Recession?!

Technically, Estonia seems to be in a recession, as our GDP growth has been negative for two quarters in a row. There are some important factors that do not make this a regular recession:

1. Unemployment rates are 4% (which is 0,2% below last quarter and 1% less than last year’s same quarter). So people still have jobs and the incomes of people actually should be growing at a normal rate. People seemed to have been scared off by the media’s talk about a possible recession and the rising prices and simply stopped spending as much as they used to.

2. The real estate market has not collapsed. In July actually the number of transactions rose slightly, which might (or might not) be an early indication of a recovery in that sector and the economy as a whole.

3. The statistics are always behind the times. As we live in August, we get the picture of the state of the economy in the quarter ending 30 June. It is important to see what are the numbers for this quarter, if it is going to be more than this quarter’s growth, the worse will be over.

4. The external factors are looking better as well. Oil prices are falling, euro is weakening slightly (helping exports).

So the thought should be do not panic, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

The price for Kosovo’s independence from Serbia

There are a large number of areas in a large number of countries where there is a dominant ethnic minority (vis-a-vis the majority nationality in the main part of the country). In Estonia for example North East Estonia, where there are 95% ethnic Russians living in the city of Narva. The same applied for Kosovo and Serbia to a certain degree and the same applies to South Ossetia and Abkhasia in Georgia, Transdnistria in Moldova. This also applies to Scotland and Wales in the UK, parts of the Netherlands, the Basque country in Spain, etc etc.

The current doctrine of international law does not allow for independence for these regions. This principle was breached in the case of Kosovo, and this has also fueled Russian resolve to attack Georgia and try to take South Ossetia and Abkhasia. It is clear that the agressor in Georgia’s case is Russia which has embarked on a development route, which can be described as a neo-Fascism with neo-Soviet crust. However, things should not have been made so easy for them by allowing Kosovo to become independent.

In the EU the role of the Member States is diminishing, there are common values, common principles regarding rule of law, democracy, human rights, etc, which are respected in all of these states. Thus is does not matter much where you live or which nationality you are. The same situation must be strived for in other countries with conflict situations as well. The international law and principles should be strong enough to guarantee a minimal level of protection for all human beings, regardless of where they live.

If we were to accept the example of Kosovo and agree now also to the “right” of South Ossetians to become independent (and merge with Russia), there will be no end for conflicts, both internal and full wars. The world has become a much more dangerous place and it is the job for the community of democratic countries to act decisively to guarantee the peace. Otherwise who knows which country will be next…

Article on the Irish No to EU

I wrote an article on the Irish No vote to EU, in which I make the rather unpopular argument that EU treaty modifications are so complex that they are not suitable for referenda. The Irish no-vote is an indirect consequence of the 1987 decision by the Irish Supreme Court, requiring Ireland to always put all EU treaty modifications to a referendum.

If we started the EU from scratch today, it would be much different, but we have to look at the historical context in which it developed and make best of the system we already have in place. The voters are indirectly represented in two ways, the Lisbon treaty has been approved by the European Parliament, which consists of representatives of EU citizens, and it has been represented by 18 member state parliaments, which have also been democratically elected by the people.

It is interesting to note the comments section for my article, where there is actually quite a lot of meaningful debate on what is the meaning of democracy in today’s world (along with the usual name-calling and personal insults).

Unidentified Flying Objects Don’t Exist

UFOs do not exist, at least in Britain, based on the files made public by the UK Ministry of Defence. Of course, if you wear a tin-foil hat, you would not believe the government, so it makes no difference to you. For me, it is further proof that the human brain can create all kinds of delusions and illusions, which feel real (especially under the influence of drugs or smth similar), which explains not only the UFO sightings, but also so-called “religious experiences”, seeing ghosts, communicating with the dead, miraculous healing, etc etc.

There are other ways people can waste their time, and these are pretty harmless things so why not belive in ghosts, God and UFOs? I choose to believe in other things, such as human rights, laws of nature and physics, evolution, science, rule of law, democracy etc. These things are for me far more uplifting and meaningful than some fairytales about a sky-god or people describing their ufo sightings.

Quote of the day

The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.

Albert Einstein in a private letter to be auctioned soon, which leaves no doubt about his religious views.

Of underdogs and frontrunners

This post is not about anything specific, it is a reflection on something I was thinking about recently.

I have always been a person who is prone to rooting for the underdog. I do not exactly know why it is so, but something about being second has always appealed to me. I kind of resent winning, even if it is me who wins, because winning means completion, achievement, closure. Failure on the other hand does not, it provides better opportunities to grow, to learn, to be better. Winning makes you complacent, arrogant and careless, whereas losing makes you work harder, faster, better.

In Estonia (and I guess in much of the Western world) winning and success are celebrated and revered. Nobody wants to be a loser, nobody cares about the guy who finished second. Being a winner/successful creates pressure to keep it that way, whereas people who are the underdogs can take it easier and cooler. The pressure to be successful in terms of the society (meaning mostly fame and money), is big and people sometimes take desparate measures to achieve those things. That is why I have prejudice towards those who are successful.

I love underdogs and try to be one myself (I do not actually try to not succeed, I just do not work especially hard to succeed). I do not value much financial or societal success, but rather try to live on my own terms, in my own world, as much as it is possible. It means that I give up a lot of things and probably miss out on many exciting and interesting things in life, but it also means that I am honest and true to myself. This means that I act through others, try to keep myself in the shadows as much as I can. This also means that I have made the conscious choice not to appear or talk to the media or be publicly associated with a specific matter, even if there is a possibility for this, this is why I have so far not published any articles in the popular press. It is not that I do not think that I have nothing to say or that what I say might be worthless, I am just not going to play the game as much as I can and try to make my own playground where it is my rules. It is better for me that way.

That is why I have this blog as well. It is on my terms, nobody but me decides how the blog looks like, or what I write here or whether I keep writing at all. I can write small insignificant snippets about things that I am excited about or I can write longer, more reflective pieces. Nor do I desire a big readership for my blog. It is a blog for an underdog.

Appearance is nothing, execution is everything

Some people might say that these days all that matters is appearance. People judge other people very quickly based on their initial perceptions, which are based on some preconceived notions of who they are. People like to project their own feelings and issues on to other people and in this way they sometimes might not allow themselves to see the real person behind the mask.

This also applies to ideas. Some ideas appear to be good, some not so good. Some events appear to be beneficial some not. The devil, however, is always in the details. It is how you execute that matters. How well ou achieve your goals and what you do that matter, not so much what you appear to be doing.

I personally have executed some projects: some of them well, some not so well. In some, I have put the emphasis on appearance, in others execution. The projects that have failed, are those where emphasis is put on appearance, the projects that have lived have focused on execution. This is nothing new I guess.

It is as simple as that.

Members of parliaments and their tricky expenses

In Estonia the MPs expenses that they have claimed for reimbursement by the taxpayers have been a constant source of ricidule. The groceries, the “meetings with voters”, etc.

Now it seems that the UK public also finally is able to join in the “fun”: this Guardian article reveals expenses claimed by Tony Blair and other UK parliament politicians. Blair paid for a dishwasher, for example, from his £ 22 000 (ca 500 000 EEK) yearly expense allowance. Together with accusations of outrageous spending and forgery related to expense allowances in the European Parliament, is an issue that is more serious as it seems. The sums have no real impact to the taxpayers, because they are nominal compared to the total budgets, but it nevertheless angers the voters and destroys their trust in the parliamentary system.

The expense amounts should be removed, wages of MPs should be transparent and no room should be left for fraudulent or unethical behaviour. The people’s trust in democratic institutions is too precious to risk for these benefits sake.

International Women’s Day

Today is the International Women’s Day. Started out as a political celebration, the Soviet Union countries and former east bloc countries celebrate it as a kind of mix between Mother’s Day and Valentine’s Day, which kind of goes against the idea of why the day was concieved. Too often it is celebrated here to reinforce the traditional role of a woman as “the weaker sex” and not in support of the struggles that women in many developing countries have to go through daily.

This day has lost its relevance for me personally ages ago, as I like to celebrate people on all days and for other reasons than there is a special day when you have to do it. If you have to do it and everyone does it at the same day, then is it real, from-the-heart emotion? I guess not.

Person of the Year

I have been reading/listening/watching numerous lists of best of 2007 and I thought in my opinion is the person of the year. In Estonia it is without doubt prime minister Andrus Ansip who not only hit the jackpot at the parliamentary elections in the Spring, but managed to create a coalition government excluding the Centre Party. However, in the world there are several people who could be up for the title: Benazir Bhutto for example, for her courageous return to Pakistan which unfortunately recently became a fatal decision. It could also be Steve Jobs for leading Apple into new heights with the iPhone and gorgeous Mac OS X Leopard and Macintosh computers (and for breaking the 200 dollar share price among downward spiralling tech share prices). The person of the year could also be Al Gore for his environmental campaign, although I still think he should have run for president of the US (perhaps he still will).

However, for me personally the person of the year is Richard Dawkins for his tireless fight for reason and science. I read his book the God Delusion and it had a big impact on me, restoring my belief in many ways to reason. It is really simple what he is trying to say and he is right: blind faith should not be outside of criticism and religion should not be tolerated as much as it is. I hope many people read his works and listen to the voice of reason. Then the world will be a better place for everyone.

Update: Some links:

The Official Richard Dawkins Website
The Time 100: Richard Dawkins
First chapter of The God Delusion
Richard Dawkins on BBC’s Have Your Say