a receptionist once, and most of my colleagues were female. While they expected me to do "women tasks" like decorating, hoovering, dusting the reception and washing the cups we were using, when one had to go up in a room and check what was wrong with the electrics or the plumbing, it was always me who had to go.
As if because I was born a man, I was given with my birth certificate an electrician's and a plumber's diploma! I wonder what the women during WW2 would think of them. They had to do men jobs in industries since all men where fighting in battles all over Europe. It is the women in most cases who raise their kids with this stereotype of the girls staying with mama and do what she does, while boys follow their dads in their activities. And that is true for most modern families in most countries.
So how do women expect that they deserve full equality, when it is themselves that need to re-examine their role in a society and become active? I would love to see more women in any national Parliament or indeed the European Parliament, but then again when I talk with most women about politics they are rather indifferent.
No my ladies politics are not like foot-ball! They affect you directly! Also, most women that already are in politics or other male dominated professions think that they must behave like their male counterparts to succeed. They become equally aggressive and competitive. Perhaps they are right; but then what is the point of having a woman who behaves like a man in politics? What we need is more femininity in our politics, more creativity, less aggression, more nurturing and care for the people!
The other thing that strikes me is that there is a movement especially in Northern Europe to ban prostitution. That is a noble pursue but they seem to be interested only in the poorer and deprived street prostitutes. What about the professional escorts of the rich class? They claim that women are forced into this shameful act by the brutality and abuse of men, often by a family member and it is degrading to women.
Well if you see it this way of course it is! But if you take into consideration that prostitution always existed (it is called often the most ancient profession on Earth) and it is not only a female activity but there are a lot of male prostitutes (gigolos) offering their "services" to rich women (and men) then why no one is trying to protect them?
Why do they think that being immoral is only a male trait? That girls who end up in prostitution are always victims of male brutality and abuse, and they are emotional unstable. What about the so many young men who were equally abused when they were young either by their mother or father and they have developed a disturbed sexuality that can be only satisfied by a prostitute? Because no woman will tolerate such sex acts in a formal sexual relationship!
Aren't there women that become prostitutes by choice or "immoral" women at all, that do this profession out of pleasure or the need of money? Then why in a move in South Korea to ban prostitution recently it was the prostitutes who protested against such laws? Perhaps it is time to stop seeing prostitution as something immoral and shameful?
How many young men first had sex with a prostitute? How many emotional unstable young men found refuge in a "relationship" with a prostitute? How many physically unattractive men are forced to have sex with prostitutes simply because few women will chose to be their lovers? How many men in a sex deprived marriage (either because of illness of their wife or simply a marriage that is held together because of the children, property, family or other "obligations") are finding sexual pleasure with a prostitute? Why do we care more about "unstable" and "abused" women in our societies than the equally unstable and abused men?
Isn't it a fact that the majority of homeless young people are young men? Simply because our social welfare services give priority to single mothers, families and older people while they think that a young man should be able to fend for himself. While it is acceptable for a young woman to have a child and rely on a man for their welfare.
The opposite is just laughable! So you see the problem are the different stereotypes that we ourselves have put there for the two genders and other minorities. If the women want men to understand them and respect them, they should do the same for them too. Men possibly need sex more than women, or it is simply another taboo that a strong and a successful man is the one with many women or with a very active sex life.
Or perhaps as some women with emotional issues end up in prostitution as they claim in Sweden, the same goes for men that seek perverted and kinky sex and only with prostitutes. Perhaps maybe they lack the confidence to find a real female lover? Human sexuality is not just black and white. It has all shades of grey and we should not dismiss anything.
In Sweden they claim that their new laws are highly successful and prostitution fell dramatically when compared with other Scandinavian countries. In fact in Finland are thinking of introducing similar laws. Prosecute the men that pay for sex, while prostitution remains legal and prostitutes are not convicted. I wonder if they take in consideration the rape rates and other violence in formal heterosexual relationships.
As many of the Sweden's prostitutes have admitted, the "decent" customers now stay away and they have to deal with the "rougher" perverted ones and often they are forced to have sex without condoms. Thus there is a rise in HIV cases among them. The girls sadly need to take those "customers" because they need the money. Most of them are drug addicts so perhaps that is the real problem.
Another more realistic root to the problem of prostitution is poverty, inequality and illegal immigration. I can not accept that a girl that is trafficked illegally from a poor country by a man that she barely knows, thinks that he has her best interests in his consideration. Desperation, poverty and perhaps problems at home, drive those girls to choose a risky path in knowledge that they may have to get sexually involved with the man who promised them a better future, or work somewhere like in a bar.
Only to find themselves in a vicious underworld. It is not just girls that are victims: how about young boys, drug addicts that become dealers to earn money for their next dose exactly as many female addicts end up in prostitution. Don't they get violently physically abused, beaten up or even killed? The problem is not male violence against women here. It is drug and poverty related. End up poverty and you solve many problems!
Prostitution should be legalized and regulated by the state and police and doctors appointed by the state. I do not think it will ever go away unless we end poverty in the world and change our point of view on human sexuality, sexual relationships and marriage! But I do not see this happening anytime soon. If you ban it or impose sanctions on the individuals involved, it will simply go underground and who will control it?
What annoys me is that the so called "high-class" escorts that most certainly do this profession by choice and for the financial benefits that it brings sleeping with the rich and powerful of this world, are not mentioned in the Swedish "research".
The role of the migrant women in Europe, especially those coming from a Islamic background must also be discussed! They must be equal to all other women in the continent, and their rights secured. But with such strong Islamic influence and male dominated culture how do they feel about their position in our societies? Being a modern European woman does not mean that you have to bear all. But certainly not hide yourself behind a veil or be submissive to your husband's, father's or brother's will. It will be very interested to see how they will position themselves in a modern European society n the future.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
To keep the Irish Corporate Tax, or not to keep?
The Irish corporate taxation system is one important asset for the country. The country's economy is based on it and gives it an advantage, by making it very attractive for overseas multinationals.
Ireland is an English-speaking European Union member with an open economy, plus it has lower corporate tax rates and so it has managed to become from one of the poorest nations in Europe, to one of the richest.
But the country's taxation system often brings Ireland under fire, from some of its European partners that believe that it gives an unfair advantage to the country. They would prefer to create a harmonized taxation system across the EU. Many in USA also believe that it harms their country's economy, as it is mainly American companies that take advantage of the Irish corporate tax system.
If we want to be honest about it, low corporate taxes serve mainly the multinational corporations. Though it boosts the economy of Ireland by the exports of goods such as lap-tops, it creates few job positions and the companies contribute little to the Irish state. Most of the income earned is taken out of the Irish economy and shipped back to the multinational's country of origin.
A lot of the companies are so-called "ghost" companies that only register Ireland as their base, to avoid paying high taxes back home. The rent near empty buildings and they employ very little staff, if any. The reason why the Irish public is so protective of them, is because their Government and media are portraying the taxation system as an important national asset.
Of course Ireland's taxation system does offer an advantage to the country and contributes to its economy. But if they actually developed industries and stable economic factors, their country's economy would benefit more. Multinationals are concerned only about their profit. They may locate their bases in your country for a period of time, only to move them a few years later when they find a country that is more attractive to them.
Instead in relying on pocket money from the corporations and bow to their demands, wouldn't it better to be able to rely on exports or any other "real" economy type? The problem is that it is very difficult for a small country to achieve such thing, especially when it lacks the infrastructure and the funds to do so.
Also the Irish political elite serves the global capitalist elites. They gave away all rights of the Irish oil and gas resources, that could have given the country a more stable income, which could then be used as investment to diversify the Irish economy.
What should happen in Europe is further economic and political integration.The Germans and the French who are the main critics of Ireland, should not ask the Irish to abolish their corporate tax rate unless they change the way they do business too.
Ireland and all small countries are very susceptible to the economic or political influence of their big neighbors. So they must strive to make deals and business with multinationals to attract capita, in order to maintain their sovereignty.
When Ireland gained its independence from Britain, it was left in a very bad financial status. They went from boom to bust and they remained dependent to the British economy for decades to come. Even the "Irish" pound was pegged to the British, linking Ireland's economy to Britain's.
If we want to secure small nation's financial future and harmonize Europe's economy and taxation, then it is the richer countries that must make the sacrifice and reform their economies first. If they monopolize all industrial and financial development in the continent, then smaller states are forced to come up with a taxation system that will attract foreign multinationals.
Or even worse, they will have to become tax havens and invest in their banking sector. If we could establish a European Investment Bank or Fund, together with a EU body that would coordinate these investments, then we could divert cash where is needed to create new jobs and industries across Europe.
In that way all countries would benefit and they would have a secure source of investment, that would spread equally throughout the Union. When we are allowing small European nations to seek and strike deals with multinationals, we are actually forcing them to compromise some of their sovereignty for them. They will have to pass certain laws that will allow or attract the corporations to invest, in order to maintain their position as a favorite investment hub.
So these nations are not entirely sovereign anymore and in a European context it allows third parties or countries, to have access and be able to influence their laws and of course in extend many EU laws.So how can we have an independent or unanimous agreement on EU policy, when each state is trying to protect and promote their interests. But in Ireland's and many other smaller states' case, these are the interests of the multinationals.
When Ireland agrees with American corporate companies to establish branches in its soil for example, it is relying on America to keep finding Ireland a profitable and convenient place for them to invest. To do that the Americans will place some demands that Ireland must defend and promote, sometimes even against EU law and regulations. No surprise then why some countries like Britain always wish to block or opt out of EU regulations.
And it is not just Ireland that must find as solution to its economic problem, the lowering of its tax rates for multinational companies. Many countries across the EU are doing the same and even France itself has a peculiar taxation system that favors foreign investment.
Wouldn't it better to set up European owned companies, either large or SMEs that will be funded by this new European Investment Fund, in many different European countries? Thus helping European businessmen, developers or inventors from all over the continent to keep creating jobs, promoting stability and equal opportunities for all European citizens.
What good is to point the finger to each other like France and Germany are doing to the Irish, if they do not give them any alternative. Ireland now more than ever needs to find and keep any resources it can to save their economy. If the scrap their lower tax rate, they will lose the investments from the multinationals and with no alternative solution from their European partners, their economy will be in deeper trouble.
If the rich European nations do not want to share with the Irish and include them in their industrial and economic development, then they will have to allow them to rely on foreign investment and so to keep their low corporate tax rates.
The solution to this problem lies on a European level. No country should be pushed to change its taxation system if its partners are not willing to do the same or support each other. If Europeans want to harmonize the continent's tax rates, as it should happen at some stage, then they will have to compensate the Irish by creating jobs here and fill the gap. Otherwise they will forever have to sustain the Irish economy with subsidies and further bail outs.
Ireland is an English-speaking European Union member with an open economy, plus it has lower corporate tax rates and so it has managed to become from one of the poorest nations in Europe, to one of the richest.
But the country's taxation system often brings Ireland under fire, from some of its European partners that believe that it gives an unfair advantage to the country. They would prefer to create a harmonized taxation system across the EU. Many in USA also believe that it harms their country's economy, as it is mainly American companies that take advantage of the Irish corporate tax system.
If we want to be honest about it, low corporate taxes serve mainly the multinational corporations. Though it boosts the economy of Ireland by the exports of goods such as lap-tops, it creates few job positions and the companies contribute little to the Irish state. Most of the income earned is taken out of the Irish economy and shipped back to the multinational's country of origin.
A lot of the companies are so-called "ghost" companies that only register Ireland as their base, to avoid paying high taxes back home. The rent near empty buildings and they employ very little staff, if any. The reason why the Irish public is so protective of them, is because their Government and media are portraying the taxation system as an important national asset.
Of course Ireland's taxation system does offer an advantage to the country and contributes to its economy. But if they actually developed industries and stable economic factors, their country's economy would benefit more. Multinationals are concerned only about their profit. They may locate their bases in your country for a period of time, only to move them a few years later when they find a country that is more attractive to them.
Instead in relying on pocket money from the corporations and bow to their demands, wouldn't it better to be able to rely on exports or any other "real" economy type? The problem is that it is very difficult for a small country to achieve such thing, especially when it lacks the infrastructure and the funds to do so.
Also the Irish political elite serves the global capitalist elites. They gave away all rights of the Irish oil and gas resources, that could have given the country a more stable income, which could then be used as investment to diversify the Irish economy.
What should happen in Europe is further economic and political integration.The Germans and the French who are the main critics of Ireland, should not ask the Irish to abolish their corporate tax rate unless they change the way they do business too.
Ireland and all small countries are very susceptible to the economic or political influence of their big neighbors. So they must strive to make deals and business with multinationals to attract capita, in order to maintain their sovereignty.
When Ireland gained its independence from Britain, it was left in a very bad financial status. They went from boom to bust and they remained dependent to the British economy for decades to come. Even the "Irish" pound was pegged to the British, linking Ireland's economy to Britain's.
If we want to secure small nation's financial future and harmonize Europe's economy and taxation, then it is the richer countries that must make the sacrifice and reform their economies first. If they monopolize all industrial and financial development in the continent, then smaller states are forced to come up with a taxation system that will attract foreign multinationals.
Or even worse, they will have to become tax havens and invest in their banking sector. If we could establish a European Investment Bank or Fund, together with a EU body that would coordinate these investments, then we could divert cash where is needed to create new jobs and industries across Europe.
In that way all countries would benefit and they would have a secure source of investment, that would spread equally throughout the Union. When we are allowing small European nations to seek and strike deals with multinationals, we are actually forcing them to compromise some of their sovereignty for them. They will have to pass certain laws that will allow or attract the corporations to invest, in order to maintain their position as a favorite investment hub.
So these nations are not entirely sovereign anymore and in a European context it allows third parties or countries, to have access and be able to influence their laws and of course in extend many EU laws.So how can we have an independent or unanimous agreement on EU policy, when each state is trying to protect and promote their interests. But in Ireland's and many other smaller states' case, these are the interests of the multinationals.
When Ireland agrees with American corporate companies to establish branches in its soil for example, it is relying on America to keep finding Ireland a profitable and convenient place for them to invest. To do that the Americans will place some demands that Ireland must defend and promote, sometimes even against EU law and regulations. No surprise then why some countries like Britain always wish to block or opt out of EU regulations.
And it is not just Ireland that must find as solution to its economic problem, the lowering of its tax rates for multinational companies. Many countries across the EU are doing the same and even France itself has a peculiar taxation system that favors foreign investment.
Wouldn't it better to set up European owned companies, either large or SMEs that will be funded by this new European Investment Fund, in many different European countries? Thus helping European businessmen, developers or inventors from all over the continent to keep creating jobs, promoting stability and equal opportunities for all European citizens.
What good is to point the finger to each other like France and Germany are doing to the Irish, if they do not give them any alternative. Ireland now more than ever needs to find and keep any resources it can to save their economy. If the scrap their lower tax rate, they will lose the investments from the multinationals and with no alternative solution from their European partners, their economy will be in deeper trouble.
If the rich European nations do not want to share with the Irish and include them in their industrial and economic development, then they will have to allow them to rely on foreign investment and so to keep their low corporate tax rates.
The solution to this problem lies on a European level. No country should be pushed to change its taxation system if its partners are not willing to do the same or support each other. If Europeans want to harmonize the continent's tax rates, as it should happen at some stage, then they will have to compensate the Irish by creating jobs here and fill the gap. Otherwise they will forever have to sustain the Irish economy with subsidies and further bail outs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)