Manny Pacquiaio is running for president in the Phillippines. He, apparently, belongs to the same party (PDP-Laban) as Durtete but from a different (and rival) wing. Durtete is planning to run as VP candidate, as he apparently can't run for president twice (in a row?).
How dirty is it going to get? Is there any substantial differences between the wings within PDP-Laban or is it just about personal or regional crony networks? Are there any other parties that stand a chance?
Looks like Putin's party is going to win the recent Russian election. It also looks like the Communists were the primary beneficiaries of the anti-Putin vote. This is apparently primarily a tactical thing (they were there to be voted for) than necessarily strong support for the actual Communists. Will they step up as an opposition party? Time will tell.
Reports indicate widespread vote-fraud, with reports (and videos) of ballot stuffing having surfaced from multiple places.
Quote from: Jacob on September 20, 2021, 12:35:20 PM
Looks like Putin's party is going to win the recent Russian election. It also looks like the Communists were the primary beneficiaries of the anti-Putin vote. This is apparently primarily a tactical thing (they were there to be voted for) than necessarily strong support for the actual Communists. Will they step up as an opposition party? Time will tell.
Reports indicate widespread vote-fraud, with reports (and videos) of ballot stuffing having surfaced from multiple places.
Most serious opposition figures are simply not allowed to run. The Communists support Putin on most important votes.
Quote from: Barrister on September 20, 2021, 12:39:40 PM
Most serious opposition figures are simply not allowed to run. The Communists support Putin on most important votes.
Yeah. I was seeing analysis that said that since the Communists got the opposition vote, they'd have to consider if they wanted to actually act a bit more like an opposition.
Quote from: Jacob on September 20, 2021, 12:35:20 PM
Looks like Putin's party is going to win the recent Russian election. It also looks like the Communists were the primary beneficiaries of the anti-Putin vote. This is apparently primarily a tactical thing (they were there to be voted for) than necessarily strong support for the actual Communists. Will they step up as an opposition party? Time will tell.
Reports indicate widespread vote-fraud, with reports (and videos) of ballot stuffing having surfaced from multiple places.
Read an article in the paper that Russia is really pushing online voting this time, especially for public servants who can vote from their supervisors' computers. :ph34r:
On Russia I'd note that YouTube removed videos running through the best tactical votes against Putin and Apple and Google removed Navalny's app from their appstore it would tell you the best anti-Putin tactical vote in your location <_<
Quote from: Jacob on September 20, 2021, 12:41:04 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 20, 2021, 12:39:40 PM
Most serious opposition figures are simply not allowed to run. The Communists support Putin on most important votes.
Yeah. I was seeing analysis that said that since the Communists got the opposition vote, they'd have to consider if they wanted to actually act a bit more like an opposition.
Looks like the Communists are refusing to recognize the result, saying fraud has robbed them of the mandates - especially in the Moscow area. I'm seeing reporting of up to 4,500 incidents of fraud - things like ballot stuffing and simply flipping the number of votes between candidates.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 20, 2021, 12:43:40 PM
On Russia I'd note that YouTube removed videos running through the best tactical votes against Putin and Apple and Google removed Navalny's app from their appstore it would tell you the best anti-Putin tactical vote in your location <_<
Wow.
Bending over for China I get. Yuan speaks.
But Russia?
Quote from: Tyr on September 20, 2021, 04:10:49 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 20, 2021, 12:43:40 PM
On Russia I'd note that YouTube removed videos running through the best tactical votes against Putin and Apple and Google removed Navalny's app from their appstore it would tell you the best anti-Putin tactical vote in your location <_<
Wow.
Bending over for China I get. Yuan speaks.
But Russia?
Ruble speaks. :smarty:
Quote from: Tyr on September 20, 2021, 04:10:49 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 20, 2021, 12:43:40 PM
On Russia I'd note that YouTube removed videos running through the best tactical votes against Putin and Apple and Google removed Navalny's app from their appstore it would tell you the best anti-Putin tactical vote in your location <_<
Wow.
Bending over for China I get. Yuan speaks.
But Russia?
The choice was between removing the app and having named employees jailed by the Russians. It's easier to decry "bending over" when you are safely and anonymously behind your keyboard. It's less easy when it means ruining your employees' lives.
Quote from: grumbler on September 20, 2021, 06:30:57 PM
The choice was between removing the app and having named employees jailed by the Russians. It's easier to decry "bending over" when you are safely and anonymously behind your keyboard. It's less easy when it means ruining your employees' lives.
I agree that Apple and Google had no choice, but this kind of hostage-taking has to have some consequences. Maybe American companies should be barred from conducting business in a country where they can be extorted in such a way.
Quote from: DGuller on September 20, 2021, 06:38:00 PM
I agree that Apple and Google had no choice, but this kind of hostage-taking has to have some consequences. Maybe American companies should be barred from conducting business in a country where they can be extorted in such a way.
I agree - and I think we should consider the costs of certain businesses in certain countries. Especially because the default for them will always be to do what they need to operate in that country and have access to its market.
https://twitter.com/olliecarroll/status/1440193859430981637?s=21
(https://preview.redd.it/kbwcet4jato71.jpg?width=960&height=540&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=f85e2d892041e5e963af4fc6786fdcafca5ff469)
QuoteOliver Carroll
@olliecarroll
This @tvrain info graphic shows the gamechanging nature of controversial e-voting in Moscow elections. Left is how things look without it - red shows victory for Navalny endorsed candidates.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 21, 2021, 04:52:28 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 20, 2021, 06:38:00 PM
I agree that Apple and Google had no choice, but this kind of hostage-taking has to have some consequences. Maybe American companies should be barred from conducting business in a country where they can be extorted in such a way.
I agree - and I think we should consider the costs of certain businesses in certain countries. Especially because the default for them will always be to do what they need to operate in that country and have access to its market.
THis was what I was referencing in regards to China in the AUKUS thread.
The issue with Hollywood and China is not that Hollywood wants to appeal to Chinese consumers. It is that in order to have the chance to compete for Chinese consumers, Hollywood must get their movies onto the yearly "approved" list. The CCCP approves 80ish foreign films a year.
They don't SAY you have to censor your content to never mention Taiwan, or make sure your potrayal of China is always positive, but everyone knows you have no chane of being one of those 80 spots otherwise.
And the Chinese movie market is now as large as the US. There is no way and Hollywood company can realistically decide to just give up 50% of their potential market. So of course they will make sure their content does not offend the Chinese government.
You saw similar stuff with the NBA tying itself into knots trying to be sufficiently appeasing.
This is not a free market issue - there is no free market here to fight over. It is a market access issue, and will require coordinated political action to overcome. Of course that is the case - it is coordinated political action that has created the access to begin with!
Quote from: Berkut on September 21, 2021, 10:14:13 AM
The issue with Hollywood and China is not that Hollywood wants to appeal to Chinese consumers. It is that in order to have the chance to compete for Chinese consumers, Hollywood must get their movies onto the yearly "approved" list. The CCCP approves 80ish foreign films a year.
hey don't SAY you have to censor your content to never mention Taiwan, or make sure your potrayal of China is always positive, but everyone knows you have no chane of being one of those 80 spots otherwise.
I have some first hand knowledge on this. In our case, they were very troubled with our series showing the state as being fallible (and it wasn't China). We had to change that and make a new (very tacky) ending.
It reminded me of Franco censorship, which also changed many movies so the cops always got their man, the authorities made no mistakes, etc...
Quote from: celedhring on September 21, 2021, 10:47:50 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 21, 2021, 10:14:13 AM
The issue with Hollywood and China is not that Hollywood wants to appeal to Chinese consumers. It is that in order to have the chance to compete for Chinese consumers, Hollywood must get their movies onto the yearly "approved" list. The CCCP approves 80ish foreign films a year.
hey don't SAY you have to censor your content to never mention Taiwan, or make sure your potrayal of China is always positive, but everyone knows you have no chane of being one of those 80 spots otherwise.
I have some first hand knowledge on this. In our case, they were very troubled with our series showing the state as being fallible (and it wasn't China). We had to change that and make a new (very tacky) ending.
It reminded me of Franco censorship, which also changed many movies so the cops always got their man, the authorities made no mistakes, etc...
You can't even blame the producers of the content. They are a business, and they are not going to realistically be able to resist that kind of political control.
This is a prime example where the state has to exert its own power against the power of the other state. And there needs to be coordination. Make it illegal to market and sell any media in a country where the state exerts that kind of political control over content. Get everyone on the same page, and China will have to back down - their own domestic political reality will demand it. They are absolutely counting on the successful imposition of a divided prisoners dilemma to control this kind of thing. But oddly enough, in this case the prisoners can all talk to each other!
Well, we just made a version for China with all the problematic content removed/adjusted. In the ROTW we released as intended. That's not always possible though.
Quote from: Berkut on September 21, 2021, 10:14:13 AM
THis was what I was referencing in regards to China in the AUKUS thread.
Yeah and it's the sort of thing I was meaning when I said I don't think Hollywood matter v the tech platforms who in this case are complying with requests to make it more difficult for the opposition to function :lol:
There's a huge and difficult question of whether the benefits of Google and Apple everywhere and semi-open internet globally (generally) is worth the things they need to do to offer their products, or if the alternative would be worse.
QuoteThey don't SAY you have to censor your content to never mention Taiwan, or make sure your potrayal of China is always positive, but everyone knows you have no chane of being one of those 80 spots otherwise.
I could be wrong but I think they literally do say what you need to do if there's something they're not happy with, especially if it's a big enough film.
QuoteYou saw similar stuff with the NBA tying itself into knots trying to be sufficiently appeasing.
This is not a free market issue - there is no free market here to fight over. It is a market access issue, and will require coordinated political action to overcome. Of course that is the case - it is coordinated political action that has created the access to begin with!
And the really interesting case of Arsenal v Mesut Ozil.
What would be the point of prohibiting a company like Apple or Google from operating in a country like Russia?
If we're trying to protect the company's interests, can't they judge that for themselves?
Is there some national interest that is served by Apple being banned from Russia?
I guess it's in Americas best interest not to aid hostiles nations in broadcasting domestic propaganda. But that has to be weighted against the sweet sweet money and stock prices.
Quote from: HVC on September 21, 2021, 03:25:13 PM
I guess it's in Americas best interest not to aid hostiles nations in broadcasting domestic propaganda. But that has to be weighted against the sweet sweet money and stock prices.
Yeah I suppose my thought is whether there should be standards - similar to say anti-bribery/corruption legislation, or anti-modern slavery laws or other laws about making sure you're not doing something dodgy and neither's your supply chain.
I think we may end up moving in that direction with environmental standards - I wonder if there should be some wider ethical standards too. But I'm not sure what they'd be.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 21, 2021, 03:34:29 PM
Yeah I suppose my thought is whether there should be standards - similar to say anti-bribery/corruption legislation, or anti-modern slavery laws or other laws about making sure you're not doing something dodgy and neither's your supply chain.
I think we may end up moving in that direction with environmental standards - I wonder if there should be some wider ethical standards too. But I'm not sure what they'd be.
Good point. The point of bribery laws is really to protect the interests of the citizens of the other country, and this would be similar.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 21, 2021, 03:21:24 PM
What would be the point of prohibiting a company like Apple or Google from operating in a country like Russia?
If we're trying to protect the company's interests, can't they judge that for themselves?
Is there some national interest that is served by Apple being banned from Russia?
Any time you have a coercion dynamic in play, the "judge that for themselves" argument becomes dubious. The freedom to give in to coercion is hardly an unqualified good, it's the kind of freedom that paradoxically can make you less free on aggregate.
The best way to fight coercion is with counter-coercion. If Apple is going to be forced to exit Russia if they give in to threats by the Russian government, then the Russian government knows that trying to extort Apple is basically tantamount to kicking them out of Russia. On the other hand, if they know that Apple has the freedom to give in when their employees are threatened, then that gives the incentive to threaten their employees. Apple technically has more freedom in the second case, but in the first case they actually get to do business without dealing with extortion, because Russia doesn't want Apple out of their country.
This dynamic is exemplified by an episode in Sopranos where a couple of wise guys try to shake down a Starbucks-esque store, only for the manager to explain to them that he has no flexibility to give in to them, because the corporate would come down on him if anything is missing from the coffers. The small business stores have a lot more flexibility to decide what to do, they don't have the corporate breathing down their neck, and as a result they get successfully shaken down by the mob.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 21, 2021, 03:21:24 PM
What would be the point of prohibiting a company like Apple or Google from operating in a country like Russia?
If we're trying to protect the company's interests, can't they judge that for themselves?
Is there some national interest that is served by Apple being banned from Russia?
You are basically saying "What is the point of trying to break the prisoners dilemna? Shouldn't the prisoner be able to decide for themself how to respond?"
Quote from: Berkut on September 21, 2021, 11:03:37 AM
China will have to back down - their own domestic political reality will demand it.
Tank man might agree with you but homie got steamrolled.
Yeah, I don't think China's domestic reality puts any pressure on the CCP letting Hollywood films into the country.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on September 20, 2021, 05:56:51 PM
Quote from: Tyr on September 20, 2021, 04:10:49 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 20, 2021, 12:43:40 PM
On Russia I'd note that YouTube removed videos running through the best tactical votes against Putin and Apple and Google removed Navalny's app from their appstore it would tell you the best anti-Putin tactical vote in your location <_<
Wow.
Bending over for China I get. Yuan speaks.
But Russia?
Ruble speaks. :smarty:
Barney was certainly the "face" of that group.
Quote from: DGuller on September 21, 2021, 04:05:51 PM
Any time you have a coercion dynamic in play, the "judge that for themselves" argument becomes dubious. The freedom to give in to coercion is hardly an unqualified good, it's the kind of freedom that paradoxically can make you less free on aggregate.
The best way to fight coercion is with counter-coercion. If Apple is going to be forced to exit Russia if they give in to threats by the Russian government, then the Russian government knows that trying to extort Apple is basically tantamount to kicking them out of Russia. On the other hand, if they know that Apple has the freedom to give in when their employees are threatened, then that gives the incentive to threaten their employees. Apple technically has more freedom in the second case, but in the first case they actually get to do business without dealing with extortion, because Russia doesn't want Apple out of their country.
This dynamic is exemplified by an episode in Sopranos where a couple of wise guys try to shake down a Starbucks-esque store, only for the manager to explain to them that he has no flexibility to give in to them, because the corporate would come down on him if anything is missing from the coffers. The small business stores have a lot more flexibility to decide what to do, they don't have the corporate breathing down their neck, and as a result they get successfully shaken down by the mob.
Good point. Oddly enough I watched that Starbucks clip not to long ago.
Quote from: Jacob on September 21, 2021, 05:20:28 PM
Yeah, I don't think China's domestic reality puts any pressure on the CCP letting Hollywood films into the country.
Of course it does. China still has to keep the masses basically content.
Otherwise they would not care what Hollywood showed.
Quote from: DGuller on September 21, 2021, 04:05:51 PM
Any time you have a coercion dynamic in play, the "judge that for themselves" argument becomes dubious. The freedom to give in to coercion is hardly an unqualified good, it's the kind of freedom that paradoxically can make you less free on aggregate.
The best way to fight coercion is with counter-coercion. If Apple is going to be forced to exit Russia if they give in to threats by the Russian government, then the Russian government knows that trying to extort Apple is basically tantamount to kicking them out of Russia. On the other hand, if they know that Apple has the freedom to give in when their employees are threatened, then that gives the incentive to threaten their employees. Apple technically has more freedom in the second case, but in the first case they actually get to do business without dealing with extortion, because Russia doesn't want Apple out of their country.
This dynamic is exemplified by an episode in Sopranos where a couple of wise guys try to shake down a Starbucks-esque store, only for the manager to explain to them that he has no flexibility to give in to them, because the corporate would come down on him if anything is missing from the coffers. The small business stores have a lot more flexibility to decide what to do, they don't have the corporate breathing down their neck, and as a result they get successfully shaken down by the mob.
Thomas Schelling should be required reading in every university.
Quote from: Berkut on September 21, 2021, 10:27:04 PM
Of course it does. China still has to keep the masses basically content.
Otherwise they would not care what Hollywood showed.
I don't think Hollywood packs that much of a punch in keeping the masses basically content.
If the CCP banned all Western films from being shown domestically tomorrow, sure some people would complain but the level of complains would not stand out against all the other things people in China complain about. A bunch of people would start watching bootleg Hollywood films (not that they aren't already). Occasionally the CCP would crack down on the most vociferous complainers and most egregious bootleggers (in a way that would really suck for them), and that'd be that.
Hollywood saying "fine, we won't even LET you see our films" is basically zero leverage IMO. Sure, some Chinese people would be really annoyed, but compared to the annoyances of where the economy is going, the price of housing, shitty Covid measures, cracking down on celebrity culture, corruption, education reforms that make life harder, and a million other things banning Hollywood films all out doesn't really rate.
They care what Hollywood shows because they care about exercising control and people submitting to their authority, not because Hollywood is crucial to their bread and circuses plan.
At least that's what it looks like to me.
Quote from: Jacob on September 22, 2021, 12:21:34 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 21, 2021, 10:27:04 PM
Of course it does. China still has to keep the masses basically content.
Otherwise they would not care what Hollywood showed.
I don't think Hollywood packs that much of a punch in keeping the masses basically content.
If the CCP banned all Western films from being shown domestically tomorrow, sure some people would complain but the level of complains would not stand out against all the other things people in China complain about. A bunch of people would start watching bootleg Hollywood films (not that they aren't already). Occasionally the CCP would crack down on the most vociferous complainers and most egregious bootleggers (in a way that would really suck for them), and that'd be that.
Hollywood saying "fine, we won't even LET you see our films" is basically zero leverage IMO. Sure, some Chinese people would be really annoyed, but compared to the annoyances of where the economy is going, the price of housing, shitty Covid measures, cracking down on celebrity culture, corruption, education reforms that make life harder, and a million other things banning Hollywood films all out doesn't really rate.
They care what Hollywood shows because they care about exercising control and people submitting to their authority, not because Hollywood is crucial to their bread and circuses plan.
At least that's what it looks like to me.
My point here, and using this as an example, has nothing to do with how "critical" it is, or whether the leverage would work or not.
It is about having some standards for how we tolerate interference in our own world. The point to telling China to suck rocks when it comes to Hollywood is not to protect Chinese civilians from their governments interference, it is to protect OUR civilians from their government interference.
And to just establish some basic, humane, standards for how we tolerate other, non-liberal countries interference in the western, liberal, global market.
Quote from: Berkut on September 22, 2021, 07:48:35 AM
The point to telling China to suck rocks when it comes to Hollywood is not to protect Chinese civilians from their governments interference, it is to protect OUR civilians from their government interference.
Exactly. China's tactics seem like a direct attack on sovereignty of other nations. It's disappointing how the Western governments have left their citizens on their own to deal with a hostile foreign government.
Quote from: Berkut on September 22, 2021, 07:48:35 AM
My point here, and using this as an example, has nothing to do with how "critical" it is, or whether the leverage would work or not.
It is about having some standards for how we tolerate interference in our own world. The point to telling China to suck rocks when it comes to Hollywood is not to protect Chinese civilians from their governments interference, it is to protect OUR civilians from their government interference.
And to just establish some basic, humane, standards for how we tolerate other, non-liberal countries interference in the western, liberal, global market.
I have no argument with that :cheers:
Meanwhile in Austria: vice-general secretary of the ÖVP held an emergency press conference. She complained about multiple journalists asking if there had been/will be raids by investigators on ÖVP premises, denying any such allegations and that it's unfair towards younger party members who worry about the safety of their smart phones. Also, since everything is routinely deleted because of data protection, there would be nothing to find anyways.
General public reaction to this was: "Err, who with the what now? :huh: "
Seems that in the ongoing investigations re: how certain positions in publically (co-)owned companies were handed and other connected suspicions of corruption some passages in the files are redacted for review by certain parties because of ongoing investigations. So it seems ÖVP lawyers were nervous about there coming more raids by police, which filtered through to journalists who then asked directly about it.
Cynics say this is an attempt to get the message to every ÖVP member: "Delete anything that might be a problem."
(Not that it saved Schmid and others because their chat logs could be restored.)
So over the last days Chancellor Kurz again railed against the WKStA (prosecution office for economy and corruption) as undermined by "leftist cells". Never mind that the chief prosecutor investigating the various ÖVP irregularities has a history of investigating (and successfully charging) Social Democrats before.
And today this happened, though I guess last week's press conference (see above) may have undermined this.
https://www.dw.com/en/austria-police-raid-chancellery-and-peoples-party-offices/a-59421892
QuoteAustria: Police raid chancellery and People's Party offices
Investigators in Austria have searched the offices of Chancellor Sebastian Kurz and his People's Party's headquarters. The raids are thought to be linked to newspaper ads alleged to have carried misleading information.
A spokeswoman for the party of Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz said the workplaces of some of his aides and confidantes had been raided on Wednesday.
The swoops were in connection with the placement of misleading advertisements, according to media reports.
Officers were reported to have been looking for data and documents at the offices of Kurz's press spokesman Johannes Frischmann, media officer, and strategic adviser Stefan Stein.
The newspaper Die Presse reported that the raids were tied to possible corruption offences in the publication of adverts and opinion polls in the Österreich daily newspaper.
It said Kurz was suspected of being an accessory to the offences.
Deputy Secretary-General of the People's Party (ÖVP) Gabriela Schwarz said the allegations were false.
"This always happens with the same goal and scheme: To massively damage the People's Party and Sebastian Kurz," she said.
Schwarz said the raids had taken place "for show" and that "accusations were constructed over events that date back as far as five years."
It's also reported that a raid took place in one department of the finance ministry.
Kurz himself is under investigation on suspicion of having made false statements to a parliamentary committee on corruption. However, he has not been charged.
Small aside: the federal government is the biggest newspaper advertiser in Austria. Hence big papers usually try to not piss off the government too much (unless they can help someone else get into office who will be grateful ... ). Money is often tied to circulation, so the biggest, shittiest tabloids get the most money. In this case, Der Standard reports that among the allegations is a supposed agreement between government members and associates and Fellner (owner of the Österreich media group) that in exchange for 1.3 million Euros Kurz could have some influence on the news and editorial part of the paper.
The ÖVP of course sees a left-wing witch hunt and denies all accusations.
Addendum: allegedly ÖVP paid Fellner media to change numbers in polls to show ÖVP leading more decisively, and the SPÖ further behind, than they actually were.
EDIT: Also, allegedly Kurz's circle used party funds (which is largely tax money) to make sure polls show that people want Kurz to run the ÖVP in the run up to his taking over the party which were then published by their media friends..
Hopefully there are real consequences.
We'll see. Interviewed on the late night news yesterday, Kurz tried to deflect and said he would of course remain in office, since there was no criminal activity connected to him.
Today, ÖVP leaders from the Austrian states released a statement of support.
Meanwhile, the Greens vice chancellor has said he sees the chancellors Handlungsfähigkeit (ability to act) in question and has asked all parliamentary parties and President van der Bellen to have separate talks. The opposition parties are bringing votes of no confidence into parliament (they would only need 6 defectors from the government.
The current impression from the Greens seems to be that they want to continue the coalition (in truth there's no realistic coalition majority in parliament that would include them) but with a different chancellor.
At any rate, Kurz will deliver another statement at 4 pm (so in a bit over half an hour) and right afterwards talk to the President.
EDIT: Kurz's statement - uncomfortable to be accused of something that isn't true, but also good, because he knows he's innocent. Also, presumption of innocence, remember? Anyways, if the Greens want to seek new coalition partners they're free to do so, but they're happy to continue the coalition.
I know nowhere near enough as I should about Indian politics but election results and polls occasionally pop up on my timeline and you see things like, say, a 40% swing in a regional election - or this showing the incredible popularity of M.K. Stalin (centre-left):
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBIAloWVQCAZRfT?format=jpg&name=small)
If it's not the Hindu nationalists then I approve. Funny names are a bonus.
Genuinely named after Stalin. He was born four days after Stalin died so his dad thought it'd be a nice tribute - which sounds like a friend of mine who has a wild middle name because her dad felt like it when he went to the registry office :lol:
How wild is that middle name? :P
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 07, 2021, 04:31:32 PM
Genuinely named after Stalin. He was born four days after Stalin died so his dad thought it'd be a nice tribute - which sounds like a friend of mine who has a wild middle name because her dad felt like it when he went to the registry office :lol:
I have a cousin the was named ben-hur. Now he wasn't named that when he was born. His father saw the film when he my cousin was like 5 and decided he liked the name so much he renamed his son :lol:
The lesson I'm learning from this is that dads need to be stopped.
Politico has summed up the Austrian events.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austrian-government-hanging-by-thread-chancellor-sebastian-kurz-investigation/
QuoteAustrian government teeters as Greens look for exit
Chancellor Sebastian Kurz under suspicion of bribery and embezzlement in corruption probe.
Austria's government was hanging by a thread Thursday after Chancellor Sebastian Kurz's junior coalition partner questioned whether he could remain in office as he faces a criminal investigation into corruption allegations.
Greens leader Werner Kogler, whose party has been in coalition with Kurz's People's Party since early 2020, met with Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen on Thursday to consult about a way forward. Kurz told Austrian public television late Monday that he had no intention of resigning and has dismissed prosecutors' allegations against him as "manufactured."
"We can't just return to business as usual," Kogler said in a statement before his meeting with the president. "The capacity of the chancellor to carry out the duties of his office under these circumstances is in question. We must ensure stability and order."
The probe against Kurz and nine close associates concerns allegations that he masterminded a scheme, beginning when he was foreign minister in 2016, to fuel his rise to power by diverting public funds to buy off pollsters and journalists.
The nature of the accusations would give any coalition partner pause, but has put the Greens in a particular bind because the party has sold itself to voters as a force against corruption. Attempts by Kurz and his allies to discredit the authorities' investigation — earlier this week a prominent conservative MP claimed "left-wing cells" in the prosecutor's office were behind the investigations — have further strained relations between the governing parties.
Kurz, who met separately with Van der Bellen late Thursday, said afterward that he saw no reason not to preserve the coalition with the Greens.
"We stand by this government," he said.
Yet at this stage, the government's survival no longer depends on him.
Kogler's statement on Thursday triggered a chain of events that many observers believe will inevitably hasten the collapse of the current coalition. The Green leader said he intended to meet with the other parties represented in parliament in the coming days, a process seen as a possible prelude to a four-party alliance against Kurz's People's Party.
Parliamentary leaders scheduled a special session for Tuesday to discuss the affair and opposition parties, all of which have called on Kurz to step down, said they intended to call a no-confidence vote against him. The opposition needs only six Green votes in order to achieve the simple majority they'd need to remove Kurz from office.
Such a move could pave the way for the Greens to join the other three parties represented in the parliament — the Social Democrats, the liberal Neos and the far-right Freedom Party — in a broad-based alliance. That would likely only function as a minority government with the tacit support of the Freedom Party, however, because including the far-right would be too divisive for the others.
Another option would be for the president, who holds the power to name a chancellor, to put a technocratic government in place, as he did after the collapse of Kurz's first coalition following the Ibiza affair, until a new election could be held.
The easiest solution to the crisis would be for Kurz to resign and for someone else in his party to take over as chancellor while keeping the coalition with the Greens in place. The next regular election isn't due until the fall of 2024.
Under Austria's constitution, the process of switching chancellors in the middle of a legislative period is straightforward because voters elect parties and not a government leader.
But the People's Party made clear on Thursday that it wanted Kurz to be chancellor and only Kurz.
In a show of solidarity with the chancellor, People's Party Cabinet officials and influential party interest groups, such as the seniors' association, said Kurz had their full confidence, as did the party's powerful regional leaders. The latter group, consisting of several state governors, was expected to meet in Vienna on Thursday evening with the chancellor.
The associations said in a statement that Kurz was the target of a concerted effort to remove him from office. They were silent about who was supposedly behind the alleged plot, however.
"Sebastian Kurz has our full support," said Ingrid Korosec, president of the People's Party Seniors. "Like all previous accusations against him, these too will turn out to be false."
In addition to the allegations of corruption leveled against Kurz this week, he is under investigation for committing perjury in testimony to parliament. An indictment in that case is expected any day.
After the German elections there were voices in the CDU saying the party should renew, and Kurz's ÖVP could be a template. :D
Also, I loved Kurz's deflection on TV. Basically, he didn't know or associated much with the other people accused. And even if they did those things they're accused of, and plotted to make him chancellor, what does that have to do with him? :lmfao:
Quote from: HVC on October 07, 2021, 05:45:27 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 07, 2021, 04:31:32 PM
Genuinely named after Stalin. He was born four days after Stalin died so his dad thought it'd be a nice tribute - which sounds like a friend of mine who has a wild middle name because her dad felt like it when he went to the registry office :lol:
I have a cousin the was named ben-hur. Now he wasn't named that when he was born. His father saw the film when he my cousin was like 5 and decided he liked the name so much he renamed his son :lol:
My brother is named after Raymond Burr because my father loved Perry Mason so fucking much.
So the Greens have declared they won't continue the coalition with Kurz. They're asking from the ÖVP a "person above reproach (untadelig)" as chancellor if they want to continue (cynics are saying finding such a person in the high ranks of the ÖVP is not possible).
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 07, 2021, 05:53:36 PM
The lesson I'm learning from this is that dads need to be stopped.
I wanted to give my kid the middle initial C. Just that.
But the rules said both parents had to go register. Pff.
Additional chat protocols have leaked. Kurz (the foreign minister) and his paladins torpedoed a pretty much agreed law to provide significantly more funding to public child care. The law had support across government and opposition party lines, and was popular in the public view, but Kurz and Co. killed it behind the scenes to publicly humiliate their own party's vice-chancellor Mitterlehner and kill the coalition and take over afterwards. This all happened while Mitterlehner's daughter was suffering from a terminal illness and literally died while these events unfolded.
(The law remained buried afterwards.)
Lovely people.
Kurz resigns, nominates Schallenberg (foreign minister) as new chancellor. Kurz will remain party chairman and leader of the ÖVP faction in parliament. Which raises immediate questions about whether Schallenberg (who doesn't have a high profile) is basically a puppet.
The speech was the usual. "I've always worked hard for the country", "many politicians were investigated, but the coalition partner never threatened to blow up the government" (well, so far it's not been the chancellor himself), "to ensure stability over the coming months", "these are old allegations from 2016, and they're not true" etc.
Remains to be seen if this will be enough for the Greens to continue the coalition.
I heard the German Christian Democrats are looking for a new leader.
:D
The Greens have signaled they're ok with the new arrangement.
One of the funniest things is that on Friday there was an emphatic declaration that if Kurz resigns, all others of their ministers would resign, too. Not a one of them is stepping down now. :rolleyes:
The new sockpuppet Chancellor.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/2020_Alexander_Schallenberg_Ministerrat_am_8.1.2020_%2849350907178%29_%28cropped%29_%28cropped%29.jpg)
So....there's a lot going on here :blink:
QuoteCzech president in hospital after shock election defeat for PM
Fears of a political crisis as Miloš Zeman, an ally of Andrej Babiš, is admitted to intensive care unit
Robert Tait in Prague
Sun 10 Oct 2021 19.58 BST
The Czech Republic is facing political upheaval and a possible power vacuum after its billionaire prime minister, Andrej Babiš, suffered a surprise general election defeat and then saw his most powerful backer and sole potential saviour, the country's president, Miloš Zeman, taken to hospital, apparently gravely ill.
In a stunning upset that confounded pollsters' forecasts, Babiš' populist Action for Dissatisfied Citizens (ANO) 2011 party finished second in this weekend's popular vote behind the centre-right Spolu (Together) alliance, which previously vowed not to form a government with him.
Spolu followed up its victory by agreeing to start coalition talks with a liberal-left faction, Piráti-STAN, after the two blocs won a total of 108 seats in the 200-member chamber of deputies in the poll, staged on Friday and Saturday.
Babiš' hand appeared to become weaker still on Sunday as television cameras captured Zeman – who has repeatedly promised to do all he could to keep the prime minister in office – being transported to hospital in an ambulance minutes after the pair had met at the president's countryside retreat to discuss the results.
Miroslav Zavoral, the head of Prague's central military hospital, later told journalists that Zeman had been admitted owing to "complications that accompany a chronic illness" and said the president was being treated in an intensive care unit. The nature of the illness was not disclosed.
Czech media outlets published footage and images of Zeman, a heavy smoker, being wheeled into hospital, apparently unconscious, with a bodyguard holding his head, and in the presence of his wife and daughter.
Speculation about the health of 77-year-old Zeman, who uses a wheelchair and has neuropathy and type 2 diabetes, was rife in the run-up to the poll, leading commentators to question his fitness to conduct his constitutional post-election duty of inviting parties to form a government.
Zeman's spokesman, Jiří Ovčáček, who had previously dismissed reports that his boss was seriously ill despite an eight-day hospital stay last month, pleaded with politicians and journalists on Twitter to exercise a "sensitive approach" and wish the president an early recovery.
The president's condition has a direct bearing on Babiš' political survival because Zeman has said he would invite the leader of the biggest single party to form a government, a status applying to ANO 2011, despite its overall election defeat. The prime minister's party won 72 seats, one more than Spolu, which is an alliance of three parties, the Civic Democrats (ODS), the Christian Democrats (KDU-ČSL) and the pro-EU Top 09.
Although Babiš, a billionaire former oligarch whose industrial conglomerate, Agrofert, controls large chunks of the Czech economy, has no clear path to a viable coalition, analysts believe he could exploit an interregnum period, during which he serves as interim prime minister by seeking to retain power through dividing Spolu and trying to reach an agreement with one of its constituent parties.
Meanwhile, there were calls for parliament to invoke a constitutional clause that would declare Zeman unfit and pass his powers temporarily to the prime minister and the speaker of the chamber of deputies. The latter – currently a Babiš ally – would then have the president's responsibility of choosing who to ask to form a new government. However, the opposition is expected to vote for a new speaker when the newly elected parliament comes into being later this month.
Jiří Pehe, a political scientist and director of New York University in Prague, said the Czech Republic could plunge into a political crisis.
"The opposition groupings have formed a unity pact, so Babiš needs the president to back him and ask him to start talking about a new government," said Pehe. "It seems the president may not be able to do that for some time – or ever.
"It's a very complicated situation constitutionally if the president cannot act in his customary post-election role. If it drags on, parliament may have to step in and declare him unfit to perform his duties. It could be a constitutional crisis. It was so irresponsible of those around Mr Zeman not to have prepared by notifying parliament that he was ill and that it should suspend his duties, or else talk the president into abdicating or stepping down."
Petr Fiala, Spolu's leader and a former political science professor, is widely seen as favourite to succeed Babiš as premier. Fiala, a centre-right politician who campaigned in broad opposition to Babiš' populism, had requested to meet Zeman on Monday to discuss forming a coalition. It was unclear whether the meeting could take place.
Babiš' defeat followed the disclosure last week of damaging details about his financial arrangement in the Pandora Papers, which revealed that he had used a network of offshore companies to buy a mansion and other properties in the French Riviera for £13m in 2009. The prime minister denied wrongdoing and dismissed the revelations as a plot designed to undermine his election chances.
Some commentators warned he may remain in office for months, despite his electoral setback, especially if Zeman's health recovers.
"Should he decide to continue doing so, Andrej Babiš could well rule in resignation here until well into 2022," wrote David Klimeš on the Aktuálně news website. "The five-party coalition has a difficult task ahead of it. When the post-election enthusiasm wears off, it will have to jump over all the sticks and traps that Andrej Babiš and Miloš Zeman are now setting under its feet."
I believe the real problem for Babis wasn't how his party performed but the fact that the Social Democrats who were his coalition partners and the Communists who broadly supported the government fell under the 5% threshold so have no seats (first time there's no party of the left in parliament). I think the Pirates and Mayors party hates him and the far-right are too small. So there doesn't seem to be a route for him to keep power - but he is a billionaire so he might do something and this chaos feels like it could be helpful for him, I don't know :bink:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBap_0gX0AUYl38?format=jpg&name=large)
Schallenberg is pointing out almost excessively that he will work closely with Kurz, will contnue Kurz's policies, and that the "Kurz system" will continue.
Which becomes even funnier when you compare Kurz's and his tweets about their first trip taking them to Brussels (Kurz's tweet was hastily deleted after people pointed out the duplication).
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBpmusSXoAMeWdq?format=jpg&name=small)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBpmxMyX0AEmFO2?format=jpg&name=small)
EDIT: Apparently it's not a copy from Kurz's post, but rather that the social media team posted it ot the wrong account at first.
Actual news story (from CNN):
Russian President Vladimir Putin has been accused of making a sexist remark to a female journalist at an event this week. (https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2021/10/15/putin-sexist-comment-gas-kiley-newday-intl-ldn-vpx.cnn)
:o :o :o
Well that destroys my faith in the integrity of brutal despots who run murderous regimes.
Anyone have insight into what is going on in Lebanon recently?
From what I've read, situation is going from bad to worse.
My understanding of recent events:
- Hezbollah protests against judge probing the Beirut explosion, claiming he's unfairly investigating Hezbollah politicians and not others.
- Hezbollah does a big public protest march
- the march goes through turf traditionally owned by Christian militia, and march is shot at; civilians killed
- Hezbollah claims it isn't interested in starting a new civil war, but won't be pushed around
I think the context is the aftermath of that explosion in the port. There's been fuel shortages for over eighteen months, plus the political fights (and failures) over rebuilding since the explosion. In the last week or so the entire Lebanese national grid was shut down, I think power is back but it's only for a few hours - so the entire country is running on bootleg oil and private generators.
That contributes to, but also takes place in the context of hyperinflation (again following from the economic impact of that explosion) I think the currency is now trading at about 20,000 lir to the dollar v around 1,500 pre-explosion. And the wider economic collapse is huge - according to the World Bank from a GDP of $55 billion in 2018 to $33 billion in 2020. That explosion also destroyed Lebanon's biggest grain silo and a huge chunk of the port which is important as Lebanon imports a lot of food. I believe the Word Bank has said the collapse of Lebanon's economy and financial system is one of the top 10 and possibly top 3 severe economic crises in recorded history - at least since the 19th century.
In the context of this there's the political/elite failure. So the PM (I think) is Lebanon's richest man, the system is corrupt and the politicians who are basically operating to get their share of the economy for their community have not proven capable of mastering any side of this crisis - and instead seem to be looking for new revenue sources (for spoils?) to keep the minimal state going such as a proposed tax on WhatsApp messages :lol: :bleeding:
Also, I think, relevant to this is the failure and absence of the international community since the explosion. I remember Macron's quite dramatic visit in 2019. But I think the world has been a little distracted with covid, but also it feels like lots of regional powers (France, Turkey, EU, US) have basically not done much for the last two years. Some of that may be indifference (the US - especially under Trump), or distraction/focus elsewhere but it feels like they were all waiting for it to spill over into an actual crisis to do anything.
The US is now talking about working to help build solutions for Lebanon's energy system and food supply etc - of course the global context for that is not ideal because there is a wider energy crisis and global supply chain strains. So just yesterday Pakistan opened a tender for deliveries of LNG for their power system over winter - and no-one bid at any price. Similarly global food prices are higher than any time since the 60s and the last time they even approached this level was the early 2010s and it was, probably, a factor in the Arab revolts.
With the specific Hezbollah angle - they have been able to bring in fuel by the truckload from Iran via Syria, but are also (from Iran) delivering a lot of basic commodities in their communities and using it to expand their influence while the central government fails.
So there's lots of context and especially economic background, plus political failure. In terms of the actual recent events my guess would be Hezbollah making a bit of a play for more power/influence backed up by their ability to materially provide more than the central government or other factions.
Edit: And again I think Lebanon would be a country I would consider could benefit from a "neighbourhood" focused policy from the EU - obviously France would be likely to leave, but I wonder if it could be even better if the EU could convene to increase support/policy cooperation in Lebanon.
Thanks for that account - it is a sorry outlook all around. This is a case where the world community really ought to be doing more for Lebanon, than just sitting around watching it fall apart.
Quote from: Malthus on October 16, 2021, 03:00:58 PM
Thanks for that account - it is a sorry outlook all around. This is a case where the world community really ought to be doing more for Lebanon, than just sitting around watching it fall apart.
Yeah, that isn't going to happen.
The western liberal order punishes anyone who tries to help in messes like this. It is always assumed to be self serving colonialism or crass power grabbing.
There is no political upside to getting involved in this crap, and that is, IMO, almost entirely a problem within ourselves.
Sheilbh's explanation is not 100% complete - Lebanon was deep in the shit and spiralling downwards even before the explosion in 2020. The seeds being sown when after the Civil War Lebanon guaranteed that you could freely exchange 1507 Lebanese pounds for one US$. At any bank. Or apparently even at supermarket checkouts.
Lebanese banks were thus forced to maintain large dollar holdings in a country that the Civil War had left with a virtually non-existent export sector.
Lebanon's economy had depended massively on overseas remittances from the diaspora post Civil War. These started to decline in 2011 as sectarian tensions rose.
The Syrian Civil War dumped nearly a million refugees in a country of six million.
Local banks started to be unable to maintain their dollar holdings.
The wheels really started coming off in 2016, which led Lebanon's central bank to start what amounted to a "Ponzi" scheme (at least according to some observers.)
Then when Lebanon finally started to try and raise more revenue to cover its historical "blank cheques"...they triggered protests. Guess what happens when a country looks unstable to the direction of dollar flows?
Not to mention foreign donors have held back large sums of money due to Lebanon's inability to stem corruption or to make agreed reforms.
And Lebanon's taken 13 months to select a new prime-minister to replace the previous one who had stayed on in a caretaker role. Which doesn't help negotiations with the IMF or overseas donors at all.
See, for example -
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/lebanons-financial-meltdown-how-it-happened-2021-06-17/
Or this article recommending dollarisation - written just before the Port explosion (the opening paragraphs, anyway.)
https://www.cato.org/blog/dollarization-lebanon
------------------------------------------------------------
And speaking of corruption in Lebanon and the port explosion? It's possible, based on the explosion strength and other factors and bits of information that have come to light, that roughly 3/4 of the confiscated cargo of ammonium nitrate had gone "walkies" by the time of the explosion.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Also now waiting for our resident economics expert to tell me how much of the above I got wrong or misunderstood. ;)
This is really great stuff - I'm learning a lot here. Thanks for that!
I don't know if great is the word I would use :ph34r:
But yes thanks for the insight Agelastus
Quote from: Valmy on October 16, 2021, 04:51:48 PM
I don't know if great is the word I would use :ph34r:
But yes thanks for the insight Agelastus
Ha! :P
Looks like Russia has shut down their offices working directly with NATO and the EU, and are similarly kicking the NATO and EU offices out of Russia. Apparently they were upset that the staffing for those offices were cut due to alleged spy activities.
Looks like Canada is pulling a Meng Wanzhou on Denmark...
So apparently a Canadian firm is suing a state-owned Russian entity in Canadian court. At issue is a state-owned Russian Arctic vessel Akademik Ioffe that the Canadian company hires to conduct Arctic tours. The vessel ran aground during one of the tours, and the travel company claims it lost about CDN$7.5 million as a result (refunds and evacuation and whatnot).
(https://d1ioghyrwc6upe.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_images/public/2019-04/Ioffe_Ship-Image.jpg)
The Akademik Ioffe was held back in a Portuguese port, but escaped. Now it is in a Danish port and is being held back by Danish authorities at the request of the Canadian courts, as surety against the claim.
The Russians - according to marinetraffic.com - sent the corvette Stoiky straight into the Danish harbour in violation of Danish territorial integrity and in a clear attempt at intimidation.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/%C2%AB%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%C2%BB.jpg)
The Stoiky
... except, of course, it wasn't actually there. It was a hack of marinetraffic.com. So it's mere virtual intimidation rather than actual intimidation, which I suppose makes it less egregious.
Here's a story in Danish (google translate does a decent job if you care to read it). (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/nyt-om-spoegelsesfartoejet-fra-skagen-russisk-statsskib-tilbageholdt-med-krav-paa-39)
<_<
QuoteNo longer a 'cash cow', Saudi squeezes Lebanon's ruined economy
Saudi Arabia's blanket ban on Lebanese imports is another blow to Lebanon's crippled economy, and some fear the squeeze could get worse.
Beirut, Lebanon – It is close to two weeks since Saudi Arabia declared an all-out ban on imported goods from Lebanon after it came to light that a minor Lebanese minister had criticised the kingdom over the civil war in Yemen.
Though the comments were made before the minister took office, for Lebanon, the timing could not be more painful. Cash-strapped and sinking deeper into a two-year-old economic crisis, the import ban by the richest economy in the Arab world is kicking Lebanon's tiny, embattled economy when it is already hopelessly down.
More at Al Jazeera (https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/11/10/no-longer-a-cash-cow-saudi-squeezes-lebanons-ruined-economy)
Quote from: Savonarola on November 10, 2021, 03:53:35 PM
<_<
QuoteNo longer a 'cash cow', Saudi squeezes Lebanon's ruined economy
Saudi Arabia's blanket ban on Lebanese imports is another blow to Lebanon's crippled economy, and some fear the squeeze could get worse.
Beirut, Lebanon – It is close to two weeks since Saudi Arabia declared an all-out ban on imported goods from Lebanon after it came to light that a minor Lebanese minister had criticised the kingdom over the civil war in Yemen.
Though the comments were made before the minister took office, for Lebanon, the timing could not be more painful. Cash-strapped and sinking deeper into a two-year-old economic crisis, the import ban by the richest economy in the Arab world is kicking Lebanon's tiny, embattled economy when it is already hopelessly down.
More at Al Jazeera (https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/11/10/no-longer-a-cash-cow-saudi-squeezes-lebanons-ruined-economy)
No wonder MBS got along with Trump very well. <_<