Don't forget to vote! In Sweden it's the 7th of June. The EU parliament consists mainly of different political groups that cooperate over country boundaries. The candidate/s that your political party sends to Brussels will, in most cases, automatically be member of such a group and generally vote as the group does. The group doesn’t necessarily always vote the way you candidate would have done in your home country, at least not in all issues. It is therefore important to know which group your party will join and the policy of that group.
Here follows a list of all the groups and a short presentation of each. The second part of the list is Swedish political parties that don’t belong to a group yet. I hope you are not the kind of persons that finds it important to always have commas and dots in the right places =p.
EPP-ED (Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna) kapitalism and market economy. Extended European cooperation. Yes to the Treaty of Lisbon and the development of a common policy of foreign affairs and security.
ALDE/ADLE (Centern, Folkpartiet, Feministiskt initiativ) free market, common rules and more transparency. Yes to the Treaty of Lisbon, urges caution when it comes to common anti terrorist actions.
Greens/EFA (Miljöpartiet) wants to reduce the EU emissions by 40 % before 2020 compared with the levels of 1990. Yes to the Treaty of Lisbon and a closer cooperation within EU but does also want to increase democracy within the EU organization by making the commission responsible before the parliament
PES (Socialdemokraterna) regulate the economy on all levels to prevent new crises. The ambition is full employment, fight all forms of discrimination and give everyone the same possibilities. Give women the same condition as men and develop the childcare system.
GUE/NGL (Vänstern) loosely tied group, reorient EU from an EU centered perspective to a perspective that sees to the best of all world citizens and that doesn’t try to force the south do what the north wants, solidarity.
IND/DEM (Junilistan) critics of the EU, wants to hinder all forms of centralization.
Piratpartiet är emot IPRED (rättighetesinnehavares rätt att begära information om bl. a. IP-adresser tillhörande personer som laddad ned deras verk olagligt) och FRA ( Försvrets radioanstalts rätt att bedriva signalspaning på kabelburen trafik(telefon och stor del av internettrafiken)). De avgör vilket grupp de kommer att tillhöra efter valet men det verkar troligt att det blir ALDE/ELDE eller Greens/EFA. http://www.piratpartiet.se/
Sverigedemokraterna - ut ur EU, folkomröstning om Lissabonfördraget, ”ansvarsfull” invandrarpolitik, stärkt gränsskydd i Sverige http://www.sverigedemokraterna.se/
ArbetarInitiativet Antikapitalistiskt EU-motstånd för jobb, väfärd och klimatet (sannolikt ett socialistiskt parti med mer eller mindre starka kommunistiska tendenser)
Democratic National Party -finns ingen information att hitta på internet, om ni har någon så säg till
Europeiska arbetarpartiet - man måste satsa på långsiktiga kriditer riktade på produktiva ändamål, annars skapar man finansbubblor. Sverige borde ha sin egen ”new deal”, nej till privatisering, nej till Lissabonfördraget, för ett humanistiskt samhälle och en moralisk uppfostran. Har bl a påstått att världens knarkhandel styrs från brittiska kungahuset och att Palme var betald först av CIA sedan av KGB.
Kommunistiska förbundet - systerparti till amerikanska Socialist Workers Party. Från början trotsistiskt men har senare främst fokuserat på solidaretetsarbete med Kuba.
Lisabonfördraget är olagligt / Frihetliga rättvisepartiet (FRP) - Sverige ut ur EU och decentralisering av samhället. Hjälp till elallergiker.
Nationaldemokraterna - ”varje land har rätt att bevara sin etniska särart”. Detta innebär för dem att vi ska stoppa invandringen och kulturyttringar som inte är svenska. De främmande makterna i Palestina, Serbien och Afghanistan ses som olagliga occupationer. Ut ur EU, nej till ”perverterade” familjeformer. http://www.nd.se/start/default.asp
Nordisk union - mycket fördjupat samarbete mellan de nordiska länderna, främst Sverige, Norge och Danmark. Mot EU, mkt liberal politik med bland annat fri hastighet på vägarna och legalisering av droger. http://www.nordiskunion.nu/
Partiet.se - avskaffa spelmonopolet i Sverige, fri kollektivtrafik. http://partiet.se/
Sveriges Nationella Demokratiska Parti - partiet har kallats både rasistiskt och nazistiskt.
666 för EU:S super-state med frihet, jämlikhet, rättvisa, fred, kärlek och lyckan - antikapitalistiskt protestparti. http://www.the666.com/eng57.htm
torsdag 14 maj 2009
onsdag 15 april 2009
Rules of War
If one people attack another people it is considered a crime, but if they announce the attack before, it’s ok. All weapons are made to kill, yet only those who kill fast are allowed. It’s always ok to kill an enemy combatant, but a physician, that can bring back numerous otherwise defenseless soldiers into battle, must always go free.
Why bring legitimacy to war at all. Why not prohibit it all in all. War always brings suffering and death, without exception. Why isn’t the whole thing in itself forbidden. Why can’t you accuse a person in court for starting the war, because it’s just that action that leads to all the other things. And they know, when they make the proclamation, that people is going to suffer and die, no doubt about it.
I do believe that violence is sometimes necessary but it must be sanctioned by the UN. Separate countries can not be allowed to go into other countries and start burning and killing. USA had no right to go into Afghanistan or Iraq. Russia had no right to go into Georgia and Israel had no right to go into the Palestinian territories. These countries should be punished for the fact they went into other countries with the intention of killing its citizens, not only for the single atrocities committed.
I know the rules are there to decrease the suffering. But sometimes the whole situation is so absurd that I don’t know what to think. There is no war without “war crimes”. It’s in the nature of a war to include “war crimes”. Yet the war is allowed but the “crimes” are not.
Why bring legitimacy to war at all. Why not prohibit it all in all. War always brings suffering and death, without exception. Why isn’t the whole thing in itself forbidden. Why can’t you accuse a person in court for starting the war, because it’s just that action that leads to all the other things. And they know, when they make the proclamation, that people is going to suffer and die, no doubt about it.
I do believe that violence is sometimes necessary but it must be sanctioned by the UN. Separate countries can not be allowed to go into other countries and start burning and killing. USA had no right to go into Afghanistan or Iraq. Russia had no right to go into Georgia and Israel had no right to go into the Palestinian territories. These countries should be punished for the fact they went into other countries with the intention of killing its citizens, not only for the single atrocities committed.
I know the rules are there to decrease the suffering. But sometimes the whole situation is so absurd that I don’t know what to think. There is no war without “war crimes”. It’s in the nature of a war to include “war crimes”. Yet the war is allowed but the “crimes” are not.
torsdag 12 mars 2009
Nuclear debate
This is of course highly subjective so for those of you who have counter-arguments please post them below and I will try to answer to the best of my ability.
Long-term storing
In 2003 the United States had already accumulated 49 000 tons of nuclear waste. There is yet no policy regarding the final storage of this waste that will cease to pose a threat to public health and safety no sooner than after 10 000 years (United States Environmental Protection Agency). There is no way to guarantee what will happen in such a large timescale and what costs that will be inflicted upon future generations for the disposal of this waste (http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications/downloads/SDC-NuclearPosition-2006.pdf). In other words we produce radioactive waste that future generations will have to safeguard for thousands of years without being certain of the consequences on health and environment that this might involve.
Uranium
Just as coal, oil and natural gas uranium is a finite resource. According to IAEA the easily accessible uranium will be sufficient for another 40 or 50 years at the consumption rate that we are at right now. Thus, if uranium use increases the number of years that it will be available decreases.
International Security
Nuclear power plants in Sweden are required to follow numerous safety policies and are constantly inspected and kept under strict vigilance. The probability for an accident here is therefore very small even though the possibility can never be completely excluded. However, by using nuclear power ourselves we legitimize it. As long as Sweden is hosting nuclear power plants we have no right to tell other countries they cannot. These other countries might not have the political stability, the economical means or the corruption free administrative system that is required to keep the power plants in perfect condition. With fewer safety policies the risk of accidents naturally increases.
As it is now, nuclear power accidents are very unusual. However no one can say that there is not a risk and, taken into account the enormous environmental and social consequences of a possible accident, that risk is unacceptable.
Economy
“It is disquieting that a government in crisis isn’t capable of making an economically reasonable decision. According to the international energy agency a terawatt hour from nuclear is twice as expensive as a terawatt hour from wind power”.
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/miljororelsen-kritisk-om-karnkraften-1.793562
It is commonly believed that nuclear is a cheap energy resource. However these positive estimations frequently contain hidden costs and fails for example to include expenses for final storage and dismantling of the reactors.
Weapons
Some people maintain that there is a link between the knowledge of nuclear technology for peaceful means and that for weapons. I am afraid that I do not know enough technical details to have an opinion on the matter but, there is no denying that states has used peaceful nuclear programs as a cover for nuclear weapon programs.
Energy efficiency
There is a large amount of energy to be gained from energy efficiency. According to a report from SWECO, commissioned by Naturskyddsföreningen, the energy consumption of Sweden could be halved by 2030. This is of course preferable to all other solutions as it favors both the economy and the environment.
http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/upload/Foreningsdokument/Rapporter/externa_rapporter/rapport_sweco_halvaenerginhelavalfarden.pdf (swedish).
Evidently, this is not something that is going to happen by itself. There needs to be different incentives for private persons as well as companies. Most of all the knowledge of the importance of these measures needs to be spread to all parts of society.
“To meet our carbon reduction targets, we will need much greater action to reduce energy demand. We are concerned that a new nuclear programme would give out the wrong signal to consumers, encouraging the impression that the challenge of climate change can be tackled by a large-scale technology fix. Greater use of decentralised, small-scale energy generating technologies helps to increase awareness of energy consumption and foster more sustainable behaviour.”
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications/downloads/SDC-NuclearPosition-2006.pdf
This is the only solution there is in the long term. If we keep using more natural resources than the environment can contend with, we are going to have to pay for it in the future.
A good example where nuclear has contributed to drastically decreasing the resources for renewables is Finland. When deciding about the construction of a new power plant about six years ago the Finnish politicians promised that this would not affect investments in energy efficiency and renewables. However, in reality investments in renewables has become fewer and the electricity consumption continues to increase…
http://www.greenpeace.org/sweden/kampanjer/karnkraft/fraagor-och-svar-om-kaernkraft
Long-term storing
In 2003 the United States had already accumulated 49 000 tons of nuclear waste. There is yet no policy regarding the final storage of this waste that will cease to pose a threat to public health and safety no sooner than after 10 000 years (United States Environmental Protection Agency). There is no way to guarantee what will happen in such a large timescale and what costs that will be inflicted upon future generations for the disposal of this waste (http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications/downloads/SDC-NuclearPosition-2006.pdf). In other words we produce radioactive waste that future generations will have to safeguard for thousands of years without being certain of the consequences on health and environment that this might involve.
Uranium
Just as coal, oil and natural gas uranium is a finite resource. According to IAEA the easily accessible uranium will be sufficient for another 40 or 50 years at the consumption rate that we are at right now. Thus, if uranium use increases the number of years that it will be available decreases.
International Security
Nuclear power plants in Sweden are required to follow numerous safety policies and are constantly inspected and kept under strict vigilance. The probability for an accident here is therefore very small even though the possibility can never be completely excluded. However, by using nuclear power ourselves we legitimize it. As long as Sweden is hosting nuclear power plants we have no right to tell other countries they cannot. These other countries might not have the political stability, the economical means or the corruption free administrative system that is required to keep the power plants in perfect condition. With fewer safety policies the risk of accidents naturally increases.
As it is now, nuclear power accidents are very unusual. However no one can say that there is not a risk and, taken into account the enormous environmental and social consequences of a possible accident, that risk is unacceptable.
Economy
“It is disquieting that a government in crisis isn’t capable of making an economically reasonable decision. According to the international energy agency a terawatt hour from nuclear is twice as expensive as a terawatt hour from wind power”.
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/miljororelsen-kritisk-om-karnkraften-1.793562
It is commonly believed that nuclear is a cheap energy resource. However these positive estimations frequently contain hidden costs and fails for example to include expenses for final storage and dismantling of the reactors.
Weapons
Some people maintain that there is a link between the knowledge of nuclear technology for peaceful means and that for weapons. I am afraid that I do not know enough technical details to have an opinion on the matter but, there is no denying that states has used peaceful nuclear programs as a cover for nuclear weapon programs.
Energy efficiency
There is a large amount of energy to be gained from energy efficiency. According to a report from SWECO, commissioned by Naturskyddsföreningen, the energy consumption of Sweden could be halved by 2030. This is of course preferable to all other solutions as it favors both the economy and the environment.
http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/upload/Foreningsdokument/Rapporter/externa_rapporter/rapport_sweco_halvaenerginhelavalfarden.pdf (swedish).
Evidently, this is not something that is going to happen by itself. There needs to be different incentives for private persons as well as companies. Most of all the knowledge of the importance of these measures needs to be spread to all parts of society.
“To meet our carbon reduction targets, we will need much greater action to reduce energy demand. We are concerned that a new nuclear programme would give out the wrong signal to consumers, encouraging the impression that the challenge of climate change can be tackled by a large-scale technology fix. Greater use of decentralised, small-scale energy generating technologies helps to increase awareness of energy consumption and foster more sustainable behaviour.”
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications/downloads/SDC-NuclearPosition-2006.pdf
This is the only solution there is in the long term. If we keep using more natural resources than the environment can contend with, we are going to have to pay for it in the future.
A good example where nuclear has contributed to drastically decreasing the resources for renewables is Finland. When deciding about the construction of a new power plant about six years ago the Finnish politicians promised that this would not affect investments in energy efficiency and renewables. However, in reality investments in renewables has become fewer and the electricity consumption continues to increase…
http://www.greenpeace.org/sweden/kampanjer/karnkraft/fraagor-och-svar-om-kaernkraft
fredag 20 februari 2009
Comunication
to understand any of this you need to know that I live in a mixed family. The child lives with her mum and step-dad, and me.
I just have to write something to get out some of my frustration.
We just had dinner, me, the mum, the dad and the daughter. The daughter is incredibly well behaved for being just 12 years. It's always she who runs to get everything and serves everyone. However today, when she had finished eating, she went to the TV since her favorite program was on. After about two minutes the "dad" started complaining to the mum about her behavior. Result: the mum calls the daughter back to the table. The daughter directed one look, just one look, at the "dad" that said only "I know that it's your fault that I was called back". Then hell broke loose.
The mum told her to "stop" and the daughter said she wasn't doing anything (which she wasn't, apart from staring sullenly at the table). Then the "dad" broke in and started gathering the plates together, speaking about how she never helped and how she didn’t behave properly for her age. I could just see how she was on the brink of tears.
Ok. I guess the reason why this upsets me so much is that I totally understand how the daughter feels. No one likes being reprimanded but when it comes to your parents, you’re used to it. When it comes from somebody else though and especially through the parent...
From my experience a mixed family like this creates a feeling of competition. The daughter and the step-dad compete over who the mum loves the most. In theory it's ridiculous, but in real life it's all very serious. A big problem in this competition is that the adult has authority over the child which makes it all unfair. The “dad” in this family uses that authority to complain on the daughter and thereby “proving” that he’s more lovable. The daughter tries to get everything right but he still finds something to complain on. I do not think that he realizes why he’s doing what he is doing but seems to really believe that it’s the daughter who does something wrong. Gaah, it’s so frustrating not to be able to do anything!
lördag 24 januari 2009
Moral problems
Ok. So living in a huge city like this is pretty great from many points of view. Today I was in this incredibly big library, my favorite store Decathlon is placed at lots of places all over the city and there are a big range of cultural stuff like movies and theater. Unfortunately there is also a backside. Here and there you can see so called SDF:s (sans domicile fixe), homeless people. The beggars are even more common and range from young mothers with small children to old men with filthy dogs. Well, the thing is, should you give them money or shouldn't you? I have no idea how much they make in a day. Someone once told me that street musicians actually make very much. I guess that if you give them money, in a way, you encourage it and people might be less persistent in searching for a real job? On the other hand I can't imagine anyone doing that if they had any choice whatsoever. I mean, when I worked for IM, trying to get people to give money to this aid organization, people didn’t look at me like I was a worthy human. That’s the best way I can describe it. It’s a horrible feeling when everyone avoids meeting your eyes like you had the plagues. Like you’re so far below them that you don’t even exist in their world. And then I was “begging” for a good cause, I guess it must be even worse when you’re just begging for your own survival. Maybe I got my answer there, or what do you think?
Another thing that concerns France and that I have been reading about is a woman called Rachida Dati. She was the first woman from a non-European country to be chosen to a key position in the French government. As I have understood it, she was sort of an idol in the poor suburban areas here in France. She worked her way through her entire education as both her parents where poor immigrants and she was the second child of twelve. Recently, she gave birth to a baby girl. She refuses to say who the father is and says she’s going to raise the child herself. Ok, now to the point. The wind blows hard at the top and just five days after the birth she was back at work. It is not an easy thing to reach the position she has had, especially not being a woman and especially not having a foreign background. She doesn’t have few enemies and I suppose she had to defend her ground. However here in France there has been a huge debate about the whole thing. I think that a French mother has the right to 16 weeks of maternity leave. Women all over France are in a rage and say that many bosses will not allow them to stay home that long now with reference to Dati. Right, a lot of background for a short question. Should women be made to act certain ways because it gets back on all of us otherwise? I guess in Sweden the problem is the opposite. One could ask the question about whether women should be home with their children less. After all, that women put more energy into raising the children than the men is a big reason to why all of us still get less paid and have fewer top jobs. Well what do you think?
tisdag 20 januari 2009
Colombes
Ok, now I'll write a quick update about life here.
Colomb is the name of the place where I live. As I've said it's about ten minutes outside of Paris (I count Paris as the area where there's subway. The house is not very big, about the same size as Adam's. They do have a celler too though, only they don't use it except for stooring stuff. It's seriously so full you can barely walk in there and the floor's really cold. (That was a little exaggerated).
Anyway the family is still nice. Most of my chores consists of doing the laundery, iron (they iron everything, even underwear!) and cleaning. I also get to walk their supercute dog. Right now it takes pretty much time but I don't think that it will take more than 2-3 hours once I get used to it. Also, I'm still looking for a school. I would prefer to be in the same school the whole time I stay here because there is quite a large inscription fee. Problem is that only some of them have the higher levels that I will hopefully reach later.
They have lots of holidays here. I haven't discussed it with the mother yet, it would feel kind of stupid as I've just arrived, but they have to times two weeks of holiday. And there is no language school that time either. It might acctually be possible to be in Sweden that time. Though, I don't know what they will do with Victor, the dog, if they want to go away for the holidays.
About the mail I don't know what's wrong. It's simply impossible to open the home pages for hotmail, yahoo and gmail. They have "tradlost" here but I can't get it to work. It might be that it's the wrong code. I'll keep working on that. Right now I'm using the daughter's computer.
Keep commenting! =). For you who are really bored with me just describing my life I'll write something more general about stupid french stuff next time.
Colomb is the name of the place where I live. As I've said it's about ten minutes outside of Paris (I count Paris as the area where there's subway. The house is not very big, about the same size as Adam's. They do have a celler too though, only they don't use it except for stooring stuff. It's seriously so full you can barely walk in there and the floor's really cold. (That was a little exaggerated).
Anyway the family is still nice. Most of my chores consists of doing the laundery, iron (they iron everything, even underwear!) and cleaning. I also get to walk their supercute dog. Right now it takes pretty much time but I don't think that it will take more than 2-3 hours once I get used to it. Also, I'm still looking for a school. I would prefer to be in the same school the whole time I stay here because there is quite a large inscription fee. Problem is that only some of them have the higher levels that I will hopefully reach later.
They have lots of holidays here. I haven't discussed it with the mother yet, it would feel kind of stupid as I've just arrived, but they have to times two weeks of holiday. And there is no language school that time either. It might acctually be possible to be in Sweden that time. Though, I don't know what they will do with Victor, the dog, if they want to go away for the holidays.
About the mail I don't know what's wrong. It's simply impossible to open the home pages for hotmail, yahoo and gmail. They have "tradlost" here but I can't get it to work. It might be that it's the wrong code. I'll keep working on that. Right now I'm using the daughter's computer.
Keep commenting! =). For you who are really bored with me just describing my life I'll write something more general about stupid french stuff next time.
söndag 18 januari 2009
Arrival
I don't have a lot of time. I have to eat and then I'm gonna meet Hanna in the city. Just wanted to say that you can't check your email in this house. Maybe I will get my own internet later and then I may be able to figure it out.
Just a brief rapport. The family is nice and consists of a mum a "dad" (he's not the real dad but he lives here) and the daughter Marie that's almost 13 but is very grown up. There is also a brother that's 24 and seems to visite once a week. Everyone speeks only french although the "dad" Gil seems to know pretty much english, at least he knew the word for headquarter. It's ok though, I understand most of what they say.
This keeboard is totally different and it's really slow writing. You'll hear more from me soon. Hugs! Good luck with moving and everything Jocke and Paul.
Just a brief rapport. The family is nice and consists of a mum a "dad" (he's not the real dad but he lives here) and the daughter Marie that's almost 13 but is very grown up. There is also a brother that's 24 and seems to visite once a week. Everyone speeks only french although the "dad" Gil seems to know pretty much english, at least he knew the word for headquarter. It's ok though, I understand most of what they say.
This keeboard is totally different and it's really slow writing. You'll hear more from me soon. Hugs! Good luck with moving and everything Jocke and Paul.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)