The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
suppose ....I happen to be a religiously devout, socially conservative, free marketeer and political libertarian who believes in minimal state intervention. Does that mean I am not welcome here?
Yes, of course you are. On the basis of civility of course, but must accept that such views, being in the minority here, will be challenged and cannot just be repeated as a conventional wisdom as they could be on other more conservative sites.
Equally, I don't think I was making an absolutist point about who we are either. The first sentence is my get-out clause;-
I don't think there is a simple or single answer to your question.
There are people here who are religious in various forms, and there are some people who are at the rightward end of the spectrum (Although not very far to the right) Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
but must accept that such views, being in the minority here, will be challenged and cannot just be repeated as a conventional wisdom
He has become quite a regular there annoying all the dirigiste French Socialists with his free market libertarian ideas. Even the "Anglos" on the site usually take issue with him but he is quite a good exemplar of the neo-conservative Republican line. Usually he just spouts cliches to really annoy people - almost troll like - but sometimes he forces people to think through their assumptions a bit better.
I doubt he still lurks here (hallo Terry???!!) because Timesonline has a larger and more popular audience and deals with more "populist" topics. We had a couple of run-ins and he regards me as an unreconstructed communist but I generally felt I wasn't learning much from the exchanges and thus left him at it.
But his presence here is an interesting example of the argument I am just having with Helen here. Terry is way off to the right of the ET spectrum, but he is an archetype of the people and ideology which we are battling in the US. He has changed his tune and style quite considerably since he started on Timesonline and so "constructive engagement" can work.
The question is, is the ET strategy to preach to the converted or to teach and influence Mainstream opinion? - because whether we like it or not Terry represents c. 30-40% of active US political opinion.
Over to you - do you think we're better off without Terry? Index of Frank's Diaries
He obviously did what he came here for which was harass you and lecture us, and left.
But he's not the first nor the longest-lived libertarian or "conservative republican" we've had here, nor will he be the last. We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
The trouble with advertising in MSM is you can't control who follows your links. Index of Frank's Diaries
No, the purpose of this blog per se is not to influence mainstream opinion. It is what we can build here that I hope may do that, and what we can draw on from this community to get out into the MSM and through whatever other channels we may be able to use. As such I find battles with -- in particular -- US libertarians, as a waste of energy. There is imo enough sharpness here to help us hone our arguments.
Please don't think I'm complaining because Terry came here. C'est la vie :)
PS who said you - or any other front pager - was a bad lieutenant?
What I am trying to elucidate here is whether ANY political position on the spectrum is an ESSENTIAL part of the ET value system, or whether the way we go about our business is what BEST defines us - e.g. independence, critical analysis, respect for opposing points of view, collaborative learning, widespread participation etc. etc.
I sense an impatience with the fact that I am even asking the question. Fair enough, lets move on. But I wouldn't be here if I felt you couldn't challenge the conventional wisdom of whatever ilk if you felt it was wrong in a particular instance.
Migeru below gives me a hard time for even considering the possibility that Jacob Freeze might have had a point in one of his (more minor) complaints. Just because Jacob was wrong on some fairly major points of etiquette doesn't mean he is wrong on all points. Just because Jacob might have had a small point doesn't mean that I am calling you or Migeru a "Bad Lieutenants".
If it is so tiresome to raise the issue, then perhaps rdf is right and perhaps I am in the wrong place. Index of Frank's Diaries
Afew was referring to a comment in another thread.
It was a simple member's comment. It's my view that it's not our job to debate wingers and neolibs. It's not a view that everyone shares. Just my two cents.
In no way did I mean to be aggressive towards you or to show impatience with your question.
Bad Lieutenant was a joke because front-pagers are getting some bad press elsewhere at the moment. To the extent that it is hard to post a simple member's opinion when one is also a front-pager.
So I'm going to shut up for tonight.
No, the purpose of this blog per se is not to influence mainstream opinion
That has an impact on the question posed by this blog: What Values does ET Represent? It is saying we are more a think tank for "progressive thinkers" rather than a direct attempt to engage with (US) Mainstream opinion. Fair enough - I only wanted to know what the implicit (or explicit) strategy behind ET is.
Feel free to comment, even if you are a hated frontpager!!! Index of Frank's Diaries
I was genuinely puzzled by whether Terry's arrival here via my link on Timesonline would be welcomed
I'd like to address (in some way, it's not easy) a "European/International mainstream." I'm much less interested in ET as a venue to address a "US mainstream" as I feel there are many other venues for that.
That doesn't mean I don't want to discuss with people from the US and about US policy, both are important elements of international politics.
But, as a site, what ET can be special as is a place for a European discourse with an international slant.
It is saying we are more a think tank for "progressive thinkers" rather than a direct attempt to engage with (US) Mainstream opinion.
That is a good sumamry of my personal view. Is it the majority opinion? I truly don't know. Probably.
As to who is welcome, I hope you felt that you were. Terry... He's free to comment. Not quite the same...
The front-pagers are listed on the (duh) front page, below right, under the Blogroll. Sorry if this one is a bit touchy tonight, it's this knife I can't get out of me back... (not to be taken too seriously).
I'm very good at taking knives out of peoples backs, and I can be a rottweiler when I want to be. Who was it, let me at him!!!!
Colman, colman stop holding me back..... Index of Frank's Diaries
If they move to address the fragmentation of the Information Channels they lose the adjective "mass" and their economic basis.
If they refrain from addressing Information Channel fragmentation they lose their influence. She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
But it is a moot point imo. I can't see newspapers lasting too many years in their present formats. The Finnish paper industry is already closing mills at speed, both at home and abroad, in ackowledgement of those newspapers' forthcoming demise. No panic here yet in the fibre industry since 85% of Finnish fibre goes into packaging, not print papers. But there will be some expensive paper machines sitting idle for a while before they get sold off to other markets. You can't be me, I'm taken
With the multiplication of free newspapers it seems newspapers will not disappear.
If you look at the content of the free newspapers, mostly full of sensationalism or celebrity gossip and of the advertising that makes them viable, and compare it to, say, weekly glossies (where the audience pays to see the ads and the gossip and pseudo-wisdom), maybe what has its days numbered is the "broadsheet" newspaper as a mass product. We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
Free newspapers do not differ in this.
The market for LWC and super-calendared paper is still holding up (glossies, ad mailings, brochures, catalogues etc.) But even a couple of those have been closed by Finnish companies recently.
Basically many newspapers in the US and Europe are losing a few % sales each year and it is beginning to add up. Add to that the loss of classified ads. Circulation loss is unimportant as far as income, but loss of readers is hugely important in retaining a share of the total ad spend. A formerly wide-circulation Finnish newspaper 'Talous Sanomat' recently abandoned print altogether to focus entirely online - where they had built up a similar audience, or should I say 'community'
And interestingly even the ad spend is shifting (in Finland) with a move away from msm toward seminars, training, sponsorship and trade fairs. You can't be me, I'm taken
and of the advertising that makes them viable,
Are they?
In France they are mostly losing money. It seems their real utility is providing influence to their owner ; the adds cover a part of the losses, but certainly not all of them. Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
The pluts have been pissing away their money buying newspapers at the exact moment, as you say, they are losing their major influence, importance.
Double butter on my popcorn, please. She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Buying influence is the only explanation.
Oh, and incompetence. Never underestimate incompetence. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
By the way, when you look at the PEG it becomes utterly preposterous.
And one more thing, buying companies not to maximize profits, is that not the thing we are supposed to stop those sovereign wealth funds from doing? Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
I've always found a mainstream American very difficult to discuss with, and thus any attempt to influence those opinions is beyond my talents. You can't be me, I'm taken
Me duck.
(Whatever that means.) She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
I advise against it's use except when in the locale or speaking to inhabitants or former inhabitants. It can also cause problems in France where it can be confused with Medoc. You can't be me, I'm taken
Though spoken less commonly today, the dialect of the East Midlands has been investigated in notable texts such as the affectionately titled Ey Up Mi Duck[3] series of books (and an LP) by Richard Scollins and John Titford. These books were originally intended as a study of Derbyshire Dialect, particuarly the distinctive speech of Ilkeston and the Erewash valley, but later editions acknowledge similarities in vocabulary and grammar which unite the East Midlands dialects and broadened their appeal to the region as a whole. "Ey Up" is a greeting of uncertain origin used widely throughout the North Midlands and South Yorkshire, and "Mi Duck" is thought to be derived from a respectful Anglo Saxon form of address, "Duka" (Literally "Duke"), and is unrelated to waterfowl. [4] Non-natives of the East Midlands are often surprised to hear men greet each other as 'Mi Duck.' [5]
Though spoken less commonly today, the dialect of the East Midlands has been investigated in notable texts such as the affectionately titled Ey Up Mi Duck[3] series of books (and an LP) by Richard Scollins and John Titford. These books were originally intended as a study of Derbyshire Dialect, particuarly the distinctive speech of Ilkeston and the Erewash valley, but later editions acknowledge similarities in vocabulary and grammar which unite the East Midlands dialects and broadened their appeal to the region as a whole.
"Ey Up" is a greeting of uncertain origin used widely throughout the North Midlands and South Yorkshire, and "Mi Duck" is thought to be derived from a respectful Anglo Saxon form of address, "Duka" (Literally "Duke"), and is unrelated to waterfowl. [4] Non-natives of the East Midlands are often surprised to hear men greet each other as 'Mi Duck.' [5]
As Steve Colbert says "Facts have a liberal bias". So really all you're asking is a variant on the chicken-egg question. Are we liberal because we are committed to reality-based policy or are we committed to evidence based policy cos we're liberals ?
It's the same thing you hear right-wingers moaning about the liberal bias at the BBC. Can a conservative really stay true to their beliefs without ignoring the eividence. I have my doubts. keep to the Fen Causeway
Facts have a liberal bias
We are simply an evidenced based, independent think tank and any views we express are simply a logical consequence of that.
The point being that I think we can deduce a centre of gravity for the community, but at the same time, just like a big party, it's actually a number of people who form differing disagreeing groups depending on the issue.
The zeitgeist is not easy to sum up, one can list issues where there is large amounts of agreement (e.g. government shouldn't be drowned in the bathtub, the Washington/neo-liberal consensus on economics is flawed, war is a very dangerous means of foreign policy, peak oil looks like a real incoming problem, the EU is basically a good thing, and many more.) But, I don't know if that's what you're after, when you say "what values does ET represent?"
One is wary of saying "ET represents" much as one is wary of saying "dailyKos represents" because of the multiplicity of voices and the generic disagreements. Certainly I feel not at all confident to say to an interviewing journalist "this is what ET is about as a political movement."
Which perhaps brings me to some philosophical thoughts:
1) In a lot of ways ET is so far mostly just a community, rather than a movement. It doesn't represent very formally, rather it tends to just exist.
[Note: I don't say that to frustrate you or duck the issue, more to recognise the difficulties I outline above and the fact that ET has not developed a representational project very much so far.]
2) What is the essence of the community? Internationalism is some major part of it. And that's why there is often a sense of a great deal of exaggerated ritual around evidence and civility in discussions. We come here to be in touch with things beyond our backyards. Many of us have lived in a number of different places. Many of us are even interested in much further zones that just "Europe" but I think there is a strong sense that the "European ideal" of nations coming closer together, that people should have more freedoms to travel and interact with those abroad, etc. is all an important thing.
As to
The question is, is the ET strategy to preach to the converted or to teach and influence Mainstream opinion?
My answer is, "Yes."
Both intellectual validation and persuasion are worthy goals and can be carried on simultaneously. How individuals approach those tasks - should they have an interest - is, of course, up to them.
By validation I mean the psycho-epistemic realization, "Hey! I'm not alone AND my ideas have intellectual respectibility."
By "persuasion" I mean someone accepting a statement, proposition, or conclusion due to acceptance of the reasons supporting the statement, proposition, or conclusion. I have zero interest in establishing the 'The Left Church of ATinNM: Semiotic, Epistemological, & Post-Modernist."
From all this I don't give a damn about 'Terry' lurking or engaging as long as 'he' obeys the norms of ET. Repeating myself, my basic tenet is posting on ET is a Privilege, not a Right. She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Of course a minority viewpoint has to prove their case, just the same as I do. But if, say, somebody wants to come on and suggest that the Iraq war has been a success on the terms bush claims, then you have to accept we're gonna greet it with a lot more skepticism than one we're more inclined towards. That's not an anti-right wing plot, that's human nature. keep to the Fen Causeway
Contributers may well have a tendancy towards a certain area of the political spectrum (I'm sure somebody could point you in the direction of results and discussion on that) and in broad terms we are probably looking in roughly the same direction but when you break it down to individual topics, approaches, ways of thinking, backgrounds, locations, there is huge diversity here.
I personally hope to minimise aggressive conflict because it is unpleasant and intimidating and does nothing for constructive debate and dialogue. That does not in any way amount to suppressing discussion or variety of opinion. We wouldn't have so many excellent diaries with long discussion threads if we were all bleating a conventional majority opinion.
And we do challenge each other - sometimes people agree totally on one topic and then on another will be debating it out til the cows come home.
The implication from various people that the front page team is acting as a groupthink or as scrambling leiutenants is utterly unfair.
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 26 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 31
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 22 3 comments
by Cat - Jan 25 52 comments
by Oui - Jan 9 21 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 13 28 comments
by gmoke - Jan 20
by Oui - Jan 15 91 comments
by gmoke - Jan 29
by Oui - Jan 2731 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 263 comments
by Cat - Jan 2552 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 223 comments
by Oui - Jan 2110 comments
by Oui - Jan 21
by Oui - Jan 20
by Oui - Jan 1839 comments
by Oui - Jan 1591 comments
by Oui - Jan 144 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 1328 comments
by Oui - Jan 1219 comments
by Oui - Jan 1120 comments
by Oui - Jan 1031 comments
by Oui - Jan 921 comments
by NBBooks - Jan 810 comments
by Oui - Jan 717 comments