by Avi Davis
On Monday morning, the Greek people awoke to find themselves confronted by a new reality.
In a landslide, the anti -austerity party, Syriza, won a decisive victory in national elections, positioning its tough-talking leader, Alex Tsipras, to become the next prime minister.
Appearing before a throng of supporters outside Athens University late Sunday, Mr. Tsipras, 40, declared the era of austerity over and promised to revive the economy.
He also said his government would not allow Greece’s creditors to strangle the country.
Such a victory was hardly unexpected. Since Germany and other northern European countries had forced Greece to swallow the bitter pill of austerity in 2011,
the country has groaned under the dramatic cuts in government spending, the loss of public sector jobs ( at one time the public sector made up nearly 45% of the workforce)
and the evaporation of the once booming housing market. The Greeks could not become accustomed to a situation in which their future was controlled by other countries
and there has been increasingly loud rallies calling for an end to the Euro mandated austerity regime.
But Tsipras’ plans to end austerity and grow the economy quickly will immediately encounter some insurmountable hurdles to which the economists
in his party have not given sufficient attention.
For lets be clear about one thing: Greeks economic pain is not due to the austerity measures forced upon it by the Eurozone. It came about because of years of profligate
spending, irresponsible budgets, a debt to GDP ratio that was the highest in Europe and a country that failed to produce anything much at all that the rest of the world wanted.
Greece joined the Eurozone in 1999 flush with the expectation that the high valued Euro would bring with it a rush of international investment
which would power the economy into the 21st Century and contribute to widespread prosperity.
But in those giddy years, the people of Greece neglected to affirm the one value that they would need to enshrine in order to grasp their new golden egg:
they still needed to work and work hard.
That was not to be. Given to years of lassitude, the Greeks, and most Europeans have no stomach for the kind of effort it takes to sustain a modern economy.
Profligacy, social welfare, neoptism, corruption and a vibrant, fairly open black market, has produced a country where people don’t work much, retire young
and take long vacations. Add to this severe institutional problems – such as the fact that a third of the country doesn’t pay tax and a quarter of the economy operates
under the table and you have a recipe for economic catastrophe.
Corruption, venality of office, an over loaded and under-worked bureaucracy and the fact that there is no history of accommodation between the political classes
and labor unions at all, have all added to the sense of hopelessness.
The Greek model actually describes the bulk of Europe, where the work ethic has given way to the pleasure ethic and the
lambent idea that government can always be counted on to bail out failed enterprises. But what happens when the government has no money to bail out anybody
and the source that it must rely on – namely foreign investment, remains skittish and uncertain about the country’s future? What happens when no one – not the European Union,
not the United States and not China – is prepared to say we believe in your future and we will continue to fund your debt?
That is exactly what the new prime minister will face in the coming days and weeks when the EU stands its ground and tells the Greeks that if they
welsh on their commitments then their debt will be called – leading to a pain unlike the people of Greece have ever known before.
For the EU, Greece and the austerity regime imposed upon it has represented the plug that has prevented them from hearing that flushing sound as the wealth of Europe
gurgles down the drain and empties into the Aegean Sea.
Would detaching Greece from the Euro and letting it drift back into the drachma bring great pain to the heart of Europe? Almost certainly, but it is not fatal.
Will the Greek revolt against austerity encourage other countries under the same austerity regime – Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italy – to follow their example and
buck their benefactors? Almost certainly not. The difference is that these countries have mature statesmen who have been able to convince
their populations that a temporary belt tightening and fiscal discipline could lead to a far more prosperous future.
Unfortunately in Greece that kind of leadership has been absent and that absence is now even more pronounced with the ascension of anew leader who eschews
the kinds of sacrifices the Greeks have needed to make for years
In 2011 The European Union – and most particularly its wealthier countries in Germany and France – handed Greece a gift. Now the Greeks wish to
return that gift with contempt, thinking that the EU has more to lose than they do. They could not be more mistaken. The Northern European countries
will let Greece sink into the Aegean rather than open the floodgates to other fragile economies demanding the same accommodation.
A titanic tussle is about to take place. But lets set in perspective: In this Olympian wrestle for dominance,
it is the Europeans who hold the Greeks by their vulnerable parts and not the other way around.
Avi Davis is the President of the American Freedom Alliance and the editor of The Intermediate Zone
Rolling Stone Rues Not Getting “the Other Side of the Story”
December 9, 2014A rare event occurred in our galaxy last week, something I believed I would never see nor read about in my lifetime. Rolling Stone Magazine, the venerable chronicle of modern American nihilism, issued an apology for getting a story wrong.
The story A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA appeared in the Magazine’s November 19th edition and revolved around investigative piece by Sabrina Rubin Erdely involving a woman solely identified as “Jackie.”
The 9,000-word story recounted a horrific attack on the U.Va. freshman on September 28th, 2012 in an upstairs room of the university’s Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house. Crude comments attributed to fraternity members suggested the attack was part of an initiation. The gruesome details of the story recounted how the girl was raped over a shattered table with shards of glass jamming into her back. She alleged she had been raped over several hours by seven different individuals.
The piece portrayed U.Va.’s response as tepid, reporting that students who cheat on exams are routinely expelled for violations of U.Va.’s Honor Code, but none has ever been expelled for rape.
The publication of Erdeley’s article generated campus protests and vandalism of the fraternity’s property. It prompted U.Va. President Teresa Sullivan to suspend the activities of the university’s more than 60 Greek organizations. The school’s Board of Visitors adopted a zero-tolerance position on sexual assault. Police began an investigation.
However, after a Washington Post investigation called Jackie’s account into question, pointing out that there was no Phi Kappa Psi event on September 28, 2012, no PKP brothers with the nick names “Armpit”and “Blanket”, no back stair access through which she escaped her ordeal, Rolling Stone was forced to submit an apology:
“In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced,” the Magazine commented on its website last Thursday.
Rolling Stone Managing Editor, Will Dana, tweeted later that day that “the truth would have been better served by getting the other side of the story.”
The apology itself aroused a storm of protest as the Magazine seemed to be blaming the victim for the story’s unreliability when the onus should have been on the reporter herself who failed to obtain any corroboration of the woman’s allegations.
Thereafter the Magazine published a second apology in which it shifted the blame for the story’s inaccuracies onto its own shoulders:
“We published the article with the firm belief that it was accurate. Given all of these reports, however, we have come to the conclusion that we were mistaken in honoring Jackie’s request to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account. In trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault, we made a judgment – the kind of judgment reporters and editors make every day. We should have not made this agreement with Jackie and we should have worked harder to convince her that the truth would have been better served by getting the other side of the story. These mistakes are on Rolling Stone, not on Jackie. We apologize to anyone who was affected by the story and we will continue to investigate the events of that evening.”
It is of course a good thing that the the Magazine, nearing 50 years old, has admitted that there are sometimes “other sides” to stories that are worth considering. However that is not an admission you will ever find when the Magazine launches its vitriolic attacks on the Koch Brothers, Tea Party groups, big business and Climate Change critics. But since Rolling Stone is now in the mood for a little self-examination, perhaps it might want to revisit some of these old stories for how ell its examined ” the other side”: .
Take for instance an article by environmental activist Bill McKibben in the August 16, 2012 edition of the magazine titled The Arctic Ice Crisis
In his piece McKibben offers a report from Jason Box, a scientist at the Byrd Polar Research Center in Greenland who contends that large sections of Greenland are just falling off the continent:
“Box had conservatively predicted that it might take up to a decade before the surface of Greenland’s ice sheet melted all at once. That it actually happened in just a few weeks only underscores how consistently cautious ice scientists have been in forecasting the threat posed by global warming. Now, however, that caution is being replaced by well-founded alarm. “Greenland is a sleeping giant that’s waking,” says Box. “In this new climate, the ice sheet is going to keep shrinking – the only question is how fast.”
But in the same year, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by NASA – together with the Danish Meterological Institute, both revealed that the Arctic Ice Cap had actually grown.
In fact today the National Snow and Ice Data Center reveals an increase of 1.71 million square kilometers over the past two years – which is an an impressive 43% while the Danes, using a different measure, have found a 63% increase! We can debate how much global warming is responsible for changes in our climate. But maybe Mr. McKibben’s reporting on the issue might have benefited from a discussion with Dr. Ed Hawkins from the U.K.’s Reading University who observed that year that the decline seen in the years leading up to 2102 was not caused only by global warming. “It was,” he said, “intensified by ‘natural variability’ – shifts in factors such as the temperature of the oceans. This has happened before, such as in the 1920s and 1930s, when there was likely some sea ice retreat.” Like many scientists, Dr Hawkins has averred that these natural processes may be cyclical. If and when they go into reverse, they will cool, not warm, the Arctic, in which case, he said, ‘a decade with no declining trend’ in ice cover would be ‘entirely plausible’.
Did McKibben not know of the contradictory evidence and views or did he just decide exclude it?
Or take this September 24, 2014 attack on the Koch Brothers by investigative journalist Tim Dickinson. His beef with the Koch Brothers seems to be largely that they are rich and successful, that they trade in oil and support right wing political causes – all cardinal crimes against humanity in his and Rolling Stone’s world view
Among the many allegations made by Dickinson are that the Koch Brothers are that they are unreformed toxic polluters, financial manipulators, Machiavellian political schemers and treacherous partners.
Here is how he sums them up at the end of his 5,000 word story:
“Koch has profited precisely by dumping billions of pounds of pollutants into our waters and skies – essentially for free. It racks up enormous profits from speculative trades lacking economic value that drive up costs for consumers and create risks for our economy.
The Koch brothers get richer as the costs of what Koch destroys are foisted on the rest of us – in the form of ill health, foul water and a climate crisis that threatens life as we know it on this planet. Now nearing 80 – owning a large chunk of the Alberta tar sands and using his billions to transform
the modern Republican Party into a protection racket for Koch Industries’ profits – Charles Koch is not about to see the light.”
In a long response to the multiple slurs, untruths and outright deceptions in the Dickinson piece, Koch Industries who had opened themselves to Dickinson’s inquiries and had been assured by him that he was attempting to engage in ” a good faith discussion”, they pointed out that of the 3,200 word response they offered Dickinson in response to his written questions, he only chose to quote 99. There was barely a mention of the 900 awards for safety, environmental excellence, and community stewardship Koch has received since 2009 alone or that the EPA has repeatedly praised Koch for a productive and collaborative approach to environmental protection. The article falsely claims that Koch’s petroleum coke business at its KCBX North facility in Chicago is endangering the “health of South Side residents,” despite the fact that they provided Dickinson with the Congressional Research Service research, findings from the city of Chicago that “there are no known illnesses or health effects associated with pet coke dust,” and EPA’s own conclusion that “petroleum coke itself has a low level of toxicity and that there is no evidence of carcinogenicity.” Nor does Dickinson note that KCBX was honored with the Good Neighbor award from the Southeast Environmental Task Force in 2001 and again in 2005.
They provided a summation of the absence of journalistic integrity, fairness and balance in Dickinson’s piece:
‘”Any reasonable reader will conclude that this article is nothing more than a thinly veiled “hit piece.” We believe that Rolling Stone readers would have benefitted from an open and honest discussion of the issues Mr. Dickinson decided to write about. We are confident that if the true facts had been presented, Rolling Stone readers might have learned something about us that was contrary to the misinformation that Rolling Stone and other media have rehashed and regurgitated over the years. Apparently Rolling Stone and Mr. Dickinson do not trust or respect their readers enough to provide them with balanced information and an objective narrative, nor do they want their readers to make up their own minds.”
Balance and fairness – providing a wide perspective on controversial issues – is what we should expect from our journalists. But how little editorial oversight there is of so many contributing writers to Rolling Stone. The magazine regularly accepts hit pieces, just like the one above, presenting opinion as if it is fact, excluding information which does not fit within its own political narrative and resorting to name calling and epithet slinging against all those who disagree with its polemical approach. The absence of journalistic integrity puts Rolling Stone in the vanguard of the decline in standards we have seen in the U.S. over the past 30 years in both reportage and investigative journalism.
Maybe the failures of Sabrina Rubin Erdely to adequately corroborate her story will hasten a broad review of the magazine’s journalistic practices. But don’t count on any real change until Rolling stone is hit hard by the a declining subscriber base and perhaps even the fall off of advertising revenue due to its abandonment of proper journalistic practices and its preferences for ideology over truth.
.
Share this:
Leave a Comment » | Radical Left, Social Commentary | Permalink
Posted by avidavis