RUTHFULLY YOURS

In President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s view, Belarus is decent and peaceful, but Western Europe is not. Merely because Belarus’s dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, agreed to open a mosque to lure some Turkish investment.

Back in Turkey, things look very Belarusian — even worse — rather than Western European, a culture Erdogan despises.

President Erdogan’s crackdown on dissent goes at full speed. Asli Erdogan, a peace activist and novelist, worked for Ozgur Gundem, a pro-Kurdish newspaper. She has remained in prison since her August arrest. The prosecutors demand an aggravated life sentence plus 17.5 years in jail for her. How did Asli Erdogan, the novelist, “support terror”? This is from the indictment: “… in an understanding of a novelist [the accused] portrayed terrorists as citizens in her columns.”

“In the history of the program, there has never been such an extraordinary situation where I think we can say that a democracy is threatening to turn itself into a dictatorship.” — Frank Schwabe, German Social Democratic lawmaker and human rights expert.

Europe’s unpleasant game with Turkey should end at once, with Brussels and Ankara admitting that the planned marriage was an awfully bad idea from the beginning.

Reading his public speeches, one may think that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan must be joking; that he is a celebrity stand-up comedian, the best in his profession. In reality, he is not joking. He believes in what he says. And he does not want to make people laugh. He is just an Islamist strongman.

Visiting Minsk, the capital of Belarus, in the first week of November for the opening of a mosque in a dictatorial country where there are 100,000 Muslims, Erdogan accused Western Europe for “intolerance that spreads like the plague.”

Erdogan described Belarus, which Western countries describe as a dictatorship, as “a country in which people with different roots live in peace.” In Erdogan’s view Belarus is decent and peaceful, but Western Europe is not. Merely because Belarus’s dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, agreed to open a mosque to lure some Turkish investment.

Missed in all the media bias is the rejoicing in Hungary, Tel Aviv and in Egyptian President Al Sisi’s government.

He isn’t making with the gags himself, but Donald Trump is boosting global merriment by inspiring his critics to make monumental jokes of themselves. They simper, they sob, they pack suitcases and, most of all, they sneer non-stop at voters deemed so less intelligent than their precious selves.
If US President-elect Donald Trump achieves nothing during his four years in the White House, he has at least given us days of laughter following his election. In this grim world of ours there is often little to laugh about, so thank you, Mr. President-elect, for the hilarity following your election. Observing the mainstream media scrutinizing the tea leaves (and their own entrails) has been side-splitting.

Take the ostentatiously virtuous Peter van Onselen, columnist for The Australian, who wants to tear up his US passport because of the Trump triumph. Perhaps he could tear up his Australian passport as well — just so long as he doesn’t litter our streets with its debris, as angry Clinton supporters have been doing in ‘blue” states in the US.

You see, van Onselen says he could not look his daughters in the eye if he did not protest Trump’s stated intention to see Roe v Wade overturned and, more generally, because of Trump’s attitude to women. Well how does Professor van Onselen look his daughters in the eye while babies in China and India are being aborted purely because they are female? And why didn’t he tear up his US passport when President Bill Clinton seduced an intern in the Oval Office, lied about it and plunged the US into years of hearings and impeachment proceedings? Or when Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy parked a one-night girlfriend in a pond, left her to drown and did not report the accident until the following day? And has Professor van Onselen told his daughters about all John F. Kennedy’s affairs, including his fling with a mafiosi’s mistress?

With red ink engulfing welfare-heavy national budgets, identity politics has become the last, desperate gambit to mine the pockets of the productive, hence the alliance of the Islam and the left. The president-elect’s genius was to recognise those being milked are themselves a marginalized group.
When reason guides the minds of men and women, free-market capitalism and prosperity follow. Reason can either be beaten down or, alternatively, elevated by cultural norms. Islamic cultural norms provide an example of the former; Christian norms an example of the latter. Reason is the enemy of progressive politics. That is why Islamists and the Left find common cause.

Progressive policies are disastrous. They produce human misery: debt, dependency, and division. Debt emerges pari passu with unfillable promises of free stuff. Dependency emerges as regulatory obstacles are put in the way of full employment and the unemployed and the dispossessed are seduced with baubles. Division emerges as sets of citizens are pitted against each other in desperate acts of vote-buying.

But surely progressives aren’t bad people? I will leave the question open. It is an open question when supposed good intentions are not informed by bad experience after bad experience. Okay I have gone too far. They are not bad people. I will settle for deluded or self-serving.

Left-wing prescriptions have a use by date. The use by date transpires when, as Margaret Thatcher so aptly put it, “you run out of other people’s money.” What the heck do progressives do then? In the best of all worlds they convert to conservatism, as I did, or at least take their bat and ball, go home and sulk. We don’t live in this world so, for the most part, progressives double down.

Their difficulty is that their rationale of the past, representing working people seeking a better deal, no longer holds water. Working people have long since got the better deal. Capitalism has given it to them. Result: constituency gone. The conclusion: target and build up other, motley constituencies of special interests.

These constituencies are those serially dependent on taxpayer support; those who value the habitat of yakka skinks over people’s livelihoods; those who hold the wellbeing of refugees higher than those of citizens; and those who form ethnic minorities. Who is left behind? Those left behind are the white working class; those who in former days formed the left’s core constituency. But it’s worse than that. Policies which benefit special interests almost always damage and marginalize the interests of the white working class.

Enter Donald Trump, brazenly appealing to the newly marginalized. Seven out of ten whites without college degrees voted for Trump according to exit polling (Edison Research). This was roughly the same proportion as Latino women voting for Hillary Clinton. And by the way, white women overall (53%) voted for Trump. Those misogyny charges didn’t cut it.

One of the frustrations of the coverage of the US elections was the overwhelming focus on the candidates’ personalities rather than on their policies. Expect no change in future US elections. The press is in the pocket of the Democrats and the Democrats have no credible policies. Ergo, the press will continue to focus on digging dirt on Republicans. The Washington Post had twenty reporters gunning for Trump. It is a wonder they found so little on a flamboyant rich guy when you think about it.

No left-wing parties across the globe have credible policies. They are out of other people’s money to spend. A claim of inequality is their last desperate economic cause du jour. But it is a blind alley for the left. The only way to produce less inequality without devastating the economy is to adopt conservative policies of less government and less regulation. Inequality rises when economies struggle and falls when they are buoyant, as competition for labour drives up wages.

It’s offical — Nicholas Sarkozy is out of the running to regain the office he once held:

Fance’s former president Nicolas Sarkozy conceded defeat Sunday in the race to choose the conservative nominee for next year’s presidential election. With more than 3.2 million votes counted from about 80 percent of polling stations, former prime minister Francois Fillon had 44 percent, former prime minister Alain Juppe had 28.1 and Sarkozy had 21.1 percent.

The two candidates confirmed as winning the most votes advance to the Nov. 27 runoff.

In a speech from his campaign headquarters in Paris on Sunday, Sarkozy called on his supporters to vote for Fillon in the second round. “I did not succeed in convincing a majority of voters. I do respect and understand the will of those (voters) who have chosen for the future other political leaders than me,” Sarkozy said.

Fillon may win the nomination of Les Républicains, but his path to the Palais de l’Élysée is likely to be blocked by “far-right” candidate Marine le Pen, who seeks to ride the same anti-establishment wave that saw Britain ankle the EU and Trump put paid to Hillary Clinton’s girlish presidential fantasy.

The conservative nominee is expected to have strong chances of winning the April-May presidential election, because traditional rivals on the left have been weakened by Socialist Francois Hollande’s troubled presidency.

The conservative candidate’s main challenger may turn out to be far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who is hoping anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and anti-establishment sentiment can propel her to the presidency. Le Pen, official candidate of her once-pariah National Front party, did not take part in the conservative primary.

The conservatives’ campaign has focused on immigration and security concerns following recent attacks by Islamic extremists.

Islam is, of course, le Pen’s strong suit — meaning she’s against its encroachment into Christian Europe, as is every patriotic Frenchmen and responsible European. Polls had already shown le Pen clobbering Sarkozy and she’s like to be able to defeat Fillon as well. Juppe had been tipped as le Pen’s strongest rival, but his second-place finish (which ensures him a runoff against Fillon) doesn’t bode well.

Front National leader Marine Le Pen has taken a sizeable lead over Nicolas Sarkozy in a new French presidential election poll. The far-right leader had 29 per cent of the vote when pitted against Les Républicains’ former president, who was eight points behind, and held a 15-point lead over the Parti de Gauche’s Jean-Luc Mélenchon in the poll released by Ipsos.

Now that Sarkozy is out of the race, French intellectuals are waking up to the real possibility that le Pen will defeat the “conservative” candidate, whether Fillon or Juppe, and trounce incumbent socialist Francois Hollande, should he choose to run again. CONTINUE AT SITE