Defining protectionism down

Something worthwhile on the new Guardian blog: A post by Daniel Davies.

Economic “protectionism” is back in the news with a vengeance, with France objecting to takeovers in the steel sector, Spain putting together national champion utilities and the USA crying blue murder over Dubai Ports World’s proposed acquisition of P&O. James Surowiecki had an article in the Saturday Guardian painstakingly setting out the conventional wisdom on this subject (ie that it’s very bad). Trouble is, this isn’t really what “protectionism” means.

Via Atrios.

Belarusobloggin’

Want to know what’s happening in the Belarus civil war? Belarus Today‘s yer blog. Except, of course, it’s not. As it says at the bottom of the page:

This website is part of a foreign policy simulation. The events depicted are not actually taking place.

Thank God for that. After all, by the end of the Norman Patterson School of International Affairs’s scenario simulation, the NATO Secretary General had suffered a heart attack, Gerhard Schröder had made a fool of himself, Minsk was in flames and USAF and Italian aircraft were heading for their targets..

It sounds fun. Just a pity that the transcript isn’t on the web.

Update: (From Edward, apologies in advance to Alex for butting-in like this, but there didn’t seem to be enough for a separate post here). Events still seem to be tense in Belarus with Lukashenko opponents attempting to gain ‘orange-like’ traction, and EU observers keeping up the pressure. Also it may be worth pointing out that Belarus is another one of those incredible shrinking countries, and I’ve just posted a little data about this on Demography Matters, so either way – with or without Lukashenko – the future looks extraordinarily bleak for these long-suffering people (remember they were also hit by Chernobyl).

Update the second: The Patterson School’s website is here.

The Fire Not Quite This Time

On Sunday, the people of Belarus will vote to elect their new president, who will be the same as their old president, Alexander Lukashenko. The incumbent will win about three-quarters of the vote because, I’ve been reading, that is the share that he wants to receive. Which only shows that he is a slightly more sophisticated autocrat than his many late and unlamented predecessors in Eastern and Central Europe. (Or Western, for that matter.)
Continue reading

EU Energy Policy

Well leaks seem to abound this morning about a draft policy paper which European Commission president José Manuel Barroso is circulating prior to the March 23 summit (and here). According to the leaks the paper proposes a coordinated approach designed to achieve a new long-term partnership with Russia and the creation of a gas stockpile, which could be released as a gesture of ‘solidarity’ in times of disruption.

Some difficulties are already evident, expecially in the light of the resurgence of neo-protectionism in some important EU states which seems destined to place limits on any attempts to increase cross-border connections and competition. Another possible issue is the idea of approaching Iran as an alternative gas provider, a suggestion which seems to highlight better than anything the fragility of our present supplies, especially if Iran and Russia were ever to decide that it was in their interests to have a common policy vis-a-vis the EU.

Italian Elections 2006

Ok, the Italian elections are now just about one month away, although you wouldn’t guess this from reading the British press where the David Mills/Silvio Berlusconi case is what seems to be making all the running. Now as I indicated in this post, I will try and give some systematic coverage to the election issues as they evolve during the campaign. In that post I outlined 7 issues which I thought would be worth looking at in an election which I think is going to be very important not just for the Italian people themselves but for all citizens of the EU. I had a first pass at one of the topics here (and here).

Maybe the best starting point is number 7 on the list: the sense of denial.

Looking at the fact that Berlusconi himself seems to have started his campaign in Washington, while former Commission president Romano Prodi now seems to have become an early convert to neo-protectionism (and this piece), I would definitely say that this is really the number one issue. In order to help me on my course through these troubled waters Roberto of Wind Rose Hotel has kindly offered to send me some on the spot material. Here is his first missive. It confirms my worst fears.
Continue reading

David Irving: My Part in His Downfall

David Irving, as no doubt we all know, is beginning his new career as a jailbird, in the great grey walls of the Josefstadt prison next to the even greater and greyer Landesgericht between Vienna’s city hall and its university. Now, there are plenty of facile things to say about this: freedom of expression is vital, dammit!/Nazis must be suppressed!/What if he was a Muslim? But I hope to raise some others.

Total disclosure: I participated tangentially in Irving’s lawsuit against Deborah Lipstadt. At the time I was a student of the world Holocaust authority, Professor Peter Longerich, who was one of the team of historians who acted as expert witnesses under the direction of Professor Richard J. Evans. Whilst Longerich was known to be preparing for one of his court appearances, he asked me to borrow various works of reference from the Bedford Library at Royal Holloway for him. I was not pleased, some time later, when the librarians demanded I pay fines on the books, although Irving’s defeat was some relief.

Irving is a liar who deserves nothing but contempt. (Richard Evans’s book on the case is strongly recommended for detail.) It cannot go unremarked that he has always chosen to “challenge conventional wisdom”, in the charitable way people put it, in front of audiences who are both already converted to his point of view and willing to pay well for confirmation of theirs. His lecture circuit – mad US militias, western European fascists, apartheid South Africa – speaks for itself, as do those who admit to financing him.

And there’s the rub. In Britain, his nonsense might just be tolerable. But this is in a sense a luxury afforded by a lack of fascists. I can think of many countries where this is so:
Continue reading

Viva Ricardo!

Guy of these pages recently spoke to a “source” who has an interesting counter-take on the Italian economy and the Italian government’s debt problem to that frequently discussed here. Apparently, the feller says, there’s no chance of “an Argentinian-style blowout” because of the low levels of private debt.

The source is essentially arguing that Ricardian equivalence holds for Italy. That is to say, private and public savings ratios match each other-when the government borrows, the private sector saves, and vice versa. Hence the recovery path after a debt crisis would be that firms and households load up on debt to invest and consume, kick starting a Keynesian recovery.

Now, it’s an observable fact that the Italian government is up to its neck in debt and households are hoarding cash, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that Ricardian equivalence holds. Correlation does not imply causation, and Ricardian equivalence itself is anything but uncontroversial. In fact, it’s not so much an economic theory as a point for discussion, despite having been around almost as long as economics itself. There are some cases that support it – Israel in the 1980s being the classic – but a lot that don’t.

Arguments that fit the facts are always preferable to ones that don’t, but yer man is a braver man than me if he is basing his business decisions on this theory. Especially, I’m not at all clear on what the intermediate analysis/microfoundations are meant to be-how do we get from here to there? Presumably the Eurocrisis option would be one – out of the €, deep devaluation, export-led recovery and follow through to the domestic economy. But the pain of such a course would be epic. And it’s still worth pointing out that I still haven’t met a European business person who considers it even within the realm of the non-crazed (perhaps I don’t deal with enough Italians). More seriously, the panic and Weltuntergangsstimmung that would accompany such a course would have dramatically depressing effects on those ol’ animal spirits.

What of a forced Ricardian equivalence, about the only other story I can see that would satisfy our man’s argument? Imagine that the Italian government retires large quantities (perhaps massive quantities in the course of a debt crisis) of bonds from private and institutional investors and refinances them with the banks. Government paper is a reserve asset, and an increase in reserve assets should mean a multiple increase in credit creation to the private sector. One may recall that some monetarist-minded governments have been keen on manipulating the balance between T-bill-like assets held by banks and bonds held by funds and individuals in order to influence the creation of credit, usually in a deflationary direction – so why not in an inflationary direction?

It’s a bit like reversing the economic flux capacitor, and it’s certainly what in computing we would call a horrible, kludgy hack, and the inflationary bit could easily go well out of kilter, and the whole thing would be dependent on a lot of good will from a lot of banks, but it bears a passing resemblance to some proposals of Paul Krugman’s regarding Japan in the late 1990s. Edward Hugh will no doubt call attention to the similarities between the problems.

Does the weirdness of the solutions mark the optimism of the “source’s” argument? Or is it a long shot..but it might just work? A key number will clearly be the percentage of Italian government debt held by banks.

Burn your hard drives.

The day is approaching fast (likely the release date of Microsoft’s next version of its Windows operating system, called Windows Vista) on which a so-called trusted platform module on your computer’s motherboard will be able bar you from accessing the data on your computer, or at least bar you from doing with it what you want to do, if what you want to do does not comply with the rules embedded in it.

This is on the one hand a consequence of the entertainment industry’s global strategy to reduce the utility of their products to be able to command higher prices for them, and on the other an attempt to increase the security of data on a computer – in case you would not be able to access your files, it would be rather certain that no one else would be either.

Well, don’t be too sure.
Continue reading

Islam; internal discussion, pt 5

Alex, I agree. But to know what happened to the ideals when they became their respective opium can only serve as a reminder to be careful, and, that politics matters. In fact, my idea of “dealing with Islam” doesn’t necessarily include the CRS, but compulsory Europe-wide reading of the relevant articles on Wikipedia, for example. I mean, look at what’s going on, this is not about state-prescribed belief, or even opposition to it, it’s about campaign management.

I think on of the fundamental problems with today’s version of enlightenment is that it is actually quite unenlightened. It’s no longer a conclusion but just another start of a thought process. Today, I’d say that most Europeans are orthopraxically not-religious as many Muslims are, and many people in Alabama probably are (again).

We will need to socially reconnect with our own enlightenment roots if we are to convince anyone of their value. We probably need to focus on the 16th – 18th century ourselves for a bit.

Islam, internal discussion; pt 4

Maybe so. Most people arguing for this, though, aren’t the ones I’d want to take
sides with in a rerun of the 16th C. I doubt Freeborn John Lilburne would have
been lining up with Sarkozy, Berlusconi, Clarke, or Daniel Pipes.

When push comes to shove, I bet the Islamic Reformation boosters will be the
first to move up a hundred years and give those ungrateful savages a taste of
the Dialektik der Aufklaerung’s thick ugly side for not wanting to be civilised
by the CRS. The problem is that it’s not the Reformation they want, but
Enlightenment in the form Napoleon practiced it on Egypt in 1798. Something THEY
do to YOU.

State-prescribed belief: bad medicine, and one that European doctors have been
far too happy to prescribe in the last century. If the genuine heroes of the
Reformation fought for anything it was liberty of belief, the precondition of
the Enlightenment’s scientific achievements, but also the first thing the
various post-Enlightenment tyrannies destroyed in the name of their own version
of reason.

The problem with AFOE membership is that stuff like this gets used up on
internal emails…