Cyrill Vatomsky, Where All Politics Are Global

The August 12 KSCO AM 1080 broadcast of the Embassy of the New World Order, featuring Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman. As usual, this is only an outline to accompany the podcast of the show. Please go to the blog page at http://cyrillvatomsky.com to download or stream the mp3 file.

The show covered lots of subjects in no particular order:

• My disagreements with Laina on how dangerous the results of Turkish elections last month were. I personally think that the situation in Turkey makes it a great example of how economic liberalization of 1980-s resulted eventually in establishment of a moderate Islamic party. Laina is very concerned and has been vocal about it on her blog as well.
• The issue of Kosovo and how it affects other aspects of foreign relations. I am coming on record as no longer supporting independence for Kosovo. It is a geopolitical issue and I am treating it as such. US insistence on Kosovo independence is ill advised because if pushed through, it will cause problems for one of the staunchest supporters of the US - Georgia that also wants to be a NATO member. Geopolitically Georgia's location on the Caucasus isthmus between Black and Caspian Seas is way more important to the US then Kosovo will ever be. I think that the US should drag its feet and give this issue to the Russians as a victory. Creating the precedent of Kosovo independence will push South Ossetia and Ablhazia away from Georgia.
  
• Religion has been discussed a lot in different parts of the show, including a little exchange with a caller that claimed he had seen Jesus. I actually asked for an opportunity to be introduced, but I don't think it went anywhere. I am an atheist, so it is pretty silly to try to convert me.
• Lots been said about moderate religions, and a potential for moderate Islam. In general the consensus was that Islam is preoccupied with appearances and acts like a testosterone poisoned teenager. Grow up already.
• Just a bit about the death of democracy in Russia. Or was it an abortion or maybe a miscarriage. 40% of Russians are apparently ready to vote for whomever Putin appoints, regardless of the person. There does seem to be any pretense anymore in Russia about democratically electing their presidents. Too bad.
• A caller wanted our opinions of the rise of China and supposed future confrontation between US and China. Maybe, someday, but for now China is hardly a military giant. As for economics, I want prosperous China.
• Some talk about America leaning left and most importantly, my take on the split in the "conservative" movement in the US.
  

Take a listen.

Russian authorities all but admitted that the ban on export of all biological specimens from Russia was a flop. Well, not officially, of course.  Officialdoms do not make mistakes let alone flops. However, as the Kommersant Business Daily reported today,

Two weeks after the ban was initially imposed, leaving a legislative vacuum on the issue, the Ministry of Health and the FTS have issued new regulations governing biological specimens being sent out of the country. In essence, the document repeals the ban on the transport out of the country of three basic categories of biological specimens: those being used in clinical studies of new drugs, as part of an international scientific exchange, and for laboratory analysis as part of the treatment of patients in Russia.

Finally, after promises to resolve the issue within hours, Federal Customs Service and Ministry of Health pulled the ban, you think, right? Well, again, not exactly. Unlike the ban that had been immediately imposed without any explanations and any procedures, the repeal of the ban have not yet taken place. Just like it did on May 28^th the Federal Customs Service sent out directives this past Saturday.

"We found out on Saturday that the customs posts had received letters concerning the new regulations for exporting biological materials," said TNT's coordinator for clinical studies, Maria Astanina. "Now the customs officials should pass these rules along to the couriers. So far we haven't received them." Ms. Astanina also said that, in conjunction with possible changes in the permission-granting process, the company is currently not accepting any new orders for the transport of such materials abroad.

In the caption of the article, Kommersant offers a figure of 40 thousand Russians whose health was threatened by the ban. It would be just great to let these people off the bureaucratic hook, but the natural instinct for self preservation trumps patients once again.

Pharmaceutical companies expect to wait at least another week for the real removal of the ban. A representative of one such company told Kommersant that "some time will elapse while the decree is registered with the Ministry of Justice or until information is received indicating that the decree will go into force without registration."

Even when according to the same Kommersant article,

In essence, the regulations can be considered "new" only with regard to laboratory analyses "for patients' medical conditions."

Well, there is another "new" feature that had many people puzzled.

The only unanimous reaction to the document among experts concerned the rule that the permit must be in the name of the patient. According to Svetlana Zavidova, a former legal advisor for the Association of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers, the rule violates patient confidentiality. Specifically, outside agencies - in this case, the customs offices where permits for the export of biological specimens are sent - will have access to patients' confidential medical histories.  

Once again, bureaucratic thinking meets reality. In search of a mild, saving face retreat without casualties among bureaucrats, at least some regulations needed to be imposed. What could possibly be easier and more benign then simply require a patient's name specified? What possible harm could it do? There is no need for it and there is already an existing system of coding that protects interests of patients, but would a saving face bureaucrat do any kind of research on consequences of his actions?

In no way am I suggesting that Russian bureaucrats are somehow different from bureaucrats elsewhere or here in the US. A planning department in some over bureaucratized county in California, like Santa Cruz can easily drag a business owner through several years of a grinding ordeal for no other reason then to show its power. Bureaucrats just have more power, more control over people's lives in Russia. They are more entrenched and are more likely to operate with impunity no matter the consequences of life and death to tens of thousands of people. Unfortunately, Russia is not moving away from the overreaching power of bureaucracy. The course of building "vertical power structures", the course of de facto nationalizations, the course of "managed democracy" its current president had embarked Russia onto leads to more day to day dependence of its citizens on bureaucracy.

The more people depend on the state the less likely they are to oppose it in any way. Across the globe in Santa Cruz, one of the most lefty cities in the US, people are less likely to vote its incompetent leaders out simply because government in one form or another is the largest city employer. Bureaucracy is the foundation of any lefty rule, its bread and butter, its milk and honey, its line, hook and sinker; it is the cage it forces people into. The only way to break the stranglehold bureaucracy has over lives is to privatise and deregulate as much as possible. In Maxist terms, to move away from state ownership of means of production to private ownership of means of production. And that is a very long road indeed.

I am honestly looking for something positive to report about Russia while browsing various web sites of Russian newspapers and press agencies. I probably should stop altogether, since I am afraid I sound way too negative. Well, my desire for Russia is to improve way beyond its current state and I do not think its current administration is leading it in the right direction, if it is leading it anywhere at all.

Gazeta.ru reports that according to Arkadi Dvorkovich, Head of The President's Expert Office (whatever that might be) state investment in the economy have surpassed private capital investments. This, according to Dvorkovich reveals poor investment climate. No effing shtick Sherlock!

Besides "poor investment climate" surely not related to Yukos, Royal Dutch Shell and TNK-BP affairs - why would they really - the newspaper speculates about the increase of government stake in businesses as well and offers a figure of 40%. Do I get this right and does it mean that 40% of the economy is controlled by the state? And this is the sector of the economy that is most active in investment and borrowing. This is not a healthy situation. But to be sure, it is better then it was in the USSR.

The newspaper then mentions some "experts" that think this is not because government wants to control everything, but rather because it just happens this way based on day to day economic demands. One of these experts compares  Russia's economy with a boat, that the state investment is trying to steer it in the right direction using state investments.

I am left wondering what that right economic direction could possibly be if in order to steer towards it, the state needs to control more then 1/3 of the economy.

Kommersant is following up on the medical specimen export ban, offering Mr. Putin statistics he had admitted lacking. Wouldn't it be prudent to have statistics first and band second? No matter, there was an interesting little sign during the highly publicized interview Putin offered last Friday. He actually expressed doubt that all that export of medical specimens was warranted. Kommersant does a great job of providing data to the contrary of Mr. President's opinion.

But to me this little blurb of news opens a very interesting peek into Putin's economic philosophy. Why hire someone else when we should be doing it ourselves? Yes I understand that this is a very slim sampling rate, but add to it all recent actions of Russian government designed to strike it all alone, limiting participation of outsiders - Shtokman, Sakhalin to name just a few. It suggests to me that Putin, and most likely all of his entourage are stuck in the zero-sum economic model and do not understand benefits of capitalist integration, sharing the wealth so more of it can be created again and again.

In the heart of it lies trust in individuals. Just like Democrats in the US, Putin and his government do not trust individuals and especially the market. Yes sure, the scope of distrust is different but the roots are in the same old left wing ideology. A welfare state? A corporate state? Merger of business and state? What a progression comes to mind: Mussolini - Chavez - Putin - Clinton.

Sorry, not enough time right now to write a full blown show outline. If anyone knows of any decent way of ttranscribing my shows I would appreciate it.

In any case, as usual, this is only a writeup of what happened on the air during my live KSCO AM 1080 board cast. To listen to the full show (sans commercials) follow click on the listen button above. If you are looking at this in your email, just follow the link to my blog and then click Listen.

First part of the show was dedicated to exciting news from France and exciting first week for Nicolas Sarkozy as France's new President. Some interesting observations there as well as critique of American inflexible reaction. For example, Rush Limbaugh unloaded on Sarkozy for nominating Bernard Kouchner a Socialist as his foreign minister, probably unaware, that Kouchner was all but the only member of the French political elite that supported in principle invasion of Iraq and liberation of it from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein.

Then some dopey caller wanted to argue about socialism in the US with me without really having any clue. I kept this segment for entertainment purposes just to show the whole world how ignorant some ultra-right winders (that are no different by the way from ultra left wingers) can get.

Second hour also opened with a bit of talk about socialism and then it launched me into a tirade about meaning of words. As a linguist, I think I can afford a tirade or two on the subject.

The last portion of the show was devoted to the recent immigration bill. In a nutshell, I am generally in favor of resolving the issue of 12 million illegals without forcing massive deportations that will require collection and detention centers, also known as concentration camps and all kind of nastiness this country should not be getting into. There is no easy solution and I have not seen anything from those that oppose the current plan except the same old unimplementable idea of massive deportation.

My general point is that although we claim to be a country of laws, there could be good laws and bad laws. Immigration system in the US was a clear example of bad laws that never worked. In the mean time we have 12 million people caught in this net because this country had bad, unnatural laws on the subject. And I simply call not to destroy peoples' lives, not to punish too hard for doing something that very many ancestors of current US citizens had done themselves. Very many laws were violated by the avalanche of settlers from Europe. Let's not be too hypocritical.

Please listen and enjoy.

The first Embassy of the New World Order radio show after I returned from my trip to Russia. Naturally, most of the show was dedicated to my views and my assessment of what is current state of Russia. As always, this is not a transcript, this is just an outline of what went on during the show. Take a listen.

Resignation of Tony Blair and assessment of his legacy will wait, but for eight now I can safely state that the main factor in Blair's legacy will be transformation of the Labour Party decidedly to the right. Gone are Clause Four and most of the Socialist agenda of the British Labour in force since early 20th century. Whatever else Tony Blair did will be overshadowed by this departure from Socialism.

Elections of Nicolas Sarkozy will have to wait as well, although there is really not much to say here, other then very soon he will find himself in the same situation Margaret Thatcher and Jacques Chirac found themselves. The situation that Thatcher won and that victory led to what is now the UK, and the situation that Chirac lost and  thus wasted  a decade of his country's future.

As I said, most of the talk was about Russia, its social and moral state, its economic state. And I have to admit I am quite afraid for its future. Socially and morally the country is in trouble. Combination of the clannish society that is in the early stages of transformation from feudalism (socialism, communism being really just versions of feudalism) towards capitalism and unheard of speed of such transformation attribute to various problems. The society is very uncaring, it is in fact downright hostile. My experiences with medical system and subsequently with death and funeral arrangements for my mother were quite eye opening.

But there is an economic component to this as well that scares me. I am afraid for the future of Russia and if it can avoid mistakes and problems of early capitalist development I will be happy for it, but I seriously doubt it will avoid them. Russians discovered mortgages and debt and they are treat them as booze. They are drunk with debt. Mortgages are everywhere and rates are astronomical. Real estate prices in St Petersburg and Moscow are through the roof and mortgages. People are borrowing like crazy without ever hoping to pay back. Consumer credit reaches I was told 60 percent and more. The balance of good vs bad debt is going to be very unhealthy.

Combine this with resurgence of Russian Nationalism brewed together with Russian Orthodoxy. Some of my dear friends have succumbed to this obscurantist psychobabble of Orthodoxy offering the only spiritual opposition to inhuman Western imperialism.  And when an economic crash comes this poisonous brew might create something really ugly. Combine this with isolationist policy Mr. Putin is dragging Russia into. One of my friends commented that the worst thing Putin has ever achieved was this foreign policy fiasco - that Russia has no friends. Some might disagree that Warsaw Pact was hardly a friendship club, but still the country was not alone. Now it is. Even Lukashenka, the mad President of Belarus is no longer a friend.

The second hour was mostly dedicated to Russian - Estonian standoff around relocation of the Bronze monument to Soviet Army from a square in the center of Tallinn to a military cemetery. Leaving aside clumsiness of Estonian authorities in carrying out what they had an absolute right, legal and moral, to do, reaction in Russia was absolutely inadequate. The Speaker of the Duma called for severing diplomatic ties with Estonia. Jerks in the streets called to send tanks into Tallinn. Russia stopped passenger train service between St Petersburg and Tallinn, as well as deliveries of some energy resources. Parliamentarians and cabinet members called for boycott of Estonian goods - the PR frenzy machine was working 24/7. And in the mean time, there was nothing from Putin. Vilhelm Konnander (an incredibly astute observer and analyst of all things Eastern European) has some interesting explanations. According to Albatz at Echo Moskvy, there were no interruptions in almost tax free transit through Estonia to Russia - the Putin Inc. money making machine was working all along.

And amidst all this I am talking to a friend of mine and he just drops in passing "I don't like Estonians". Add this to the nationalistic obscurantism. It does not even occur to some that stating something like that is sick. Imagine someone here say something like I don't like Mexicans?!

On the way back from Russia I picked up an issue of The Wall Street Journal Europe and read an interesting column by Amir Taheri about economic isolationist policies of Ahmadinejad - the president of Iran. I always thought it is important to recognize philosophic similarities to understand who's company who keeps.That column by Taheri is a great illustration of how the isolationists in the US are quite close philosophically to Ahmadinejad, Chavez or Zhirinovsky  - fascists and socialists. While they purport to be pro-capitalists. Just a side note.

The ending of the show somehow turned to discussing Putin. Thanks to La Russophobe who does a great job of finding all kinds of writings about Russia, I came to a new (to me) blog called  Streetwise Professor with some hard hitting comments about Putin's V-Day speech. Other links of note for this show: Marginalia has a very interesting discussion of how decades of falsifying history of the USSR affect our current views and attitudes towards contemporary events like the standoff in Estonia. Vladimir Socor writes about standard catch words that reveal the mystic obscurantism of Russian Orthodox Nationalism.

The last of the Embassy of the New World Order shows until I return from my overseas trip in mid may. I do promise to post blog entries just like I did when I was in Russia last September.

The first part of the show was dedicated to the coverage of the recent marches and demonstration in Moscow, St. Petersburg by the Western media. Almost all articles I saw seem to pretend these were rallies of pro-democracy freedom minded liberal pro-westerners, and this is not the case. Of course some participants favour western democratic principles, but one side of these events is conspicuously missing: the role of the Nutsballs. I just love this name, it is a rendition of  a Russian abbreviation for National Bolshevik party, but Nutsballs rolls of the tongue so well...

I made a search on Google news for Limonov - the leader of the NutsBall  party and got a very short list compared to the general list of articles about Moscow and St. Pete's rallies. And even these were nothing but in passing references. A glaring example of wishful thinking. Sure, like a lot of people in the media that cover these events, I would love for these demonstrations to be advancing values of capitalist based democracy, but they are not. One of the prominent objects in photos from the March 3 rally was the Confederate Flag. National Bolsheviks are not liberal democrats, well, in Russia even Liberal Democrats and not liberal democrats.

There of course will be a parade of pro-Putin blogs rightfully criticizing western media for this omission and some will likely suggest an anti-Russian bias or even a conspiracy. I think, however, this says more about how confused the western media reporters are. Edward Limonov and his Nutsballs  are in fact a very inconvenient phenomenon for any lefty or a socialist, because they represent the missing link between fascism and socialism - the two systems that came from the Left and are the Left. Most western media professionals are left of center but have been always pretending and insisting to classify fascism to be the far right. Limonov and the Nutsballs are a thorn in the side, a poke in the eye, a sword over shoulder of the left that illustrates to the left its political origins. It is no surprise the left wing media ignores the problem.

Needless to say, there is probably quite a bit of ignorance and  sloppy journalism involved.

Continuing on the last subject from the last week's show, more on the obscene, abhorrent ethanol folly. The chickens are coming home to roost. Food prices worldwide have risen 10% over last year because of this abomination. To turn food into fuel is worse then what Mari Antoinette could ever had suggested. Meat prices in the US are about to rise as well. Soy for vegans will be more expensive, but here I have no sympathy, suspecting that 99% of vegans are pro-ethanol moonbats.

The last subject was upcoming French elections. I do hope Sarkozy  wins and carries out badly needed reforms. He seems to be an admirer of the Anglo Saxon economic model and has a chance of digging France from the economic grave. The rest of the field are all a parade of lefties rushing again to step on the proverbial rake of socialism and get the nose bloodied again. And yes, I include Jean Marie Le Pen with the lefties as well. Please, France, no more fascists getting 20% of the vote this time! For the sake of your national psyche.

Catching up. Feb 4th Radio Show

If there is one world one could apply to my views and most of my shows across the board that would most likely be optimism. This show takes it further. Optimism is the main thread of it. And it was not planned. It just went on and developed ad lib.

Mentioning of Senator Webb and John Edwards and Jim Hightower and their vision of soup kitchen America took me to the simple statement – this country never had it as good. Which lead to the Economist article about the state of Great Britain, subtitled “You've never had it so good”

The place is enjoying a period of extraordinary prosperity. Fourteen years of stable growth have kept unemployment down. There have been social gains as well as economic ones: fewer children and pensioners live in poverty than ten years ago. Crime is broadly lower. And with prosperity has come renewed political clout. Britain has helped to shape aid for Africa, the debate on climate change, European enlargement and, last week, negotiations to restart world trade talks.

All this is especially remarkable in contrast with the recent past. A quarter-century ago, the home of the industrial revolution was closing factories and mines. The class war raged as unions took on the government and business.

In 2006, the country bought from Russia 24 Sukhoi 30 jet fighters, 53 MI-24 military helicopters and 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles.

Putin is building more nuclear submarines to fight his war in Chechnya.

And Finally, Nicolas Sarkozy is embracing “les Anglo Saxons” Why?!

January 14th broadcast of the Embassy of the New World Order.

Just another installment of utter brilliance... as one of the callers said.

Subjects for this January 14th edition of the Emabssy of the New World Order on KSCO AM 1080 included:

• Escalation and surge of troops in Iraq. There is at least one aspect that must be considered before any comments are made and way too many armchair admirals and generals do not understand it. I have to admit that I myself foolishly neglected to find out more about numbers and was of the opinion that additional 20,000 are not enough compared to 140,000 already there. Well, it appears that in terms of Baghdad proper, this escalation and surge will more then double US troop contingent. According to Economist, 5 brigades will be added to 4 stationed there. Since Baghdad is the central point for the push, my optimism levels have risen to manageable levels.
• La Patria o la tumba! Hugo Chavez is dropping silly pretense and is calling himself for the communist he is. He is embarking on the path of late Salvadore Allende nationalizing communications, energy and oil industries. Considering records of Communist states or states with nationalized pyramid economies like USSR running out of grain with all the Ukrainian topsoil, the end result will be Venezuela running out of oil, oil money and making its people even more poor.
• Case to the point is a shocking prediction of  Iran running out of oil. Not out of oil in the ground, but out of oil available for consumption. Combine this with German Gref's warning that Russia might run out of natural gas for internal use. Oil prices have been on decline for some time now hovering just above $50 per barrel. Iran and Russia whose governments survive because of the petrodollars they rake in, might begin to feel the pinch if the situation continues to deteriorate. Especially if it is true that 70% of Iran's budget is based on oil revenues.
• Quick commentary on yet another PR fiasco the inept Putin Inc administration dragged Russia into - the quarrel with Belarus over oil and gas supplies, Gazprom's stake in Belarusneftegaz as well as another reminder to the Europeans of how reliable as a partner Russia can be.

Milton Friedman postmortem show, The Noon Balloon on KSCO AM 1080.

More talk about capitalism vs feudalism dichotomy and discussion of the word progressive with its origins and its understanding in at least today's Santa Cruz. The Communist Manifesto describes proletarians ans the only class that would go all the way (for progress, presumably) because they have nothing to loose but their chains. Here is your origin of why the left managed to hijack the word progressive. Just like the left with the help of unwitting contributors like Rush Limbaugh has successfully corrupted and hijacked the word "liberal."

The first reference to what later would become a haunting subject for me for the next several days: a childhood friend of mine, a Russian musician is in NY now with several other Russians for a festival of some sort. One of these others, a young artist from Russia, that has never been in the US is very upset.

After 9 days in NY this young man is extremely annoyed by Americans' "fake smiles". Can you imagine what kind of wretched, corrupting culture does one, so young, must come from so that a simple act of friendliness causes suspicions and annoyance?! These smiles are not fakes, but a person that only knows Russian culture would not know it, because that culture conditioned him to think it must be fake friendliness.

There is a myth that so many people around the world are adhering to without direct knowledge of capitalism and US in particular. US, is actually a much kinder place then most of the societies on the planet. Russian love to talk about kind Russian souls, but talk's cheap. And the current situation in Russia, the health care examples I brought back with me from there a month ago speak volumes about how immoral and completely unkind and indifferent contemporary Russia is. Even if these smiles the young Russian dumb ass is complaining were fake, I would take them over the cruel indifference of contemporary Russia.

Further on the left-right or rather capitalism vs. socialism dichotomy. Socialism is loosing. Most countries are moving away from government ownership and control of means of production (well, except Russia, that is apparently hell bent to have its own course even if it leads into a perpetual swamp) - two decades after Thatcher turned UK over towards prosperity, Tony Blair had to completely revamp the Labour Party platform, eliminating Clause IV - demand for nationalization.

One of the callers brought up Milton Friedman's  take on health care, or rather current insurance situation in the US.