Lobbyarbejde

Nu hvor politikerne i København som reaktion på “de unges” stædighed (de er sgu gode forhandlere, det må man give dem) skridt for skridt trækker i land og giver efter for disses krav, må der da være en god gang lobbyarbejde i gang i baggrunden. For hvis det er venstrefløjens plan at hjælpe aktivisterne med at finde et nyt sted at være – og her kan “hjælpe” betyde en hel del ting – må der være et nyt sted, der overhovedet vil have dem.

Hvilke muligheder er der? Kunne man overhovedet overveje andet end Christiania eller Nørrebro? Man må håbe, at Østerbro, Frederiksberg, mm., allerede nu har organiseret sig og er i gang med lobbyarbejdet – bare for en sikkerheds skyld. Man skal jo påvirke forløbet så tidligt som muligt; og med tanke på, hvilken katastrofe et Ungdomshus disse steder ville være for alle, er der vel incitament til at lægge en smule arbejde i at få afpareret muligheden.
Jeg venter spændt på den dag, hvor “Foreningen Frederiksberg for Fred”, “Østerbro imod Brostenskastere”, samt “Amager Om’er” kommer i medierne.

*Opdateret 30/12 kl. 01.31*

Nå, nu kan jeg læse, at Ritt Bjerregaard foreslår, at Ungdomshuset skal flyttes til Christiania. Det er vel også en meget god løsning, altså på sådan en “koncentrer oppositionen”-måde. Så er det bare ærgeligt, at hverken Christiania eller Ungdomshuset synes om idéen. Måske er christianitterne ikke så åbne mennesker alligevel, især når nu de kalder de unge for et “problem”…

I andre nyheder: Enhedslistens Line Barfod er gået igang med at kigge efter ledige statslige bygninger – og det er ikke hende, der flytter. Jeg krydser fingre og be’r til gud.

*Opdateret 30/12 kl. 10:50*

Jeg bliver nødt til at rose Ritt Bjerregaard for sin optræden i DR’s Deadline i går aftes (som jeg først så her til formiddags på nettet). Hun kunne godt have betonet, hvilken glidebane det er (som Martin Breum hele tiden foreslog) at lave politiske-moralske løsninger på juridiske sager, men på den anden side gav hun Breums sædvanelige DR-vinkling følgende afklapsning, efter at han bliver ved med at nedgøre de juridiske forhold i sagen:

Bjerregaard: “For det første synes jeg ikke, at vi har nogen som helst rettighed til at sige, at de mennesker, der har ejet det her hus igennem lang tid ikke kan få deres hus…”(afbrydes)
Breum: “Nu taler du om rettigheder [ie. igen]!”
Bjerregaard: “…og derfor er der også…ja, men det er fordi vi lever i et retssamfund, og jeg kan godt høre, at du synes det er svært at forstå, men det gør vi altså, vi lever i et retssamfund, og det skal vi rette os efter, og det har jeg selvfølgelig også tænkt mig jeg vil.”

Hendes nedladende tone og ansigtsudtryk (rigtig skolelæreagtig!), når hun siger dét med retssamfund, er simpelthen priceless, og det er tydeligt på Breum, at han føler sig ydmyget over påtalen.

Why I like economists

I like the way they think.

Hvad et logo koster

Fra…

til…

Pris: 13 mio. kr.

Madeira and EU’s regional development fund

This fall I was on the Portuguese island of Madeira, off the northwestern coast of Africa. Madeira is a beautiful place, especially if you like long walks in mountainous terrain.

Not only is Madeira beautiful, it also qualifies for the reception of EU regional development aid. As such, it is a great place to observe economically wasteful behaviour.

The first picture, seen below, is a massive sign posted at the beginning and end of a particular route through the mountains I went on. The sign advertises the costs of the recent renovation carried out on the route. As the sign says, the total cost of renovation was over 4.4 million euros (!). And of this, over 3.1 million was paid for by the EU (“Comparticipacao Comunitaria”)! The renovation amounted to, from what I could see, a couple of paved sections of the path and the torching of some mountain-sides (in order to allow a better view). Unfortunately, I didn’t take any pictures of the paved sections, but there’s a picture of the burnt greenery below (although wordpress refuses to upload the bottom part of the picture…). In any event, I can hardly see how the total renovation was worth 4.4 million euros…

On another trek on a different day, I came upon the following mechanical monstrosity of a transport thingie in the middle of nowhere.

This carriage thing (what do you call these?) leads to the middle of nowhere, as seen in the next picture, taken from the main base looking down:

Notice the total lack of other people than those in my party (click on the pictures a couple of times to zoom in). Squander? Of course it is.

I also visited a beach on the northeastern part of the island. The Madeirans had built a massive concrete pathway between the cliff and the entire beach. Did we see other people using that beach? Yes, but only two…This being on a saturday afternoon.

The things one can do with other people’s money…It’s not even like Madeira is especially poor, being a rather successful turist destination and all.

A pointless reflection

Do you read, write, hear, or say more words during a typical day?

It’s probably a toss-up between hearing more words and reading more words (the two “passive” forms) for most people, especially for us hermitical students. If “hear” is meant as listening and comprehending and not just sensing, I’ll go out on a limb and say I mostly read more words than I hear, although I might be underestimating the latter (since people tend to talk rather fast).

Efterlysning: forudsigelser for 2007 fra den danske blogosfære

Kunne det ikke være skægt med nogle forudsigelser om, hvad der vil ske i 2007? Det kunne være inden for alle områder: politik, teknologi, kultur, økonomi, underholdning, you name it, og forudsigelserne kunne være mere eller mindre seriøse. Hvem vinder Nobel-priser? Hvordan vil det gå den danske regering? Vil Irak stabilisere sig? Vil der komme et gennembrud i jagten efter alternativ energi? Kommer der skattelettelser? Får en dansker en Grammy eller Oscar? Kommer der erhvervsskandaler i Danmark à la Enron? Afslører Pernille Rosenkrantz-Theil sig selv som værende bagmand bag Ungdomshusets voldelige kamp? Lancerer TV2 en 24-times børnekanal?

Jeg er sikker på, at den danske blogosfæres samlede intelligens kunne føre til nogle kvalificerede bud. Så kunne man til næste år sammenligne forudsigelserne med de egentlige udfald, hvilket om ikke andet nok skal være underholdende…

Jeg kommer måske selv med nogle bud, men jeg føler mig desværre ikke synderlig kvalificeret til at lave mange alvorlige forudsigelser.

*edit: Jeg har d. 12.01 givet en forudsigelse her.*

Today’s Twin Threat to Science

Scientific thought is under attack these days. Possibly, the threat is the most forceful since modern science developed in the Enlightenment period, but that it is a relatively novel type of attack – composed of strange bedfellows – is a certainty.

Science is being attacked from two nominally detrimental directions, the two assailants being united in their choice of target if not in weaponry. The first source of attack is historically familiar: a variation on a recurrent theme, one could say. Religious dogma has often opposed the progress of science; these days it attempts – in addition – to sow doubt in people’s mind as to the basic efficacy of science. The most visible manifestation of this assault is, of course, the Creationist critique of evolutionary theory, but the implications of the battle between religiosity and science are much wider, at least if the irrational religious doctrine is allowed the slightest success. Here, Christian dogma does not stand alone: in time, the successful spread of hardcore Islamic thought will probably be a yet more serious peril.

The second assailant also attempts to spread doubt in the fundamental makeup of scientific thought. In contrast to the religious attack, this second type relies not on dogma but rather on somewhat the opposite: relativism. The post-modern denial of positivism, of the cumulative progress of knowledge, and of the objective role of the scientist, should be rejected outright by intellectuals engaged in scientific thinking, but is instead often actively encouraged. Taking sprout in the humanities, this way of thinking has not only spread into – colonized – disciplines that otherwise would have had strong scientific potential (such as political science), but has also been seen spreading into disciplines that should stay firmly in the natural sciences (such as nursing).

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, each part of the twin attack on science has distinct geographical strongholds in the West. The religious anti-rationality is mostly an American phenomenon, while the post-modern anti-rationality is mostly European. The assailants differ strongly in political adherence, at least ostensibly so. The first is reactionary, while the second calls itself “progressive”. But make no mistake: they are both exceedingly harmful to scientific progress – and in turn their ascendance could very well spell the defeat of societal progress. We might soon see the return of an intellectual and material Dark Age.

Who’s been best at Rock: the British or the Americans?

I’ve been thinking about this question for quite some time. Now, when I say “rock” I mean classic rock (simply because I listen to this kind the most), which of course biases my thinking.

Let’s see what the two countries have to offer:

René Karpantschof forsvarer sin ph.d.

Det er ikke hver dag, at et ph.d.-forsvar på Sociologisk Institut vækker min ringeste interesse. Men så er det heller ikke hver dag at en eks-BZ’er får en ph.d. – heller ikke på Sociologisk Institut:

Ph.d.-forsvar, fredag den 19.januar 2007 v. René Karpantschof

Titel på afhandling: Gaden og Parlamentet – Kollektive aktioner, demokrati og den moderne politiks tilblivelse i Danmark 1835-1901

René Karpantschof forsvarer sin ph.d.-afhandling: ‘Gaden og Parlamentet – Kollektive aktioner, demokrati og den moderne politiks tilblivelse i Danmark 1835-1901′.Afhandlingen kan købes på Sociologisk Institut. Henvendelse tlf. 3532 3280

Short break

Because of an exam I’ll be taking a small break from the blog, but I’ll be back in a few days.

(And yes, I really will be back soon, despite my saying so.)