sábado, 17 de maio de 2014

Into Africa: China's Wild Rush - Howard French

Into Africa: China's Wild Rush
Howard French
The New York Times, May 16, 2014

NAIROBI, Kenya — For nearly a decade, as China made a historic push for business opportunities and expanded influence in Africa, most of the continent’s leaders were so thrilled at having a deep-pocketed partner willing to make big investments and start huge new projects that they rarely paused to consider whether they were getting a sound deal.
China has peppered the continent with newly built stadiums, airports, hospitals, highways and dams, but as Africans are beginning to fully recognize, these projects have also left many countries saddled with heavy debts and other problems, from environmental conflict to labor strife. As a consequence, China’s relationship with the continent is entering a new and much more skeptical phase.
The doubts aren’t coming from any soured feelings from African leaders themselves, most of whom still welcome (and profit from) China’s embrace. The new skepticism has even less to do with the hectoring of Western governments, the traditional source of Africa’s foreign aid and investment (and interference). In a 2012 speech in Senegal, Hillary Rodham Clinton, then secretary of state, implicitly warned Africa about China. The continent needs “a model of sustainable partnership that adds value, rather than extracts it,” she said, adding that unlike other countries, “America will stand up for democracy and universal human rights even when it might be easier to look the other way and keep the resources flowing.”
Some Africans found Mrs. Clinton’s remarks patronizing. What’s most remarkable, however, is how passé this now seems, given skepticism about China from Africa’s own increasingly vibrant civil society, which is demanding to know what China’s billions of dollars in infrastructure building, mineral extraction and land acquisition mean for the daily lives and political rights of ordinary Africans.
This represents a tricky and unfamiliar challenge for China’s authoritarian system, whose foreign policy has always focused heavily on state-to-state relations. China’s leaders demonstrate little appreciation of the yawning gulfs that separate African people from their rulers, even in newly democratic countries. Beijing is constitutionally uneasy about dealing with independent actors like advocacy groups, labor unions and independent journalists.
After a decade of bland talk about “win-win” partnerships, China seems finally aware that it needs to improve both the style and substance of its push into Africa. Last week, at the start of a four-country African trip, Prime Minister Li Keqiang acknowledged “growing pains” in the relationship, and the need to “assure our African friends in all seriousness that China will never pursue a colonialist path like some countries did, or allow colonialism, which belongs to the past, to reappear in Africa.”
This language came in belated response to a sea change that arguably began with an op-ed essay last year in The Financial Times by Lamido Sanusi, who was recently suspended as Nigeria’s central bank governor. He wrote: “In much of Africa, they have set up huge mining operations. They have also built infrastructure. But, with exceptions, they have done so using equipment and labor imported from home, without transferring skills to local communities. So China takes our primary goods and sells us manufactured ones. This was also the essence of colonialism.”
Mr. Sanusi’s commentary prompted critical assessments of China’s involvement in countries like Botswana and Namibia, over issues like the takeover of local construction industries, or the proper execution of building projects, working conditions, and the proliferation of Chinese newcomers — many of them illegal migrants — who have begun to dominate low-level commerce in a number of countries.
In Ghana, an estimated 50,000 new migrants, most of whom are said to have hailed from a single county in southern China, showed up recently to conduct environmentally devastating gold mining. This set off a popular outcry that forced the Ghanaian government to respond, resulting in arrests of miners, many of whom are being expelled to China.
In Tanzania, labor unions that have historically been close to the ruling party have strongly criticized the government for opening the floodgates to Chinese petty traders.
In Senegal, neighborhood associations blocked a giant property deal that would have handed over a prime section of downtown real estate to a Chinese developer with a scant track record.
Independent media have played an important role in demanding more scrutiny of government deals with Beijing. A recent op-ed article in one of Kenya’s leading newspapers, The Daily Nation, questioned whether a huge new Chinese investment in a railroad that would run from the coast all the way to landlocked Uganda and beyond was truly a good deal. The project’s first phase will increase Kenya’s external debt by a third.
The writer, David Ndii, noted that Kenya could have sought the financing for a project like this through the World Bank, which would have cost as little as a third of the Chinese commercial loan. But that would have required time-consuming processes, from competitive bidding to rigorous environmental and feasibility studies. Kenya’s Constitution insists on “intergenerational equity,” but also requires that “public money be used in a prudent and responsible manner.” Mr. Ndii asked whether the deal with the Chinese was consistent with either provision.
As someone who recently spent a year traveling widely in Africa to research a book about Beijing’s relations with the continent, I find Mr. Sanusi’s assessment too pessimistic. Yet a dose of caution for Africa, and of public scrutiny about the high-level deal-making underway, was clearly long overdue.
The booming, fast-changing China offers potentially extraordinary upsides to Africa. Without question, the continent is badly in need of more and better infrastructure. Competition among foreign investors holds the prospect of better returns for African states. Immigration, which is the central topic of my own reporting, has begun to create serious tensions between China and its new African partners, but even this is insufficiently recognized for its potential dividends. The spread of trading and business diasporas throughout history, including that of China, have a deep and proven track record for wealth creation, and properly managed, this could prove true for Africa as well.
But because China seems to be in such a hurry, and is so often seen to be looking out for itself, the potential downsides for many Africans have begun more and more to stand out: accelerated environmental destruction via mining and other activities; disregard for labor rights; the hollowing out of local industry; and even the stalling of the continent’s democratization.
This isn’t simply a matter of Beijing’s doing business with odious dictators, whether Omar al-Bashir of Sudan or Robert G. Mugabe of Zimbabwe. From Zaire to Equatorial Guinea to Rwanda, the West clearly has its own deep and insufficiently acknowledged history of doing much the same.
Rather, the problem (though not limited to China) is relying on shady arrangements made at the very top of the political system, often in the president’s office itself. Contracts are greased with monetary bribes and other enticements like expense-paid shopping trips to China and scholarships there for elite children. Adding to the opacity, China typically favors its state-owned companies for African projects and bypasses open, competitive bidding procedures.
The best way for the United States and other rich countries that have economic and political interests in Africa to respond is not by warning Africans about the advance of China — but rather, helping to strengthen African civil society and, thereby, governance. Washington should also encourage China and other up-and-coming players in the international economy, from Brazil to Turkey to Vietnam, to abide by higher transparency standards — and to rigorously abide by them, too.
In the end, though, what will minimize any downsides of China’s involvement in Africa is the deepening of African democracy. Grass-roots activism and vibrant independent media are, everywhere, the ultimate check on corrupt legislators and on foreigners who get lucrative but unsound deals by handing over bags of cash.
 Howard W. French  is an associate professor of journalism at Columbia University, a former correspondent for The New York Times and the author, most recently, of “China’s Second Continent: How a Million Migrants Are Building a New Empire in Africa.”

36 Hours in Washington, DC - Jennifer Steinhauer (NYT)

Preparando uma visita à capital federal:

36 Hours in Washington, D.C.
Jennifer Steinhauer
The New York Times, May 15, 2014

While most Americans associate Capitol Hill with Congressional misadventures and general dysfunction, thousands of people — senators, reporters, congressional aides, artists, working-class long-timers and young families — call it home. Amid the charming rowhouses and grand federal buildings, Capitol Hill is dotted with restaurants and night spots. Its history is vibrant and largely accessible, from the United States Capitol to the Navy Yard, where the banks of the Anacostia River were once lined with military ships, to dynamic H Street, the site of riots after the 1968 assassination of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. And don’t forget baseball. Take in a Nationals game, if possible, among cheering fans and very good stadium chow.
FRIDAY
1. Green Oasis | 3 p.m. 
Most tourists are drawn to the city’s spectacular array of admission-free Smithsonian museums, but the United States Botanic Garden is an overlooked pleasure in the shadows of the Capitol. Created by Congress as an instructional garden, this is an oasis of roses; medicinal plants; native, exotic and endangered flowers; orchids; shoots and seeds; ferns and the occasional carnivorous plant and more. You could while away an hour in the National Garden alone, with its Butterfly Garden and the First Ladies Water Garden, which explores the history of White House residents and their gardening interests. Also on the grounds is the lovely Bartholdi Park, where visitors can pick up horticulture tips. No gift shop, no restaurant. Just flowers, and more flowers.
2.  Rose and Rye | 6 p.m. 
By 4:30, locals are lined up for the first seating at Rose’s Luxury, a cultish little Barracks Row spot that has a distinct Charleston vibe. Head upstairs to the bar for a cocktail served in gorgeous mismatched barware. Try the rose-water cocktail, with a generous splash of rye ($11). The fried oysters ($3 each) are among the best you’ll find in any city, and don’t miss the confit jerk chicken ($13).
3. H Street Sustenance | 8 p.m.
Head north to bustling H Street, where gentrification has been slow but steady, to begin the rest of your evening. Start at the Atlas Room, where tables fill quickly and reservations are recommended. Residents know to sidle up to the bar for a bourbon and innovative American cooking, including pork shoulder with eggplant in a spicy peach sauce ($23) or foie gras with truffle vincotto appetizer ($13). The bartender can be a little cranky at first; engage him on the wine list and chickpea dish, and he’ll be your best friend.
4. Pub Crawl | 10 p.m.
Revitalization means the arrival of fun bars and good pie. Start at the Biergarten Haus — try a König hefeweizen — and then head to the H Street Country Club, a multilevel space with table games and an elaborate mini-golf course with Washington-themed holes like one with a replica of the Washington Monument. Round it out at the Pug, a local bar that smells vaguely of a high school party, and also the place where diners wait for a seat at the wildly popular Toki Underground restaurant upstairs, which annoyingly doesn’t take reservations but does serve sublime Japanese food.
SATURDAY
5. Dive Bar Breakfast | 8 a.m.
A family-owned, decades-old dive bar extraordinaire, where Capitol Hill’s older and working-class residents pull on Budweisers and scarf down burgers at night, the Tune Inn is also a decent place to start the morning. The coffee is meh — a problem throughout much of the city — but the French toast tastes of nutmeg, the Irish omelet with grits is legitimate and the service is professional. Expect to pay about $10 for breakfast. If you were hoping to spot Speaker John A. Boehner, hit Pete’s Diner, a few blocks away.
6. History at the Library |  9 a.m.
One of the city’s greatest troves of stories, artwork, history and architecture, the Library of Congress, which began as Thomas Jefferson’s personal library, is often skipped over, although there is much to see here. While it is best known for its ornate main reading room, the library offers a number of exhibits on Civil War history, music, cartography, poetry and the like.
7. For Shakespeare Buffs | 11 a.m.
After the hustle and bustle of the Mall’s Smithsonian museums, like the National Air and Space Museum and the National Gallery of Art, the Folger is a quiet, hidden respite. A “bardophile” paradise, the reading rooms of this library are open only to scholars, although Saturday tours are available; sign up in advance. Open to all at no cost is the world’s largest collection of objects related to Shakespeare and his world, including paintings, etchings, sculptures, books and manuscripts. The Tudor-style theater, based on the Globe in London, has an intimate orchestra level and balcony tiers straight from “Shakespeare in Love.” Plays run almost nightly.
8. Pizza on the Hill | 12:30 p.m.
Sometimes lost in the shadows of We, the Pizza, the “Top Chef"-star-run competitor down the street, Seventh Hill Pizza serves up the real deal: crisp, charred, thin-crusted pizza. Try the Eastern Market with goat cheese, tapenade and mushrooms ($10.95 for an eight-inch pie) or the Potomac Ave. with Felino salami and arugula ($10.95), washed down with a little glass of grenache or maybe a Purple Haze beer.
9. Cemetery Stroll |  2 p.m.
Stretching beneath the unforgiving walls of the city jail is the Congressional Cemetery, with long walking paths and benches. The cemetery is filled with the graves of lawmakers, including Representative Stephen J. Solarz, Democrat of Brooklyn, who once had a nine-hour conversation with Fidel Castro and alienated many in his own party when he supported the Persian Gulf war in 1991; and Representative Tom Lantos, the only Holocaust survivor to serve in Congress. Here, also, is John Philip Sousa’s burial site, marked with a stone lyre, and the grave of J. Edgar Hoover, which is suitably forbidding, surrounded by a wrought-iron fence. The ladies in the welcome center smile as they offer self-guided tour maps. Visitors can pay $10 for a day pass for their dogs to run off the leash among the dead.
10. Straight From New York | 8 p.m.
With Osteria Morini, the New York chef Michael White managed to break the rule about the inverse relationship between food quality and view: Giant windows overlook the Anacostia River and new riverfront park. But be prepared for a high noise level in this bustling spot. Among the best bets are the cured meats with cherry jam ($17), a succulent duck breast with farro, braised greens and cherries ($29) and the mixed grill of lamb, skirt steak, sausage and pancetta ($29). Desserts include an inventive selection of gelati — stracciatella and grapefruit-Campari among them (three for $9).
11. Jazz It Up | 10 p.m.
Not merely a club, HR 57 is a cultural center devoted to the history of jazz and blues. The name of the place is pure Washington: It refers to a 1987 House of Representatives resolution — HR 57 — that designated jazz a rare and valuable national American treasure. Don’t expect ambience: A large old-school video screen flashes acts, the décor is decidedly sparse and drink selection is minimal. But it’s all about the music, and you’ll hear some of the best jazz gigs in the city, including the up-and-comer Antonio Parker.
SUNDAY
12. Pancakes and Crab Cakes | 10 a.m.
The indoor Eastern Market has some competition from the more upscale Union Market, but the food purveyors and artisans make this a draw for visitors and locals who crowd the counter space at Market Lunch for blueberry pancakes ($5.50 for a short stack) or a crab cake sandwich ($9.95), the most vernacular of Washington fare. Then check out the market’s wares, including woven bracelets, or giraffes made out of aluminum cans. If there is time, zip over to the adorable Hill’s Kitchen, which occupies an 1884 townhouse, to fill your suitcase with some crazy, colorful kitchenware.
13. Around the Park | 2 p.m.
End your visit at the sprawling Lincoln Park. On the west end of the park sits a monument to the activist Mary McLeod Bethune, and at the other a striking, and bizarre, statue of President Lincoln holding the Emancipation Proclamation with a presumably freed slave kneeling at his feet. If you need refreshment before hitting the road, head to Ted’s Bulletin, a 15-minute walk away, for a divine milkshake ($8.99); if you’re not driving, get one spiked.
THE DETAILS
1. United States Botanic Garden, 100 Maryland Ave SW; usbg.gov.
 2. Rose’s Luxury, 717 Eighth Street SE; rosesluxury.com.
3. The Atlas Room, 1015 H Street NE; theatlasroom.com.
 4. Biergarten Haus, 1355 H Street NE; biergartenhaus.com. H Street Country Club,  1335 H Street NE; thehstreetcountryclub.com.  The Pug, 1234 H Street NE; thepugdc.com.
5. Tune Inn, 331 Pennsylvania Avenue SE.
6. The Library of Congress, 10 First Street, SE; loc.gov.
7. Folger Shakespeare Library, 201 East Capitol Street SE; folger.edu/index.cfm.
8. Seventh Hill Pizza, 327 Seventh Street SE; montmartredc.com/seventhhill.
9. Congressional Cemetery, 1801 E Street SE; congressionalcemetery.org.
10. Osteria Morini, 301 Water Street SE; osteriamorini.com.
11. HR 57, 1007 H Street NE; hr57.org.
12. Eastern Market, 225 Seventh Street SE; easternmarket-dc.org. Hill’s Kitchen,  713 D Street SE; hillskitchen.com.
13. Lincoln Park, nps.gov/cahi/historyculture/cahi_lincoln.htm. Ted’s Bulletin, 505 Eighth Street SE; tedsbulletincapitolhill.com.
Lodging
The major chain hotels can be found within a mile of the Capitol, but a better option is the Hotel George (15 E Street NW; hotelgeorge.com; from $249), a Kimpton Hotel with a fun George Washington theme and animal- print robes. A stone’s throw from Union Station and the Capitol, it has the added bonus of a very decent restaurant, Bistro Bis, which also has a sexy bar.
A less expensive and slightly less elegant but equally convenient option is the Liaison Capitol Hill (415 New Jersey Avenue NW; affinia.com; from $219), an Affinia Hotel, with 343 rooms and a seasonal rooftop deck and pool, an unusual feature for hotels at this price. Locals still flock to the four-year-old Art and Soul, run by Art Smith, best known as Oprah’s chef.

Book review: o racismo cientifico num livro que pode ser cientificamente racista

Concordo com o resenhista: o livro é uma má construção de um problema real: pessoas estão sempre refletindo o ambiente em que foram criadas...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 

A TROUBLESOME INHERITANCE
Genes, Race and Human History
By Nicholas Wade
278 pages. The Penguin Press. $27.95.

Reviewed by Arthur Allen
The New York Times Book Review, May 15, 2014

Few areas of science have contributed more to human misery than the study of racial difference. In the 1920s, eugenicists from top American universities promoted the sterilization of the unfit and later praised Hitler’s racial codes while advocating laws that would exclude thousands of Jews from our shores.
Contemporary researchers have found it useful to examine genetic variations that affect traits like diabetes in Native Americans or high blood pressure in African-Americans. But in the shadow of the Holocaust, scientists in the United States have largely avoided the classification of races as a “futile exercise,” in the words of the population geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza; the very concept of race is a matter of scientific debate.
In “A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History,” however, Nicholas Wade argues that scientists need to get over their hang-ups and jump into studies of racial difference. “The intellectual barriers erected many years ago to combat racism now stand in the way of studying the recent evolutionary past,” he writes. 
Mr. Wade, a longtime science writer for The New York Times, draws on the wealth of evolutionary data that has emerged from the decoding of human genomes. This research has enabled scientists to imagine our prehistory with more precision, and the picture is one of unexpectedly significant genetic change since many of our ancestors left Africa. Since this evolution affected traits such as skin color, body hair and the tolerance of alcohol, milk and high altitude, why not intelligence and social behavior as well? Mr. Wade asks. 
The central problem here is that if significant genetic-controlled behavioral differences exist among races, with scant (at most) exception they haven’t been discovered yet. To build a case with the evidence at hand requires a great deal of speculation, with the inevitable protrusion of the nonscientific worldview. 
Mr. Wade presents a few scattered genetic studies and attempts to weld them into a grand theory of global history for the past 50,000 years. Where Jared Diamond argued in  “Guns, Germs and Steel”  that environment and geography enabled Europe to develop a highly successful civilization, Mr. Wade says environmental pressures led to genetic differences that account for much of that advantage. “The rise of the West,” he writes, “is an event not just in history but also in human evolution.” 
Conservative scholars like the political scientist Francis Fukuyama have long argued that social institutions and culture explain why Europe beat Asia to prosperity, and why parts of the Mideast and Africa continue to suffer destabilizing violence and misery. 
Mr. Wade takes this already controversial argument a step further, contending that “slight evolutionary differences in social behavior” underlie social and cultural differences. A small but consistent divergence in a racial group’s tendency to trust outsiders — and therefore to accept central rather than tribal authority — could explain “much of the difference between tribal and modern societies,” he writes.
This is where Mr. Wade’s argument starts to go off the rails.
At times, his theorizing is merely puzzling, as when he notes that the gene variant that gives East Asians dry earwax also produces less body odor, which would have been attractive “among people spending many months in confined spaces to escape the cold.” No explanation of why ancient Europeans, presumably cooped up just as much, didn’t also develop this trait. Later, he speculates that thick hair and small breasts evolved in Asian women because they may have been “much admired by Asian men.” And why, you might ask, did Asian men alone prefer these traits?
Mr. Wade occasionally drops in broad, at times insulting assumptions about the behavior of particular groups without substantiating the existence of such behaviors, let alone their genetic basis. Writing about Africans’ economic condition, for example, Mr. Wade wonders whether “variations in their nature, such as their time preference, work ethic and propensity to violence, have some bearing on the economic decisions they make.” 
For Mr. Wade, genetic differences help explain the failure of the United States occupations in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. “If institutions were purely cultural,” he writes, “it should be easy to transfer an institution from one society to another.” It’s hard to know how to begin to address such a puzzling statement. 
Mr. Wade acknowledges that specific evidence for the influence of “social behavior” genes is quite limited. The one example he presents repeatedly is the MAOA 2R variant, the so-called warrior gene that has been linked to violent behavior in men abused as children and is more common in blacks than whites or Asians. Mr. Wade admits that such genes at most create a tendency to violence, and adds that there may be other, yet undiscovered violence-susceptibility genes that could skew the racial picture.
Mr. Wade’s distinctive focus is on how evolution, in his view, shaped different races’ “radius of trust,” or ability to assume loyalty to, say, a nation rather than a tribe, and to punish those who violate social rules. Modern civilizations select out violent individuals and their genes, which might be more valuable in tribal societies, he argues.
When it comes to his leitmotif — the need for scientists to drop “politically correct” attitudes toward race — Mr. Wade displays surprisingly sanguine assumptions about the ability of science to generate facts free from the cultural mesh of its times. He argues that because the word “racism” did not appear in the Oxford English Dictionary until 1910, racism is a “modern concept, and that pre-eugenics studies of race were “reasonably scientific.” This would surely surprise any historian of European colonies in Africa or the Americas. 
“Science is about what is, not what ought to be,” Mr. Wade writes. “Its shifting sands do not support values, so it is foolish to place them there.” Yet he acknowledges that views of scientific truth are highly contextual. The philosopher Herbert Spencer “was one of the most prominent intellectuals of the second half of the 19th century, and his ideas, however harsh they may seem today, were widely discussed,” Mr. Wade writes. Why does he suppose that Spencer was so popular? Was it science’s “shifting sands” that gave his ideas credibility, or their tendency to support what powerful people wanted to believe? 
The philosopher Ludwik Fleck once wrote, “ ‘To see’ means to recreate, at a suitable moment, a picture created by the mental collective to which one belongs.” While there is much of interest in Mr. Wade’s book, readers will probably see what they are predisposed to see: a confirmation of prejudices, or a rather unconvincing attempt to promote the science of racial difference. 

Arthur Allen is the author of “The Fantastic Laboratory of Dr. Weigl,” to be published by W. W. Norton in July.

Egito e Siria: um pouco da miseria do mundo - Foreign Policy


Inacreditável...
É tudo o que eu consigo dizer...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 


Defense Lawyers Quit Egypt’s Trial of Al Jazeera Journalists


The lawyers for two of three Al Jazeera journalists being tried in Egypt on charges of fomenting violence have quit accusing the Qatar-based news agency of a "vendetta." The lead defense lawyer, Farag Fathy said "Al Jazeera is using my clients" and that the network was "fabricating quotes" attributed to him. Additionally, the court has demanded defense lawyers pay $170,000 to view footage prosecutors say shows the journalists fabricated news reports to incite unrest. The trial has been adjourned until May 22, and the journalists have again been denied bail. Meanwhile, Al Jazeera Arabic correspondent Abdullah Elshamy, who has been held without charges since August 2013, has been transferred to solitary confinement after smuggling a video out of Tora prison highlighting his deteriorating health. Elshamy has been on hunger strike for 107 days protesting his detention.

Syria
A car bombing killed at least 43 people in the Syrian province of Aleppo near the Bab al-Salam border crossing into Turkey. The area is the main route used by Syrians refugee fleeing into Turkey. The region has been controlled by the Islamic Front's Tawhid Brigade, which has been engaged in fierce fighting with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) since January. Iran has reportedly been recruiting thousands of Afghan refugees to fight alongside President Bashar al-Assad's forces in Syria. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has been offering $500 a month as well as Iranian residency and has been training Afghan fighters. Meanwhile, growing frustrated with the inability of the United Nations to deliver humanitarian aid to Syrians, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States is exploring other options for providing aid, including circumventing the Syrian government. Additionally, Kerry stated he has seen evidence suggesting that Assad's forces have used chlorine gas in attacks on rebel fighters and civilians in recent months, which would be against the weapons convention signed by the Syrian government.

James Madison, como se fosse hoje... - A new biography by Lynne Cheney

JAMES MADISON
A Life Reconsidered
By Lynne Cheney
Viking. 563 pp. $36

Book review: “James Madison: A Life Reconsidered,” by Lynne Cheney

By H.W. Brands

The Washington Post, Friday, May 16, 2014


The enduring appeal to Americans of our founding generation lies not in the genius of its members, who were smart but no smarter than typical students at a first-rate law school today; not in their high-minded devotion to the common weal, for they could be as petty and provincial as any local pol in our times; not in their deep insight into human nature, which was no greater and arguably was less than that of the modern scientific age. Rather, the appeal of the founders lies in the fact that we have no idea what they would have thought about the pressing issues of our times.
Consequently liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans can claim the founders and cite their words and actions in support. Are taxes too high? The American Revolution started in a dispute over taxes, so yes, the founders would have thought so. But no: The crux of the complaint was that taxes were imposed by a body in which Americans weren’t represented. Politics too partisan? Of course: The founders, almost to a man, condemned the influence of parties. But no sooner was the ink dry on the Constitution than they created a party system that was, if anything, nastier than our own. Obamacare? Who can say, of an era when the principal instruments of medical care included the lance and the leech?
Though demonstrating this ambiguity is not Lynne Cheney’s intention, her graceful and balanced life of James Madison shows it well. The author, who has written several books of history primarily for young readers, works a bit too hard at justifying a new biography of Madison. She contends that the common view of Madison is of a “shy and sickly scholar, someone hardly suited for the demands of daily life, much less the rough-and-tumble world of politicking.” This might be the view of some, but the more general impression is the one Cheney herself conveys: of a brilliant, shrewd statesman who, more than anyone else, was responsible for the Constitution. Yet she needn’t have worried: A good story bears retelling, especially a story as important as Madison’s.
Interestingly, given Cheney’s criticism of what she takes for the conventional wisdom on Madison, she devotes substantial space to his physical maladies, especially a syndrome involving attacks akin to those of epilepsy. Madison shunned that label, not least because epilepsy still carried connotations of demonic possession. But the attacks understandably distressed him, until he concluded from his reading that the physically challenged could be the most intellectually able. “The strongest and soundest minds [possess] the most infirm and sickly bodies,” he wrote in his commonplace book. “The knife cuts the sheath, as the French materially express it.”
Madison’s ailments didn’t prevent him from diving precociously into politics. At 23 he helped push Virginia toward revolution and independence. At 36 he conspired to overthrow the existing American government and replace it with another. At 37 he guided the convention that committed the overthrow to writing, and in the following months he collaborated on an anonymous propaganda campaign to ratify the radical new Constitution.
Cheney doesn’t dwell on the radical nature of the events of America’s founding. Conservatives generally don’t, as they lay special claim to the founders. But it is worth a reminder that conservatives don’t make revolutions. This is almost a tautology: Conservatives want to keep things as they are, while revolutions turn things upside down. But it is also further evidence that history is a dubious guide to current politics. Madison was an unabashed early advocate of big government, especially a big federal government. He proposed granting the new Congress a veto over all state laws but settled for a veto over state laws that contradicted federal laws. Even then he fretted that the Constitution didn’t go far enough to counter the “unwise and wicked proceedings” of the states.
But would Madison have been a modern liberal? Would he believe that bigger is always better in government? There is no way of telling. Bigness is a comparative concept in politics. Cheney demonstrates that Madison wanted a bigger central government than existed in 1787, but this doesn’t mean he would have wanted a bigger central government than exists in 2014. He might well have decided that the optimal size was reached long ago.
Cheney makes clear that Madison was a practical politician. “He was capable not only of deeply creative thinking,” she writes, “but of turning his thoughts into reality.”
Like any practical politician, Madison was willing to change his mind — and change it again. After helping establish a government far stronger than the one it replaced, Madison promptly sought to restrain the new government. Having argued against a bill of rights in the Constitution, he drafted what became the Bill of Rights. When Alexander Hamilton, an even more ardent advocate of big government than Madison, put forward a plan for a national bank, Madison as a member of Congress opposed it. But later, as president, he backed the idea. Madison in Constitution-drafting mode wanted to give the federal government a veto over state laws; as a member of the opposition party in Congress, he anonymously argued that states should be able to take action against federal laws they deemed unconstitutional, in particular the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798.
On this point and others, Cheney does a nice job of showing how Madison was a cooler version of Thomas Jefferson, his mentor and sponsor. Jefferson employed the verb “nullify” in describing the appropriate response to the Alien and Sedition Acts. His words prompted the state legislature of Kentucky to threaten secession. Madison preferred the less provocative “interpose,” which gave his and Jefferson’s Republican Party the issue they wanted in the election of 1800, without encouraging the fire-eaters.

As Jefferson’s secretary of state and then his successor as president, Madison had to deal with Jefferson’s disastrous Embargo Act of 1807, which sought to punish Britain and France for their depredations on American shipping by the bizarre device of imposing economic sanctions on Americans. The embargo failed, and war with Britain ensued. Cheney successfully argues that the War of 1812 wasn’t as dismal as it is often portrayed. It confirmed U.S. independence and opened the West to American growth (at the expense of the Indians, some of whom had fought on the American side).
Bill Clinton in the 1990s got in trouble after promising a “two-fer” in the event of his election: America would get Hillary as well as Bill. Cheney delivers a two-fer readers will welcome: Dolley along with James. Dolley was a force of nature, and though her story is familiar, it is still a delight to read. And it affords another reminder that the past was a different place. Certainly no first lady today would be caught baring as much flesh as Dolley did for portraitist Gilbert Stuart.
Cheney might have written a book that made Madison a prop in today’s political battles. She did not, which is greatly to her credit and true to the life of the man. Madison was principled but pragmatic, sincere but complex. His world was complicated. So is ours, and it can use more people like him.
H.W. Brands has written about several American presidents. He is completing a biography of Ronald Reagan.

Stress Test: Timothy Geithner's book on financial crises of 2008-2009 - Charles Lane (WP)

STRESS TEST

Reflections on Financial Crises
By Timothy F. Geithner
Crown. 580 pp. $35

Book review: ‘Stress Test: Reflections on Financial Crises,’ by Timothy F. Geithner

Unlike most of his recent predecessors as treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner had no experience on Wall Street or in corporate America. He did not have a PhD in economics. Nor was he a politician or even a lawyer. Far from being a presidential confidante, Geithner barely knew Barack Obama before his nomination.
What he did bring to the job was a deep-seated belief: Policymaking is a fundamentally tragic business, often involving choices between two or more bad options, and the best that can be hoped for is to avoid making matters worse. He is, as he confesses in his memoir, “Stress Test,” “reflexively skeptical of excess conviction in any form, especially excess optimism.”
It is a sensibility worthy of his first powerful mentor, the uber-realist former secretary of state Henry Kissinger, who gave Geithner a job as a researcher when the younger man was fresh out of the international affairs school at Johns Hopkins. Thereafter, Geithner refined and internalized his sense of government-as-damage-control during his career managing financial crises for the Treasury Department, the International Monetary Fund and, just before joining the Obama administration, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which he headed from 2003 through 2008.
And it was this mind-set that informed Geithner’s embrace of massive taxpayer aid to Wall Street firms amid the financial panic of 2008 and 2009, which he defended then — and vigorously defends again in “Stress Test” — as the price of averting general economic catastrophe.
Geithner’s selection by Obama made sense as a gesture of continuity toward a financial sector still in the throes of an epic crisis, but he was an unlikely member of a hope-and-change administration. As the U.S. economy spiraled downward between November 2008 and Inauguration Day, the president-elect asked Geithner what he should try to accomplish in his first term. Geithner, who admits that he “wasn’t wrapped up in the spirit of limitless possibility and new beginnings that had driven the Obama campaign,” defined success in negative terms: “Your accomplishment is going to be preventing a second Great Depression.”
Half a decade later, it’s fair to say that Obama did achieve that much — or at least that no second Great Depression happened on his watch. Historians will debate how much credit belongs to the president and how much to Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. Geithner’s version emphasizes the administration’s contribution — and, not surprisingly, casts Geithner in a favorable light, as a kind of Sancho Panza to more quixotic officials who saw the Great Recession as a political opportunity to be exploited, not a disaster to be mitigated.
History will be especially kind to the Geithner innovation that gave his book its title. In early 2009, the largest U.S. banks were still in financial cardiac arrest, unable to make loans or attract investment because markets doubted the adequacy of their capital. Many inside and outside the White House advocated nationalizing the banks, as Sweden had done to help cure a financial panic in the 1990s. Geithner resisted, citing unintended negative consequences from entangling the U.S. government in the banks’ hideously complex affairs. He proposed instead a “stress test,” conducted by the Federal Reserve, which would scour the banks’ books, then tell the markets how well they could withstand a further economic downturn. When the results came in, they credibly showed that the banks’ capital needs were manageable, inducing a renewed flow of private investment and obviating nationalization.
As for the bailouts, the charge that Geithner advocated taxpayer relief for Wall Street regardless of the financial community’s sins will probably follow him to his grave. “Stress Test” is his definitive rebuttal to critics whom he derides, repetitiously, as “populists” or “fundamentalists” gripped by an “Old Testament” mentality.
Whether aimed at Geithner from the left or right, the basic criticism of his approach was essentially the same: that shielding reckless financiers from the full consequences of their actions, monetary and legal, is not only wrong but also encourages similar behavior by others in the future. And Geithner himself acknowledges that “moral hazard” is an inherent feature of government intervention in financial crises.
He just disagrees with his opponents that there’s any point in trying to avoid moral hazard, given the need to act swiftly in a crisis and the much higher costs of letting systemically important firms collapse. Geithner’s thinking on this point reflects the global shock that followed the September 2008 bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, which he, Bernanke and then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson failed to prevent. The fallout from Lehman’s demise scarred Geithner — and he expresses deep regret about it in “Stress Test.”
The argument over Wall Street bailouts is one that no one can ever truly win, since both Geithner and his critics make a lot of assumptions about what would have happened if the government had not acted. On balance, Geithner’s probably right, though. The Federal Reserve’s emergency credit programs and the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program that Geithner and others crafted enabled the economy to make a soft landing at much lower cost to taxpayers than many predicted. Another point in Geithner’s favor is that foes of his approach never quite articulated a workable alternative, or at least one that the political system might actually accept.
Geithner’s aversion to “excess optimism” was not always an asset for him at Treasury. A more buoyant secretary might have been better equipped to reassure the public amid hard times, as well as less vulnerable to the political slings and arrows that ultimately made Geithner yearn to leave Washington. Yet to the extent that he had a knack for imagining the worst, and how to avoid it, he may have been the right man for Treasury at the right time. Certainly we could have done a lot worse.
Charles Lane is an opinion writer at The Washington Post.

sexta-feira, 16 de maio de 2014

Pausa para clipe oficial da Copa do Mundo (para quem gosta): tem ate brasileiro (Veja.com)

16/05/2014
 às 16:15 \ Copa do Mundo de 2014

Clipe oficial da Copa tem até brasileiro. Acredita?

Achei bacana artistas e figurantes brasileiros serem convidados para participar do clipe oficialde rap americano da Copa do Mundo de 2014 dos EUA. O pessoal da produção foi muito simpático em deixar umas bandeirinhas verde-amarelas à mostra no meio do vídeo e até nossos músicos fazerem uma batucadinha de fundo para as mulatas conseguirem sambar. Com educação e elegância, sem ofuscar o brilho das estrelas principais, o Brasil se saiu muito bem no papel de coadjuvante da Copa e finalmente esclareceu aos gringos que nossa língua é mesmo o espanhol. Quem quiser comprar passagem para Miami para assistir aos jogos desta grande festa de imigrantes latinos no Tio Sam, vale a pena. Parece que lá os estádios já estão prontos.
Felipe Moura Brasil

Terrorismo na Copa? Paranoia ou possibilidade? - Adolfo Sachsida

Pode ser que ele exagere, e seja apenas um desses profetas de catástrofes sempre anunciadas e nunca ocorridas.
Mas, e se acontecer alguma coisa?
Fica a advertência...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Blog: adolfo sachsida - Opiniões

Um blog dedicado à liberdade

QUINTA-FEIRA, 15 DE MAIO DE 2014

Terrorismo: Estamos Prontos?

Em menos de 1 mês começa a Copa do Mundo, existem infindáveis problemas, e tudo leva a crer que a Copa será um péssimo marketing para a imagem do Brasil no exterior. Contudo, um problema maior me preocupa: a questão terrorista.

Sim, é verdade que existirão diversas manifestações de rua. A essa altura parece pouco provável que as mesmas sejam não-violentas. Teremos o tradicional quebra-quebra, e a culpa será, como sempre acontece, posta na conta da polícia militar. O governo já deixou claro que pouco importa o que aconteça a culpa será da pobre polícia. Agindo bem ou mal os policiais já são o bode expiatório escolhido pelo governo. Aliás, essa declaração de Gilberto de Carvalho já deixa tudo claro: Carvalho diz que governo vai conter violência da PM nos protestos durante a Copa.

Mas o que me assusta mesmo é a possibilidade de um ataque terrorista durante a Copa do Mundo. Algumas autoridades parecem cometer um erro assustador: comparam a segurança durante a Copa com a segurança durante o Pan Americano do Rio de 2007. Durante o Pan do Rio, todas as atividades e delegações estavam no Rio de Janeiro. Isso facilitou em muito o trabalho do exército. Durante a Copa do Mundo serão 12 cidades-sedes e, para piorar, algumas delegações ficarão instaladas fora dessas cidades. Resumindo: são muitas cidades para patrulhar, não temos efetivos suficientes para tamanha dispersão geográfica.

Conter atentados terroristas é uma tarefa difícil, vide o exemplo do que ocorreu durante a Maratona de Boston ano passado. Mas parece que as autoridades brasileiras sequer se preocupam com essa possibilidade. A recente medida do Itamaraty, de liberar o visto de entrada para o Brasil para países com tradição de suporte a movimentos terroristas, é algo no mínimo imprudente.

Esse é apenas mais um dos motivos para eu ser contra as manifestações de rua que deverão ocorrer durante a Copa. Simplesmente não há como garantir a segurança dos envolvidos. O risco de um atentado terrorista é alto, e as consequências podem ser terríveis para todos.

Pode parecer paranoia minha, mas durante a Copa o Brasil poderá se juntar aos países vítimas de ataques terroristas. Então pergunto: o que o Brasil fez nesses últimos 7 anos para se preparar para essa cruel eventualidade? Por acaso o Brasil se deu ao trabalho de coordenar informações com órgãos internacionais? Por acaso pedimos a ajuda de países com mais experiência em lidar com essa ameaça? Por acaso treinamos equipes em número suficiente para tais eventualidades? Aliás, caso ocorra um ataque terrorista, quais serão as contramedidas? Será que ao menos tais contramedidas existem? Algum hospital, ou alguma equipe médica, ou alguma equipe policial, foi treinada para um eventual ataque com antraz?

São muitas as possibilidades e os riscos de um ataque terrorista. Acaso as autoridades brasileiras estão preparadas para tal desafio? Por isso reforço meu pedido: nada de manifestações durante a Copa, deixemos para nos manifestar nas urnas em outubro. Durante a Copa deixemos a polícia, e as forças armadas, se preocuparem com um eventual ataque terrorista. Que aliás já é um trabalho gigantesco e dificílimo.

quinta-feira, 15 de maio de 2014

Venezuela: depois do papel higienico, agora falta pao. PAO! BREAD! PAN!

  • updated 12:58 GMT 05.14.14Fistfights amid long bread lines in Venezuela
    SHARE THIS
    Bread shortage frustrates Venezuelans
    A A A (resize font)
    (CNN) - Shoppers in Venezuela know that shortages of staples like cornmeal, milk and chicken are a harsh reality of life, but now -- amid violent protests and strikes -- shortages have spread to that most basic of basics: bread.
  • Lines are forming, and fights have broken out outside bakeries as politicians and business leaders point fingers.
    In recent days, people have had to wait in line for hours under the scorching sun. Ricardo Rodriguez, a Caracas resident waiting for the chance to buy bread, described the queues as "extraordinary."
    "It's like embarking on an odyssey," he said.
    The problem stems from labor, social unrest and currency regulation that ties to difficulties importing raw ingredients, according to Tomas Ramos Lopez, president of the Venezuelan Federation of Bread Producers.
    Ramos told CNN en Español that the problem started last year when a strike stopped production at a flour mill in Monagas state that supplies 35% of all the flour in Venezuela.
    Another problem, Ramos said, is all of Venezuela's wheat is imported from Canada, the United States and Argentina, and tight government-dictated currency controls have left producers in a situation where they don't have the dollars needed to import wheat.
    A third problem, according to Ramos, has been social unrest. Violent anti-government protests in the past three months have disrupted distribution of flour. Bakers cannot get the raw ingredient in several cities across the country, especially San Cristobal, Valencia, Barquisimeto and Caracas, the capital.
    The government blames the shortage on unscrupulous merchants and bakery owners who hoard their products in order to make a profit by selling at higher prices on the black market.
    But Ramos said, "I believe that the national industry and the laws in Venezuela have to be changed. (Government officials) need to know the difference between hoarding and having inventory."

A Copa do Vexame - Ricardo Noblat

A Copa do vexame, por Ricardo Noblat

- Da presidente Dilma Rousseff, hoje:
- Tenho certeza também que nós podemos dizer que o legado da Copa é nosso. Ninguém que vem aqui leva consigo na sua mala aeroporto, porto, obras de mobilidade urbana e estádios. Eles podem levar na mala a garantia de que esse é um povo alegre e hospitaleiro. É isso que é a questão central dessa Copa.
Discordo.
A questão central é outra: o país não estava preparado para sediar uma Copa do Mundo. Passaria muito bem sem ela, tais ainda são as carências que enfrentamos.
A “Copa das Copas” começará com estádios inacabados, com aeroportos inacabados, e com as obras que beneficiariam as cidades-sedes dos jogos inacabadas ou ainda no papel.
O Brasil corre o risco de protagonizar um vexame planetário.
Tomara que não.

Tatu-bola, o mascote da Copa das Copas
O Globo, 14/05/2914

Franca: o Desglobalizador ataca outra vez; o decreto idiota depatriotismo economico

Muitos politicos franceses não estão interessados em eficiência econômica. A pretexto de salvar empregos, eles condenam suas empresas à decadência competitiva.
Aí, em lugar de apenas perder alguns empregos, ele conseguem perder empresas e empregos.
Brilhante, não é mesmo?
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 
Francia aprueba un decreto contra las fusiones en sectores estratégicos
A solo diez días de las elecciones europeas, y en plena negociación para laventa de Alstom a General Electric, el Gobierno socialista francés ha aprobado este miércoles un decreto “de patriotismo económico” que permitirá al Estado oponerse a las tomas de control extranjeras de un gran número de empresas nacionales. Arnaud Montebourg, el ministro de Economía, impulsor del decretazo, que amplía uno similar aprobado en 2005 por Dominique de Villepin, asegura que la medida supondrá “el final del laisser-faire” (el principio de dejar hacer) y permitirá a Francia reconquistar su potencia pública.
El primer ministro, Manuel Valls, firmó el decreto gubernamental a petición del proteccionista Montebourg, conocido como El Desglobalizador y que en estos últimos dos años se ha erigido en un símbolo del intervencionismo y las ayudas públicas, así como en el azote de la Comisión Europea en asuntos de competencia.
El texto del Gobierno ampliará a cinco sectores nuevos el decreto aprobado por la derecha gala en diciembre de 2005, que sometía a la autorización del Gobierno las inversiones extranjeras en once actividades ligadas a las industrias de Defensa y Seguridad. Desde ahora, pasan a estar protegidos también por el veto político el aprovisionamiento de electricidad, gas, hidrocarburos y otras fuentes energéticas, la explotación de las redes de transportes, el agua, las comunicaciones electrónicas y la sanidad pública.
En declaraciones a Le Monde, el titular de Economía, Industria y Tecnología Digital ha explicado que la medida permitirá a Francia “reconquistar su potencia pública” y “proteger mejor sus intereses estratégicos”. “Desde ahora podremos bloquear las ventas multinacionales y exigir contrapartidas. Es un rearme fundamental. Francia no puede contentarse con hacer discursos mientras los otros Estados actúan”, señala Montebourg.
En preparación desde hace varios meses, el texto se conocerá comodecreto Alstom porque ha sido acelerado a raíz del inicio de las negociaciones lanzadas por el gigante estadounidense General Electric para comprar la rama de energía del constructor francés de ferrocarriles. Francia prefiere vender esa parte de Alstom a Siemens, su competidor alemán, a cambio de su rama de trenes para formar dos grandes campeones europeos de la energía y los ferrocarriles.
Montebourg recuerda que “Alstom es esencial para la independencia energética de Francia” y “entrará en el campo de acción del decreto como otras empresas estratégicas”. En el plano político, la medida parece un intento desesperado de los socialistas, cada vez más hundidos en las encuestas e incapaz de mejorar los datos de paro y crecimiento, para recuperar pulso e imagen antes de unas elecciones europeas que se anuncian catastróficas. Los sondeos estiman que el Partido Socialista será tercero, por detrás del Frente Nacional y de la Unión por un Movimiento Popular (UMP).

Postagem em destaque

Livro Marxismo e Socialismo finalmente disponível - Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Meu mais recente livro – que não tem nada a ver com o governo atual ou com sua diplomacia esquizofrênica, já vou logo avisando – ficou final...