1. Why there are no uploads on my site since
June 29, 2015
The basic reason is this: The programs I use for
uploading the sites, which happens with FTP (<-Wikipedia)
suddenly and unaccountably on June
29, and since then I have not been able to start them again.
There is more here (but I am
shortening this section, since it repeats).
Also, in part this also has to do with the tropical temperatures that
struck Amsterdam last week, for that is very bad for me: it
lames nearly everything, for I really have very little energy
then. I don't know whether this is related to M.E., for the simple
reason that I also had this before I had M.E.: I deal very badly with
temperatures that remain consistently above 25 C for more than a few
days, and always did.
Anyway, now that the heat is gone, I will probably be able to link up
again some time during the coming week.
Crisis materials (links,
mostly without reviews or with short ones)
The next item today is
a list of articles with links. I will keep looking every
morning at around 40 sites and
interesting articles, but for the moment I will not review most
of them: I merely list them.
This has two advantages:
Less work for me, but possibly more articles for my readers. Today is a
Sunday, and I found six articles that I will review briefly
and that are in this section, and one that I will review a bit more
extensively, in the next section.
Here they are: Titles +
links + author(s) +
This is a long article by
Florence Hartmann (who wrote a book about Srebrenica that will be
published on Tuesday July 7, 2015) and by Ed Vulliamy. Here is the
New research reveals that
Britain and the US knew six weeks before massacre that enclave would
fall – but they decided to sacrifice it in their efforts for peace
And they did not tell this
to anyone, while also no leading politician was ever persecuted or
forced to step down. Here is a bit from the beginning:
Blame among the
“international community”charged with protecting Srebrenica has piled,
not without reason, on the head of UN forces in the area, General
Bernard Janvier, for opposing intervention – notably air strikes – that
might have repelled the Serb advance, and Dutch soldiers who not only
failed in their duty to protect Srebrenica but evicted terrified
civilians seeking shelter in their headquarters, and watched the Serbs
separate women and young children from their male quarry.
Now a survey of the mass
of evidence reveals that the fall of Srebrenica formed part of a policy
by the three “great powers” – Britain, France and the US – and by the
UN leadership, in pursuit of peace at any price; peace at the terrible
expense of Srebrenica, which gathered critical mass from 1994 onwards,
and reached its bloody denouement in July 1995.
In brief: You have
all been had by the propaganda of Britain, France, the US and by the UN
leadership. And here is a quotation of Dutch troop leader Thom
Karremans, in 1995, who was supposed to be there to guarantgee a safe
haven for muslims:
There are no good
guys. There are no bad guys.
Mladic is my colleague.
Don't shoot the piano player!
As I write this, it is Monday morning, July 6. Yesterday there
was a Greek referendum, in which the Greek population voted rather
overwhelmingly - 61%, winning in nearly all districts - "No",
which supports the leftist leader Tsiprias.
I have three articles on Greece, all from The Guardian.
The first is this:
This is by Jill Treanor on
The Guardian. It is from yesterday, and missed the resignment of Yanis
Varoufakis, but it is here because it does list the basic
There are several possible
answers to what has to be done now, and here are two different ones.
This is by Nils Pratley on
The Guardian. It starts as follows:
How far will financial
markets fall on Monday morning? Expect to see the leading European
share index plunge 10% initially in the event of a no vote, Goldman Sachs predicted at the end of last
A 10% decline would be
enormous, but almost any prediction is credible in the current climate.
We’re back to the wild markets seen at the height of the banking crisis
in 2008. Many fund managers, even last week, were expecting a strong
yes vote in Greece. It’s hard to know how severely they
will be shocked by the scale of the no victory.
I don't know either,
and as I said, I am writing this in the morning of July 6.
So far, the decline was 2% (but the financial markets are still open).
There is also this article:
This is by John Quiggin on
The Guardian. This is a rational analysis:
In view of the No vote,
Syriza can’t accept a deal that doesn’t include an explicit debt
write-off, or one that obviously crosses its stated red lines. Within
those parameters, it’s clearly eager for a face-saving compromise.
For the other side
(effectively the Troika and the German government), since Syriza’s move
has already been made, the problem has now been reduced to one of
decision under uncertainty, which is something I am comfortable with.
More precisely, it’s a
choice between a “safe” option, with an outcome that is fairly
predictable, and a “risky” option where the outcome is uncertain.
The safe option for the
European institutions is to back down, write off lots of debt and lose
a lot of face.
The risky option is to
foreclose and force Greece out of the eurozone, leading to a
repudiation of debt.
There is more, including
Even if the least-bad
case is regarded as slightly better than a backdown, any reasonable
calculation of expected payoffs for the institutions concerned would
indicate that backing down is the rational choice, in every possible
That doesn’t mean such a
choice will be made. People aren’t generally rational, after all.
Moreover, individual rationality may not be the same as institutional
The reason for this last
difference - between individual
rationality and institutional
rationality - is that "institutional rationality" tends to be made up
of non-decisions of careerists who
are most interested in maintaining their jobs and looking
away from individual responsibilities, but this is an aside.
Next, another subject: Privacy and spying on everyone. There is this:
This is by Robert Scheer on
Truthdig, and is in fact a selection from his latest book. This is the
In an excerpt from
his new book, “They
Know Everything About You: How Data-Collecting Corporations and
Snooping Government Agencies Are Destroying Democracy,” Truthdig
Editor-in-Chief Robert Scheer traces the Fourth Amendment’s
enshrinement of privacy rights from English common law to Facebook and
a defense by Chief Supreme Court Justice John Roberts.
Indeed it is, and it
is a good article.
The last article of
the present section is by David Swanson on Washington's Blog:
This is here mainly because
of the following quotation from it, that does sum up what Obama's TPP
(and TTIP and TiAS) are really for:
Obamatrade, which is the
name not given to a potential treaty, a.k.a. the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) which says that . . .
You must let foreign
corporations overturn national laws.
You must throw millions
of people out of work.
You must pay more for
You must allow banks to
gamble on and crash the economy.
You must not know what’s
in your food.
You must be censored
You must destroy family
You must wreck the
You must get paid less.
ALL OF THIS
doesn’t bother anybody?
I don't agree with
everything in the article, but the above seems to me a fair summary of
what the TPP, TTIP and TiAS are supposed to do. Also, all of this
is meant to be kept deeply secret, is introduced through a secret
process, where even members of Congress are not allowed to take
notes on what they read of these "partnerships" and also are not
allowed to discuss what they have read with anybody else (for they also risk serious legal punishment
if they don't follow these rules),
and all of it will also remain secret the first four or five
years after they are signed into "laws", all of which spells "tyranny"
in my dictionary .
But this is the future
Obama deeply desires, and likes to impose, in secret, on nearly
Capitalism Is the Foundation of Police Brutality and the
This is by Chris Hedges on Truthdig:
This starts as follows:
conversation on race and crime is based on a fiction. It is the fiction
that the organs of internal security, especially the judiciary and the
police, can be adjusted, modernized or professionalized to make
possible a post-racial America. We discuss issues of race while
ignoring the economic, bureaucratic and political systems of
exploitation—all of it legal and built into the ruling apparatus—that
are the true engines of racism and white supremacy. No discussion of
race is possible without a discussion of capitalism and class. And
until that discussion takes place, despite all the proposed reforms to
the criminal justice system, the state will continue to murder and
imprison poor people of color with impunity.
Well...yes and no.
agree with the title, and I agree with the first sentence:
conversation on race and crime is based on a fiction.
But I disagree that:
No discussion of race is
possible without a discussion of capitalism and class.
"discussions of race" are possible "without a discussion of capitalism and class", and indeed racism and slavery
existed for thousands of years without capitalism and without
anyone being aware of "classes". 
And I do not
say most of these discussions are or were rational (most are not,
indeed) - I merely say they were and are quite possible, and existed,
and indeed also they are, sometimes, probably in a minority of cases,
somewhat rational. 
There are three pages is this article, that seem mostly based on a book
by Naomi Murakawa, The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built
Prison America. I will leave them to your interest, except for two
bits, that both stress how serious this is.
First, the extent:
(...) there was
from 1968 to 2010 a septupling of people locked in the prison system.
“Counting probation and parole with jails and prisons is even more
astonishing still,” she writes. “This population grew from 780,000 in
1965 to seven million in 2010.”
In any case, there were 7
to 10 times as many prisoners in the United States in 2010 as in
1965 (and 5 times more, procentually, than in most other
Second, the means:
As I have said since 2005 (at
the latest): I fear state terrorism very
much more than private terrorism, so to speak, simply because there has
been far more state terrorism than private terrorism, and it
has been - for example: the KGB and the Gestapo - far more
dangerous and far more murderous than any private terrorism.
A municipality in
Missouri is billing people
for the Tasers used against them—$26 per Taser discharge. Roughly half
of all states are now charging people for the services of indigent
criminal defense. A 2013 Supreme Court decision said that extended
families could be held responsible for the debts of those incarcerated.
Well... the last quoted paragraph is an example of state terrorism.
It may be considerably worse (concentration
camps, simply shooting offenders without trial, or after a summary
trial by their executioners) but you should not be punished for
police actions; you should have the right to good lawyers also
if you cannot pay them; and your family should not be made
responsible for the debts you made.
Since I can't upload this today, and I don't yet know
how long that will last, there is also this: I will try to keep
up writing Nederlogs for later publication, that depends on my being
able to upload them, but they probably will be briefer.
For as I said, while the main reason that you cannot read this since
June 30, 2015, is that I can't upload, it is also a
fact that I need to do quite a few other things than computing,
while my health is
currently - and since 2 months - worse than it was since 2012, and also
there has started a period with tropical temperatures in
which I tend not to cope well with.
These temperatures ceased today, which will help me (for the last days
simply were too hot for me).
In case you have read considerably more of this - quite large - site,
you will know that my parents were - honest, sincere and brave -
communists, which is a political faith I gave up when I was 20. One of
the things I heard a whole lot about in my first 20 years was
Well... I suppose I must be sorry, but I don't really believe
in classes, or perhaps rather: I think they are nearly always the wrong
People live in face groups
(of which they know most members, and in which they also are born), and
these they know. The term "class" is vastly more general than
"(face) group"; it is quite abstract; and it also is usually not
defined and presumed as-if-obvious.
I don't think the existence of "classes" is obvious, though I clearly
agree that there are a few rich people amidst a majority of
poor people. Then again, if that
is what you mean, you should call them thus: The rich and the poor.
This also is at least a bit clearer than "capitalist class" and
"proletarian class" (and "middle class").
For one example, from the Wikipedia:
Sharp (10 November 1735 – 6 July 1813) was one of the first English campaigners for the abolition of the slave trade.
He also involved himself in trying to correct other social injustices.
(...) He was also a biblical scholar and classicist,
and a talented musician.
This was before the
days of capitalism, and before the social concept of "class"
Here is some more, also from the Wikipedia:
Sharp is best
known for his untiring efforts for the abolition of slavery,
although he was involved in many other causes, fired by a dislike of
any social or legal injustice.
Indeed, slavery was abolished
in England in 1833 (and in Holland in 1865).
In 1769 Sharp published A
Representation of the Injustice and Dangerous Tendency of Tolerating
Slavery ..., the first tract in England attacking slavery.
When Sharp heard that the Act of Abolition had at last been
passed by both Houses of Parliament and given Royal Assent on 25 March
1807, he fell to his knees and offered a prayer of thanksgiving. He was
now 71, and had outlived almost all of the allies and opponents of his
early campaigns. He was regarded as the grand old man of the abolition
struggle, and although a driving force in its early days, his place had
later been taken by others such as Thomas Clarkson, William Wilberforce and the Clapham
Sect. Sharp however did not see the final abolition as he died on 6