Swiss democracy: ready to taste it!

Today, and for the first time since my arrival in Switzerland, I have received a letter in which it was mentioned that I have the right to vote for the municipal elections of March 2011. I am very pleased to know that I belong to the quite big group of 77,437 foreign voters in the canton of Geneva with a total population of 463,919!

Geneva, although considered as being among the top 5 most expensive cities for expats in the world, it is among the cities with the highest percentage of foreigners with 40% of the total population. Having this in mind, the citizens of Geneva had decided in 2005 that democracy in their canton should entail also the political involvement of the foreign residents. Therefore, they voted for the granting of the right to vote to all foreign residents who have resided in the canton for at least 8 years.

For my case, it is a bizarre feeling to receive this information in a period where I am still waiting for my "Permit" to be renewed. Another funny thing is that the information brochure that accompanied the official letter from the State Chancellery, was depicting democracy as a fondue pot, and in the last page there was also the full recipe of how to make a cheese-fondue!

On March 13, 2011, I can choose either to send my ballot by regular mail, or to present myself to the local electoral office and cast my vote in person. I'm ready, then, for the first time, to taste this democratic "dish" in a country whose political regime has often been described as the ideal form of participative democracy.

D.S.

UN: from people to people

Today, a good friend of mine posted a photo of a bus stop where there was a UNICEF campaign poster against hunger. Although I have seen several UN campaign posters, this poster made me think about the UN and the people working in the UN system.

UN is an international inter-governmental organization and its budget is based mostly on voluntary governmental contributions. Based on the information given at the UN website, the UN system spends some $15 billion a year, taking into account the United Nations, UN peacekeeping operations, the programmes and funds, and the specialized agencies, but excluding the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). It is also mentioned that among this $15 billion a year, the United Nations and its agencies, funds and programmes - mainly the UN Development Programme, the World Food Programme, the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the UN Population Fund - spend some $10 billion a year on operational activities for development, mostly for economic, social and humanitarian programmes to help the world's poorest countries.

Looking at this information I was also wondering about the overall number of people employed by the UN system. How many? 50,000? 100,000 around the world? In Geneva, which is one of the UN "capitals", there are almost 2,000 employees. I also consulted the information about the UN salary scales which are set on a level basis from the lowest P1 level to the UN Secretary General level.

I give here the gross annual salary in USD for each level and for the first year of employment:
P1: $48,627
P2: $62,856
P3: $77,101
P4: $94,268
P5: $115,134
D1: $139,074
D2: $152,231
ASG: $185,809
USG: $204,391

I was thinking what a big impact the employees of the UN system would have if they gave, each one of them, $1,000. They would have a much bigger impact if they renounced one month P3-average salary ($7,000). The amount of $700 million would be an important sum for the worldwide UN programmes and it would be a strong message that the UN is not only an inter-governmental international organization but also an organization where people take action.

The beginning can take place here in Geneva, the international city, the city of refuge, the city of Human Rights. A UNOGeneva employee fund can be established in order to demonstrate the solidarity of the UN employees here in Geneva toward the poor and the hungry of the world.

D.S.

Που πήγε το Εθνικό Τυπογραφείο??

Δημοσιεύματα σε ελληνικές εφημερίδες και δικτυακούς τόπους κάνουν λόγο για τις προσπάθειες τις ελληνικής κυβέρνησης για την ενίσχυση της διαφάνειας σχετικά με τις πολιτικές κινήσεις της αυτή την σημαντική για τη χώρα περίοδο. Μία από αυτές τις προσπάθειες είναι και η ελεύθερη πρόσβαση στη βάση δεδομένων του Ελληνικού Τυπογραφείου όπου αναρτώνται ημερησίως και με κάθε λεπτομέρεια όλοι οι νόμοι και σχέδια νόμου, προεδρικά διατάγματα και άλλες νομικές πράξεις. Ο κάθε ενδιαφερόμενος πολίτης μπορεί να επισκέπτεται την ιστοσελίδα http://www.et.gr και να "κατεβάζει" σε μορφή PDF την πλήρη έκδοση της Εφημερίδας της Κυβερνήσεως για να ενημερώνεται για τις νομοθετικές εξελίξεις σχετικά με τα πολιτικά, οικονομικά και κοινωνικά θέματα της χώρας. Στο παρελθόν η πρόσβαση δεν ήταν ελεύθερη για τον ιδιώτη πολίτη, ενώ παράλληλα απαιτούνταν συνδρομή.

Λόγω της επαγγελματικής μου εμπειρίας με τον Παγκόσμιο Οργανισμό Εμπορίου είχα την ευκαιρία να δημιουργήσω έναν τέτοιο λογαριασμό και έχω να μαρτυρήσω ότι το ΕΤ έχει μία πολύ καλά οργανωμένη βάση δεδομένων με εύκολο και φιλικό περιβάλλον αναζήτησης και περιήγησης χωρίς προβλήματα σύνδεσης με τον/τους servers, σε αντίθεση με αυτό της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας το οποίο είναι ανοργάνωτο και τελείως ελλιπές.

Παρόλα αυτά βλέπω ότι με το που μετατράπηκε σε χώρο ελεύθερης δικτυακής πρόσβασης, άρχισαν τα προβλήματα σύνδεσης, με τα error pages να κατακλύζουν την οθόνη του υπολογιστή είτε στην αρχική σελίδα, είτε στον χώρο αναζήτησης κάνοντας την πρόσβαση δύσκολη έως απίθανη.

Δ.Σ.

Που είναι η γενιά των 700Ευρω!

Αναρωτιέμαι πού είναι η γενιά των 700 (νυν 592) Ευρώ! Να κατέβει στους δρόμους να γεμίσει πάρκα, πλατείες με πανό κάθε μέρα!
Αλλά όχι μονο αυτή των 700Ε αλλά και αυτή των 1000 και των 1200 και των 1500! Δεν είναι η διαφορά στο κατοστάρικο που θα κάνει κάποιον στην Ελλάδα να πιστεύει οτι είναι πιο βολεμένος από τον άλλον! Σίγουρα η αίσθηση "βολέματος" είναι πάντα σχετική με βάση την κατάσταση του άλλου δίπλα μας. Αλλά μπροστά σε απόλυτα οικονομικά δεδομένα η συντριπτική πλειοψηφία των Ελλήνων πολιτών είναι "χαμένοι" και οικονομικά καταπατημένοι εδώ και μια δεκαετία τουλάχιστον!! Φτάνει πια να έχουμε στο μυαλό μας οτι "καλά που παίρνω χιλιάρικο, θα πρέπει να νιώθω τυχερός". Επιπλέον, δεν υπάρχει η έννοια του κοινωνικού status. Ο νέος δικηγόρος που παίρνει 1000Ε δεν έχει μεγάλη διαφορά από τους άλλους νέους επαγγελματίες! Θα έχει το ίδιο πρόβλημα να πληρώνει το ενοίκιο, το φαγητό του, το κινητό του και τη ΔΕΗ του! Και ακόμα χειρότερα, έχει να πληρώνει και τα κουστούμια και τα πουκάμισά του!!

Φτάνει πια η επικίνδυνα γενικευμένη έννοια του Έλληνα χαβαλέ!
Οι νοοτροπίες και οι πρακτικές έχουν προ-πολλού αλλάξει μεταξύ των απλών ανθρώπων που πολλές φορές είναι υπερ-παραγωγικοί κάνοντας 2 και 3 δουλειές ταυτόχρονα. Παρόλα αυτά αντίληψη οτι ο Έλληνας πολίτης ζητάει πολλά με λίγη προσφορά παραμένει και γίνεται όπλο αυτών που θέλουν να μην αλλάξει τίποτα στη χώρα αναφορικά με τους κοινωνικο-οικονομικούς συσχετισμούς!!

Αφήνουμε τον κάθε κυβερνητικό εκπρόσωπο να προσπαθεί να εφαρμόσει την πανάρχαια πρακτική του διαίρει και βασίλευε, μιλώντας για συντεχνιακά συμφέροντα και για τους "λιγοστούς τσαμπουκάδες" που δημιουργούν πρόβλημα στο πρόγραμμα της "εθνικής οικονομικής ανάτασης", πράγμα που δεν είναι προς το "συμφέρον" του "Ελληνα πολίτη". Δεν αμφισβητώ οτι υπάρχουν κάποιες ομάδες που κατά καιρούς έχουν εκμεταλλευτεί την όποια απουσία θεσμικού ελέγχου, ή απλώς, την απουσία τους «κράτους», για ίδιο συμφέρον. Εντούτοις θεωρώ οτι κάνοντας λόγο μόνο για συντεχνιακά συμφέροντα, υπάρχει κίνδυνος εξομοίωσης κάθε κοινωνικο-οικονομικού αιτήματος που απαιτεί χρονοβόρα διαπραγμάτευση σε μία περίοδο που όλα πρέπει να γίνονται γρήγορα και αδιαμαρτύρητα για την «σωτηρία» της χώρας. Η γενίκευση και η εξομοίωση είναι επικίνδυνες σε μία περίοδο κυνηγιού των διάφορων μαγισσών είτε για ουσιαστικούς λόγους είτε για λόγους κομματικού κέρδους ή τηλεοπτικού ενθουσιασμού. Το δημοκρατικό παιχνίδι γίνεται από απλή έννοια πράξη μόνο όταν η κάθε Ελληνική κυβέρνηση καταλάβει ότι ο κοινωνικός διάλογος και η κοινωνική διαπραγμάτευση είναι οι μόνες διαδικασίες για την εύρεση λύσης εν αντιθέσει με τις παρελθούσες πρακτικές μέσω κατευθυνόμενων "κοινωνικών εταίρων"!!

Νέοι άνθρωποι, με δημιουργική δύναμη και νέες ιδέες πρέπει να έλθουν μαζί, να συμπράξουν προς μία κριτική και ανανεωτική κατεύθυνση καταρρίπτοντας ιδεοληψίες και αντιπαραγωγικές παρελθούσες συνήθειες.

Ανέκαθεν ο φόβος κάθε κυβέρνησης παγκοσμίως είναι μην τυχόν υπάρξει σύμπραξη στην κινητοποίηση μεταξύ εργαζομένων και νέων. Είναι ευκαιρία αυτό να γίνει πράξη στην χώρα μας με το αίτημα ενός ειλικρινούς και δημοκρατικού κοινωνικού διαλόγου! Δεν θα πρέπει να περιοριστεί η κοινωνική δράση σε απλά διλήμματα "πληρώνω" δεν "πληρώνω"!!!

Δ.Σ.

Ridiculizing the Socratic "Self-Knowledge": the new ethics of Greek political discourse?

This is only an attempt to contemplate upon couple of elements of the modern Hellenic cultural character:

a) knowing yourself and acknowledging your weaknesses is an element of "virtue" (areti) - the Socratic "Self-Knowledge" which is a sufficient condition to the good life;

b) make the best out of the few things that you have: surviving with few things is again an element of "virtue" closely related to the heroic modern historical national legacy of deprivation, external threat and domination.

Without being able to come up with a full-blown analysis of those two elements, I believe, however, that their combination, determine significantly the relationship and political communication between the Greek political elites and the citizens.

The first element describes the top-down communication process (elite -->citizen), whereas the second describes the bottom-up political communication process (citizen--> elite) - if the latter exists. However, both have become today an excuse of political inefficiency. Those two processes of communication do not lead to an effective unified process of communication, because in the end both of them are formulated in a way that they do not ask for interaction. It looks like a really old married couple where everything that it is being said does not have any meaning or does not produce any reaction because the man and the woman are in the phase of "used to living together". The political officials, on the one hand, tend to use the "TV-accountability" of Socratic "self-knowledge" without producing any constructive political debate, whereas on the other hand the citizens seem to be content in living with little "official" means, and at the same time being proud of bypassing and cheat on the system.

What I mean by the current political Socratic "self-knowledge" is the governing political elites' tendency to claim that "nobody is perfect", that "the government makes mistakes", that "problems cannot be resolved automatically", that "we are sincere and we do not want to promise things we cannot fulfil". The paradox is that when you are in power responsible to deliver your political program and to give answers to the problems the citizens of the country face, sincerity, political humbleness, and self-knowledge are not enough. And it seems to be more ridiculous to use those "qualities" as your main political leverages during electoral campaigns.

There is one point also concerning the mentality of cheating on the system: mentalities change. They change slowly, but they change. The new generations - although living with the parental experiences of bypassing the system - seem to struggle for a more "honorable" future. The problem is that today's political leaders seem to forget that people's mentalities do change and that there are people belonging to the new generations who fight everyday for the 500, 600 or 700 Euros per month, who do not have their parents to help them, who do not own a house or appartment (most of the times provided by the parents or the with the help of the parents). And there is also the part of the people of the new generations who do not even a have a fix job (young unemployment in my birth town Thessaloniki, is around 25%) and who extend the period of their studies because of the uncertain professional future.

Those young generations deserve more than the "sincerity" and the "acknowledgment" of governmental weaknesses and mistakes, or the "pragmatism" of step-by-step slow changes. Those young generations deserve educational and professional opportunities, and not the politically manipulated "prorgammes des stages".

The political discourse of the Socratic "self-knowledge" is valid when there is real commitment for positive developments and constructive work in order to resolve the socio-economic problems in the society. On the other hand, if the commitment and work are not there, the proclaimed "sincerity" and "self-knowledge" become a ridiculous consumed "media-time" without any sense.

....

Is Political Science relevant?

A friend of mine posted on his Facebook page this interesting article on the field of Political Science:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/books/20poli.html?_r=1

Is Political Science really useful/relevant? And how it can assure its future funding if policy-makers do not consider it useful?

I think it is a very interesting issue that should be addressed clearly at some point. Following Robert Putnam's and Theda Skocpol's convictions, Political Science should answer the big questions. From my point of view, I would not go so far as saying that Political Science should "answer" the big questions. I would merely expect that Political Science "addresses" clearly the big questions. I think that the big complex of Political Science is to prove itself being as "Science" as the hard sciences. In this sense, preoccupations on methodology have the priority over the presentation of the problems as "political". Political Science should become more "political" and for that it is necessary to come closer to the people's beliefs and needs.

Prof. Stephen Walt has worked on the relationship between academia and policy-makers. However, he did not mention one important reason why policy-makers find academia sometimes incomprehensible and/or "far from the practical realities". And the reason might be the fact that amidst the competition of the various schools of political thought or the competition of the "university presses", the real issue of addressing the basic question of social sciences (to which Political Science belongs) - the structure vs./and agency problem - has not yet been pursued with the appropriate fervor.

In his contribution in the edited volume Democratization, Christian Welzel holds that mass beliefs can constitute a factor that brings structure and agency together. I hope the discussion on the usefulness of Political Science continues, because through such a process of introspection and self-criticism this discipline of thought in social sciences could progress itself and contribute to the progress of the human being as a reflective and social animal.

Political Science should sell its power of non-conformity. Its ability to transcend the frontiers of established structural arrangements and dependencies, in order to propose alternative paths for the improvement of people's lives. That's why political science is still useful and relevant. And something else: a discipline that is also defined by the force of human's intuition (except for the evidence of physical observation), is a discipline worth of fighting for; it is a shame to evaluate it on the basis of national public or corporate private budgets!!!

Political science, in the end, is useful/relevant for the "useful" policy-makers. Apparently, Senator Tom Coburn does not seem to belong to this category.

Inglehart - Welzel Cultural Map of the World

An interesting map showing that Greece and Israel are cultural "islands" in the middle of the numerous cultural zones. We see also that there is no cultural zone mentioned as "Orthodox Europe". Apparently, there is no specific combination of values that could account for the existence of such a cultural zone(?) Or, instead we can understand that the cultural impact of Communism was stronger than the Orthodox cultural particularity. And given the fact that the group of former communist regimes consists of both Catholicism and Orthodoxy, that may explain why the cultural "Orthodox Europe" is missing on this map.

See more: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/