Thursday, January 31, 2008

Serbian elections - runoff

Midnight marks the end of campaigning in Serbia's presidential elections. The final race is between the incumbent Boris Tadić and Tomislav Nikolić, candidate of the Radical party.

I'll say it right up, I voted for Nikolić in the first round, I'll vote for him in the runoff as well. Why?

I do not agree with everything in his and his party's platform. He only opposes the EU(SSR) on a pragmatic basis instead of on principle, economic and foreign policies are too populist and ideological for my taste plus the party's internal structure is too hierarchical. However, he unequivocaly rejects anything the EU and the US might offer in exchange for Serbia's at least tacit agreement on the independence of Kosovo and Metohija. Years ago Nikolić and the Radical party suggested closer ties to Russia(although it was mostly due to knee-jerk anti-westernism, rather then thoughtful analysis) and it is now coming to fruition. Also, Nikolić's postition on cultural and traditional matters is almost totally in line with my own.

Tadić, on the other hand, has no redeeming qualities. He is totally ingaged in dragging the country into the EU(SSR). It has achieved proportions where his coalition partner and minister for Kosovo and Metohija Samardžić calls this EU-philia "an ideological, dogmatic goal, like communism used to be". It is obvious that Tadić would not react in any way to a possible EU recognition of Kosovo independence. This was made abundantly clear when he refused to sign a pledge that would have the governement anull the Stabilisation and Association agreement in case the EU(SSR) decides to send it's mission to Kosovo and Metohija. He believes in "European integrations" more then he believes in keeping the country's territory, actions speak louder then words.

With Nikolić we would loose no allies and gain no enemies we don't have already. With Tadić we won't make enemies friends and will loose those we have at the moment. So the choice is clear.

Monday, January 28, 2008

The question of racial organizing

The recent brouhaha about the BNP on Jihadwatch and other web sites and blogs had got me thinking somewhat. Not so much about the BNP itself, although it was caused by a portion of their documents.

The jury is still out on BNP with me. Their unsavory past is well known and while I do not dismiss out of hand their ability and attempts to reform themselves there are still troubling characters within that make me a bit wary of them. For a moment I was definitely put off them when I found out they restrict their membership only to white indigenous Brits. But as I thought about it a bit and found out some more facts I sat right back on the fence. Why?

Well, one link on the BNP web page got to me, I must admit. There is a list of many organizations who, while propably do not have racial restrictions in their respectful statutes, have race distinctions in their name. Could I as a white man join Black Bitain, for example? Or Black Information Link? Of course not! And people find it completely normal! Yet when an organization restricts membership to whites all hell break loose!

Where do you draw the line? Why is it acceptable for the immigrant and non-indigenous ethnic groups have exclusive organizations but not acceptable to natives? Why is nobody calling the afore mentioned organizations to task alongside the BNP for their racial exclusiveness?

But this situation is hardly surprising. It is simply a natural product of multiculturalist ideology. The desperate attempt to accomodate other cultures and prove that they are inclusive can only lead to the abasement of the domicile one as well as the nation that founded it. Even worse, now we have a situation where one race is de facto held to a different standard then others. Now, how do you call that?

What can I say? BRAVO!!!!

Friday, January 25, 2008

The king is dead, long live the king!



OK, it may be a bit premature for such bold proclamations but let me gloat today at least.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

No longer news but...

Congratulations to our tennis players on yet another brilliant "grand slam" tournament. But, as Jelena Janković pointed out in a recent interview, it is no longer a surprise. Semi-finals and finals of great tournaments are now the norm for Serbian players. Now, if only Tipsarević had managed to pull out a miracle against Federer...

BTW, I have a feeling the Australian open women's final will have a bigger TV rating then usual.


Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Johnson is at it again

He kept a low profile but could not resist when the word came out of a supposed "alliance" between Vlaams Belang and the BNP. Here was the smoking gun he'd been dreaming of, the one he could point at and rub in the noses of his opponents. The trouble is, as it is aptply shown, the BNP did not participate in the event mentioned nor was it invited to participate.

So will Johnson publish a retraction? Don't hold your breath! In fact he is going beyond all pales! A couple of months ago Johnson used a sock-puppet in the form of a Norwegian "progressive" Oyvind Strommen to attack Bat Ye'or and her theory of Eurabia. Well, he's gone a step further and is now pounding on Oriana Fallacci no less. And with the same stick.

More depths where this wretched individual will sink are to be fully expected.

Monday, January 21, 2008

Serbian elections

The first round is over, on one hand as expected, on the other not quite. What was expected was the runoff and the ranking of the candidates. The unexpected was the high turnout of the voters.

The winner of the first round is the Radical party candidate Tomislav Nikolić and he won in many aspects. The first is that he got more then incumbent Boris Tadić. The second is that Nikolić got 500.000 votes more then his party did in parliamentary elections a year ago today. And third, he busted beyond repair the myth that high turnout favours so-called democratic parties and that the Radical party's high watermark is a million or so voters.

The second winner is prime minister Koštunica who, through voters whom he is influential on, those who voted Velimir Ilić, can now blackmail Tadić into supporting him. Tadić iz not going to like having to beg Koštunica but he will have no other option. The number of those staying at home that he can activate is much smaller than before plus a lot of other circumsances have changed as well.

The biggest loser is Boris Tadić for reasons that apply for Koštunica and Nikolić only in reverse. He is going to have to beg people that do not like him and that he does not like for support, but they will have conflicting demands. Velimir Ilić would demand that Tadić's party agree with the Russia pipeline deal, and the "liberal democrat"(read: transantional progressivist) Čedomir Jovanocić will demand alignement with the EU(SSR). How do you reconcile that?

Talking of Jovanović, he is the second biggest loser of the night since he got less then a year ago and fell in 5th place behind Milutin Mrkonjić of the Socialist party(the party of late Slobodan Milošević). That is the best news of the night for me and an indicator that we haven't gone completely to hell as a nation.

So, what about the runoff? Assuming the leading candidates hold on to their first round voters, Nikolić can count on votes from Mrkonjić and a couple of small-time candidates whereas Tadić will get votes from Jovanović and the candidate of the Hungarian minority party Istvan Pastor. That still gives Nikolić the edge so the voters of Velimir Ilić will decide (this solves the mystery of how Koštunica and Ilić hold the positions that they do with 10-15% of support). Tadić has a mountain to climb and the negative campaign on Nikolić has already begun. It will be interesting to see the televised debates.

And last but not least I'd like to comment on the high voter turnout of nearly 60%. Nobody could predict this in Serbia caught up with seemingly incurable apathy over the years especially since the participants were more or less the same as before. What influenced this? Tadić and Nikolić did both good campaigns but the real reason is in international cricumstances and in the fact that Russia stands like a stone wall in defense of international law in case of Kosovo and Metohija. This has shown the people in Serbia that they do have a say in the destiny of their own land. They should use this new knowledge wisely.

Friday, January 18, 2008

This has a familiar ring to it

The trial of wahabbis accused of planning terrorist attacks in Serbia has begun. The court was treated with a steady flow of islamic propaganda cliches but there was one sentence from one of the defendants that immediately set off a distant bell in me(and propably will in all my readers from ex-Yugoslavia):

“You are my enemy and I don’t recognise this state and law, but only Allah the supreme."


All those who went through elementary school in former Yugoslavia were treated with this story: the former ruler of communist Yugoslavia Tito stood trial in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia for communist activities and he proclaimes:"I do not recognize this court, I only recognize the judgement of my party".

Birds of feather flock together, eh?

Britain is dead!

Bold assesment, you think? Well, maybe reading this will dissuade you...

George Orwell, or rather the worst part of his distopias, has offically come to power in the UK. The phrase "war on terror" is indeed inappropriate but this is a change for all the wrong reasons imaginable. The British political class is no longer able to grasp even the most self-evident truths and neither is the good part of the electorate.

On the bright side, Britain did withstand the anti-Spanish armada, the anti-French Napoleon and the anti-German nazis so I bet they will cope with anti-islamic activities.

I hope the last paragraph brought a bit of a smile, because this news is absolutely depressing.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Disheartening, really

Former congressman Mark Siljander is indicted for raising money for an islamic charity he new was connected to terrorist groups. As if the news was not sensational enough, there is a twist to it. Debbie Schlussel says that Siljander is the last guy she'd think would do this, and one can understand why. You think you know someone and then...

It would really be interested to know what has happened.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

This just begs for a caption!



Bush:"Praised be Allah, with this I can finally stick it to everyone."

Why do we put up with this?

A prominent Jewish publicist from Belgrade Jaša Almuli has given an interview to Serbia's largest daily "Politika" where he sharply criticised one of the NGOs frequently quoted by western media and their governement agencies as authority on Serbia(I am not mentioning it's name or linking to it, I'll be damned before I advertise them through my blog) for "Holocaust revisionism". Unfortunately, I can not link to the interview since the newspaper's web site has, for reasons known best to themselves(but which I can guess), removed the interview. So you are just going to take my word for what I am about to write here.

UPDATE: One of my readers informs me that it was simply a case of the web site not functioning and that the article is back up now. Thanks for the tip.

The NGO in question makes an equivalence between the German occupying force and the collaborationist governement during the occupation in the role of the destruction of Jews in Serbia. Almuli's answer is quite clear:

„The claim that the quisling formations and German occupiers are equally responsible is simply untrue. ”
....
Quoting research from Federation of Jewish communities of former Yugoslavia, testimonies of surviors as well as prominent Jewish historians abroad Almuli says that all of them clearly show that only German occupiers and their forces decided on the destruction of Jews in Serbia and only they carried out such measures”.

„The role of the quisling regime and it's formations was marginal. They used to bring German summons to Jews, carried out German-proclaimed measures of throwing out Jews from public service, stood gurad and for a reward in money sought out Jews and handed them to German forces”, says Almuli.


Almuli then quotes historians such as Raoul Hilberg, Christopher Browning and Paul Friedlander who basically prove Almuli correct. But the next passage gives a tone even more sinister then plain holocaust revisionism:

Asked whether he fears being labeled as a defender of Milan Nedić and his quisling regime, Almuli responds:

„I am not defendin either Nedić or his governememnt but Serbia which is being slandered and I fight against holocaust revisionism... Some western powers, devoid of any basis in international law, claim that Serbia has no moral right on Kosovo, becaise she allegedly murdered Albanians in 1999. Is this moral disqaulification supposed to be supported with the lie that Serbia is just as responsible for the destruction of Serbian Jews as the Germans?”.


In a word, yes.

Almuli then ends by stating that the NGO sent these falsehoods to about a million(!) different adresses around the world.

This begs several questions. Such as, what has the governement done to counter such a slander campaign against the Serb people? Why are they not sending refutations of such nonsens to all the adresses that the NGO sent and more? And what are they going to do to pre-empt future attempts at re-writing history a la David Irving and call the vile personalities behind this to task?

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Film review - "Life of others"

Well, it was over a year since my wife and I have been trying to see the German film "Life of others"("Das Leben der Anderen") but it was well worth the wait. This is a very poignant film that shows the nature of the East German regime but also examines where is the breaking point of every man, how much personal indecency can one swallow.

The plot goes around the East German Stasi officer Gerd Wiesler. Besides being an experianced interrogator and investigator he is also a teacher in the Stasi academy. He is being told of a promising playwright Georg Dreyman wh, in spite of being read in the west is still considered loyal. Wiesler, a career agent, expresses his doubts about him and soon gets the assignement of tracking him. As time goes by it becomes clear that Wiesler was wrong about Dreyman since the latter, in spite of trying to intervene on behalf of some black-listed people, does not hold any anti-communist or subversive ideas. Wiesler then finds out that he was only given the assignement because one minister has a personal interest in destroying Dreyman and that he has to find something "crooked" at all costs. It is then that Wiesler begins to question himself, his work and the whole system he serves.

The film shows just how un-naturally paranoid the whole system of East Germany was, so paranoid it ends up alienating not only people who are otherwise not at all interested in opposing it but also people who are sympathetic to it and even it's supposed guardians. The acting is superb by the entire cast but also the atmosphere of mid 1980-ties East Germany is captured perfectly especially in scenes that show the streets and public places almost completely devoid of people. The unscrupulousness and cynicism of East German security authorities is a classic now.

But there is also another thing, a scene happening two years after the fall of the Berlin wall that had quite an effect on me. This may be a bit of a spoiler, so stop reading if you haven't seen the movie. Dreyman walks out of a performance of his play, obviously dissatisfied with it and meets the former East German minister that tried to set him up. The latter confronts him with the fact that he hasn't written anything since 1989 and says: "No wonder, there is nothing to write about anymore. In the old days you could at least fight against the governement. Life was good in our small republic, people only see it now."

The worst part of this line is that it is correct. The fall of the eastern block brought about proclamations of the "end of history". In such atmosphere all social struggle practically stops and the emergence of general mediocricy and fatalistic apathy is inevitable. In such conditions all creativity and critical thinking dies . The minister's line perfectly captures the malaise of the modern world and why it can not grasp some truth seen as self-evident.

Be sure not to miss this movie. It's propably out of theaters by now but renting or buying a DVD copy is a must.

They can have her

Britney Spears wants to marry a Muslim from Pakistan and convert to Islam, a least according to some of the tabloids. Well, she'd better be careful since they seem to take their religion over there quite seriously. The chadors and the burkhas can be quite a hassle.

But considering the impact she had and still has on pop-culture, it wouldn't be such a bad thing to have her covered once and for all.

Monday, January 14, 2008

I wish...

"Sorry not interested" - that is the headline of Newsweek's latest report on Serbia and refers to it's current position towards Kosovo and Metohija and the European Union.

I wish it was that simple. And equivocal. Unfortunately, when one scratches the surface a slightly different picture emerges. While prime minister Koštunica is talking tough, During one of the presidential campaign rallies president Boris Tadić called those who reject EU membership "enemies". Just yesterday the foreign minister Jeremić stated in an interview in Spiegel how "there is no alternative to EU membership". Who is going to take such a country seriously. The opposition Radical party is towing to the same line as Koštunica and adds a bit more flavour with it's general pro-Russian stance but with both of them the bottom line is that they oppose the EU membership on utilitarian basis and not on principle. None of these politicians have ever spoken about the Lisbon Treaty and even if they have they have obfuscated some of it's most important parts such as those which speak of immigration and foreign policy and which gives all authority over those aspects to Brussels. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Nobody dares mention the most disasterous consequences of multiculturalism, moral relativism, political correctness and globalist liberalism such as no-go immigrant areas, rising crime, over-burdened social services, laws that effectively curb free speech. Then there is the centralization of the economy the old USSR would be proud of achieved via ridicolously uniform standards and quotas imposed by the European Comission(so much for free trade and competiton) nobody talks about, nor about the official EU ideology of environmentalist extremism and the disastrous effects that it might have on Serbia's employment rate(Jobs? What jobs? We don't need no stinkin' jobs!).

Then again, the parties are the mirror of the electorate. And those who actually do vote(just over 50%) have their political thought stuck in the terms of ex-Yugoslavia1960-ties and 1979-ties with all it's talks about "unity among peoples" and "credits and donations" that will keep flowing. The rest are disappointed with the current political class but lack the courage and the energy(spent in the 1990-ties fighting windmills, shilling for the same EU that now spits on their country, instead of real, existing enemies) in order to activate themselves and change things. They are just trying to "get by" nowadays. So is it any wonder why we are in such a position now?

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Weekend personal post for 12th and 13th of January

Tonight Serbs celebrate their New Year according to the Julian calendar but I decided to give my first personal post of 2008. As I already said I got sick on New Year's eve and spent the better parto of the first two days of 2008 in bed, watching by now the traditionally awful holiday TV programme. At least I took thurday and friday off so I had a mini vacation.

We spent Christmas eve with my parents at dinner, and Christmas at my wife's parents for lunch. My sister in law was there as well with husband and her little girl who is now 4 months old. I love playing with her, she's a lovely baby. She almost never cries even when she needs something plus she likes me. That day, we exchanged presents as well. Talking of presents, this year I got more or less useful stuff which is a rarity.

Plus, there are still presents to hand over, to my niece and my wife's goddaughter. We'll take care of it in the next couple of days, then we dismantle the tree and the flash lights.

Needless to say, going back to work took time getting used to, but luckily nobody is really doing anything just yet. The first real week of work in 2008 begins tommorow, and I have to go to the mechanic first thing in the morning since some idiot busted my left rear-view mirror as he was passing me by and ran away. The insurance will cover it, luckily.

Weekend saw some better weather and the missus and I went to the nearby lake and took a walk. We were pretty tired afterwards, that is a consequence of having to stay indoors for over 4 weeks due to sub-zero temperatures. Then we finally got a DVD of the German film "Life of others". It was worth the wait, full review in a couple of days.

That's all for the first personal post of 2008. Stay healthy and happy New Year.

Friday, January 11, 2008

The Bush betrayal pattern continues

Bush is in Israel and the Middle East. And he brought some political and diplomatic novelties with him. Such as:

President Bush, summing up meetings with both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, said Thursday that a peace accord will require "painful political concessions" by each. Resolving the status of Jerusalem will be hard, he said, and he called for the end of the "occupation" of Arab land by the Israeli military.


What did he mean by "occupation"? We'll get to that later...


In his set of U.S. bottom lines were security for Israel, a "contiguous" state for the Palestinians and the expectation that final borders will be negotiated to accommodate territorial changes since Israel's formation. He also suggested international compensation for Palestinians and their descendants who claim a right to return to land they held before Israel's formation.
...
Earlier in the day, Bush had said Palestinians deserve better than a "Swiss cheese" state fitted around Israeli land and security bulwarks.


Contiguous state? More then Swiss cheese? Even the most superficial of glances at the map tell a clear story that a Palestinian state encompassing Gaza and the West Bank and which has territorial continuity would break up Israel. How does Israel's security fit in the picture then?


"The point of departure for permanent status negotiations to realize this vision seems clear," he said. "There should be an end to the occupation that began in 1967. The agreement must establish a Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people just as Israel is a homeland for the Jewish people."

White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said Bush was referring to the West Bank when he spoke of occupation.


Whoop, there it is! The "occupation" is everything Israel took in the 6 day war in 1967. And that includes parts of Jerusalem. So Bush not going into the specific propositions of solving the Jerusalem problem is actually a moot point.

But how could this have happened? Wasn't Bush "the best friend Israel had in the White House" and "the most pro-Israel president ever"? Well, if you look at the pattern of Bush's behaviour elsewhere, this is hardly surprising.

We need not even leave the United States to give some of the most glaring examples. For years, Bush has been stabbing in the back his conservative, Republican base. The first big issue was the nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court. She was a relative unknown so at first Republicans went along albeit in a lukewarm fashion. But when people did some research and her leftist views came up(besides the lack of qualifications) the base was up in arms and her nomination went down in flames. The thing that broke the camel's back, however, was the last year's amnesty proposition for the illegal aliens in the USA, stopped only by persistent pressure from grassroots conservative activists. It was the definite divorce between Bush and his (former) base.

There are other examples as well: forcing Pakistan's Musharaff to accept "democratic elections", demanding that Ethiopia withdraws from jihadist-infested Somalia...To anyone who has scratched a bit off the surface of Bush the current development was coming as inevitably as sunrise.

But, don't worry. You can console yourself with the fact that Bush admitted the Allies should have bombed Auschwitz. I'm sure that dispells all the fears.

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

The real malaise of the Western establishment

Back in the 1990-ties while being a high school kid and a student in Serbia all sorts of "democratic" activists would tell stories of how in the US and the EU every politician is accountable for his mistakes and could never get away with what politicians in Serbia get away with etc. While these people seemed even back then to me like political komissars telling the proletariat about the heaven on earth that would come when "communism arrives" I did believe their core message: that in the west politicians get away with far less then in Serbia. But as you grow older and providing you do not shut yourself to new facts, you learn different.

Unaccountability is alive and well in the USA as it has ever been in Serbia. Author Jacob Heilbrunn shows this in "The case of Fouad Ajami". After listing his past predictions about Iraq and how literally all of them were spectacularly wrong, Heilbrunn goes on:

Why is it worth recounting Ajami’s prognostications? The main reason is that, as Anatol Lieven has perceptively pointed out, there has been almost no accountability among pundits and policymakers for the debacle in Iraq. Quite the contrary. Instead of honestly facing up to their mistakes, the prophets of war have glibly moved on. Nowhere is this truer than in the case of Professor Ajami’s essay in this Sunday’s New York Times, which is called “The Clash.”

...

If Ajami were a doctor or a lawyer, he would be accused of professional malpractice and disbarred. His noisy cheerleading for the Iraq War and woefully blinkered assessments of the Arab world are the equivalent of a lawyer perpetrating fraud on a client—or of a doctor diagnosing cancer when heart disease is the true malady. In Washington, DC, however, different rules apply. Despite his myriad shortcomings, Ajami’s reputation has remained largely intact, allowing him to continue living in his own dream palace.


And Ajami is far from the only one. All those predicting how enthusiastically the "Iraqis" will embrace their newfound freedoms, of the triumphant entering of US forces amidst cheering crowds are in the quickest to post simillar predictions about Iran as well. Nobody takes them to task over their blunders, nobody questions their authority, nobody asseses the consequences of their failed predictions they just move on as if nothing happened. One day when they do get out of everyone's face they will be earning money by publishing their fat, unreadable memoirs while millions of us will wind up suffering as a result of their hubris, lack of learning and wishful thinking.

Want to go to war based on the assesments of Ajami and his ilk? Good luck, you're gonna need it!

Pigs fly moment! Well, two actually...

Lawrence Eagleburger was the US Secretary of State in 1992 during the administration of Bush Sr. During his tenureship the US played a significant role in the dismemberment of Yugoslavia by recognizing Croatia and Bosnia and Hercegovina and by imposing UN sanctions on then Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. His State Department set the foundations for the anti-Serb US policy of the 1990-ties. Which makes this all the more surprising!

What happened? Well, nothing special, really. Having been away from power in the mid and late 1990-ties he could not get drunk with it. So he managed to escape the irrational frenzy gripping the Washington establishment currently and thus sees that this is not the 1990-ties and that "my way or the highway" approach will bring about a situation whose outcome is out of control of anybody. And in Eagleburger's opinion Kosovo and Metohija is simply not worth it.

Another unexpected helping hand came from an EU-philic Czech magazine. It's author, a self-described EU-enthusiast says: "EU has gone insane"! Try writing this in a Serbian paper and EU(SSR) agents and NGOs would come down on you like a ton of bricks. Only EU(SSR)? The whole world has gone nuts!

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Wolves, sheep and why democracy is the delusion of our time

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who defined democracy as a situation where two wolves and a sheep vote to decide what's for dinner. Apparently such definition and situation are perfectly acceptable to Dinesh D'Souza. Here it is, in his words:

So why does the left hate democracy in the Muslim world? The reason is simple. Muslims are socially conservative and generally want a greater role for Islam in their private and public lives. Consequently Muslim democracies are likely to be more conservative socially than they are when secular despots rule them. The left fears Muslim democracy because it is terrified of Muslim values, especially sharia or Muslim holy law. Feminists and gays are not likely to fare very well under Muslim holy law.
When Iraqis rejected secular candidates and voted for a party that pledged to have sharia, at least in some forms of domestic law, the New York TImes howled that democracy could be "consigning Iraqi women to a life of subjugation." Columnist Maureen Dowd warned that "the Iraqi election may actually be making things worse" because "it is going to expand the control of the Shia theocrats." These complaints might have some plausibility if women or Sunnis were not permitted to vote. But women and men both voted for the Dawa party, and so essentially the Times and Dowd were arguing that if Iraqis don't want equal roles for men and women, their democracy is a sham.


Want to opress women, curb the religious and political rights of non-muslims, force them to pay the poll tax? No problem, just vote it in power and everything is just fine. D'Souza inadvertantly has shown everything that is wrong with contemporary promoters of "democracy spreading" and democracy in general. The focus point of the former is the process. In fact, it is the only thing they have in mind. So as long as the process is fulfilled everything else is secondary. It does not matter that the results of the process may leave a good portion of the population disenfranchised or even in serious danger.But how, they ask, do we determine what is right for people to vote? Their question further reveals how narrowly do they look on democracy.

They all simply refuse to see that democracy is much more then a mere process. It requires certain moral and social condition for it to work for the benefits of a country which it rules. One needs to have a general population culture of individualism, natural morality and respect for personal liberties and above all rights which are unassailable. Also, a country ruled by democratic principles is required to have a stable and strong middle class. Without one of the two conditions met the democratic process at best produces a contest of who pulls the biggest rabble among several demoagogues or at worst gives you a governement bent on abolishing the very process that put it in power.

Without traditional values that superceed the process or if such traditional values are antithetical to it, democracy in the long run dooms a nation it rules or brings about a dictatorship that is seen as a bulwark agains impending disaster. Examples of both are numerous in history throughout the world, and some have brought disastrous consequences. Let's not look for easy answers but stay analytical. Or suffer the consequences.

Monday, January 07, 2008

Christ is born!



Merry Christmas to all Serbs around the world and all others celebrating this Holiday acording to the Julian calendar.

Friday, January 04, 2008

Presidential elections - Serbia

The party of PM Koštunica(don't ask me it's name, Serbian politics is something straight ot of "Life of Brian") endorsed coalition partner Ilić as their candidate for the president of Serbia. So it ends the two week farce staged by Koštunica, in a quite predictable fashion. We are back where we were a year ago. What results this time? And with what consequences?

I admit I have no answers as of now. The information I have is contradictory. There are a lot of disappointed people from all parties, a big abstinence is very likely.

We need fresh faces on the political scene.

Wednesday, January 02, 2008

Happy New Year

All the best in 2008 to all my readers with apologies for a day's delay. I got ill on New Year's eve(great timing), made it through the party somehow but spent the entire first day of 2008 in bed with a fever. Feeling a bit better now, though.