[LINK] Some Friday links

• Phil Hunt at Amused Cynicism wonders if the European Union, free from the United States' baggage and much closer than China, could give a post-Castro Cuba some sort of protectorate status.


• The Lounsbury at 'Aqoul observes that al-Jazeerah's coverage of the Kosovo independence celebrations included more than a few pairings of Kosovar and American flags. Good public relations?


• At Crooked Timber, Christ Bertram's celebratory post on Castro and John Quiggin's more measured consideration of dictatorship might both have generated more heat than light, but there's still enough of the latter there. If you page past the flamewars, that is.


• Ken MacLeod speculates that Technocracy and science fiction are too close for comfort.


• Joel at Far Outliers has had a few good Timothy Garton Ash excerpts, including one on Belgrade in 1997, one in Sarajevo in 1995, and one in Kosovo in 1998, one on Bosnia in 1998, and finally, a personal view of Yugoslavia's murder.


• At Joe. My. God, Rupert Everett is quoted as saying that pride marches have become depoliticized. The blogger and many commenters disagree.


• In the aftermath of Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's apology to Australian Aborigines, Language Log has its own take on the situation, touching upon Australian Aborigine languages.


• normblog blogs about Castro's unsurprisingly long period in office and his appropriation of the word "amor."


• Strange Maps describes the Republic of New Netherlands, population 31.2 million.

[BRIEF NOTE] Eurovision Song Contest, 2008, in Belgrade (?)

Reading Hunting Monsters, I was surprised to learn that this year's Eurovision Song Contest is slated to be held this year in Belgrade.

As you know, this year's contest is being held in Belgrade, providing a handy opportunity for Serbia to show its non-recognition of Kosovan independence. I do not know what the criteria are for accepting new member states of the Eurovision Song Contest Organisation, but at this short notice it is unlikely that Kosova would be able to join up in time to compete (even allowing for the likely hostility to it from Russia and certain other countries). So we will be spared the possibility of the Serbian presenters refusing to hear the votes of juries for the Kosovan song. But there are other ways in which the contest could be marred by Balkan politics. The introductory bit where the host nation paints a picture of how great and interesting it is could be turned into a whiny nationalist whinge-fest, with a re-enactment of the first battle of Kosovo and loads of maps of Serbia pointedly showing Kosova as still an integral part of the country. Or perhaps the Serbian hosts could refuse to let the songs of Kosova-recognising countries compete.

Elsewhere, in a post on A Fistful of Euros about the attacks on a fair number of foreign embassies in Belgrade by angry protesters, I learned that there has been some talk of moving Eurovision from Belgrade altogether because of security concerns.

Partner website, Gylenneskor.se have stated that a telephone conference between senior EBU officials and reference group members will take place this morning to discuss security concerns about hosting the Eurovision Song Contest in Belgrade after the violence that has occurred in the city over the passed days.

Of main concern is the attacks on foreign embassies by a tiny minority of hooligans yesterday evening. Attacks on foreign buildings and potential harm to foreign nationals is a major concern for the Eurovision Song Contest organisers with thousands of officials from 42 delegations and fans travelling to Belgrade for the competition in May.

Whilst the EBU has yet to confirm that there are any discussions about the possibility of moving the contest to an alternative venue, they are watching developments very closely. Fans planning to travel to the contest are increasingly concerned about personal security issues.

News of the crisis conference came from Misa Molk of Slovenia yesterday. Slovenia's embassy in Belgrade was attacked by a small number of rioters. She is a member of the EBU's Eurovision Song Contest Reference Group and claimed on television that "that EBU now decided itself in order to collect together itself to one urgent telephone conference - a crisis meeting about the imminent risk in order to entire Eurovision Song Contest 2008 now possible must be moved to another country".

It would be a catastrophe for Serbia if Eurovision was moved. It would also be a catastrophe for angry mobs to attack foreign visitors and--who knows?--Eurovision participants. The press reports seem to suggest that the attacks on embassies are being made by just a few people and that the vigilance of the police is, well, somewhat selective, so it seems more likely than not that Eurovision will stay in Belgrade. Besides, where else can it go on such short notice?

[LINK] "Equalization payments equal unfairness"

In The Globe and Mail, journalist Neil Reynolds touches upon the growing discontent in Ontario ("Equalization payments equal unfairness") that the federal government's equalization program which transfers funds for public services to poorer provinces is continuing to do so at a time when Ontario's economy is facing serious problems, between slow growth and heavy job losses.

David MacKinnon is an acknowledged authority on Ontario's apparent willingness to do without public services even as it provides other provinces with the money that they use to provide the best-funded services in the country. He has studied the phenomenon for years. A native of PEI himself and a graduate from Dalhousie University in Halifax, he held senior positions with the Nova Scotia government, the Ontario government and Bank of Montreal.

For the better part of a decade, he ran the Ontario Hospital Association (retiring in 2003).

He now campaigns for radical reform of the country's equalization program. Two weeks ago, for example, he spoke to the Empire Club in Toronto - at which time he suggested that Ontario needs "the modern equivalent of a Boston tea party" in Toronto Harbour to arouse the complacent province from its long lethargy.

"Why is it," he asked, "that so much of the crime is in Ontario - but the judges are disproportionately in Newfoundland?

"Why is it that Manitoba can subsidize its electricity prices by $1.2-billion [a year] even as it collects $1.8-billion in equalization?

"Why is it that the old in Ontario and the very young in Ontario will experience greater challenges in accessing hospitals and teachers than in most other provinces?"

[. . .]

Canadians love the mythology of equalization, Mr. MacKinnon says - "the myth that we are all equal, that we all have equal access [to services]." None of the mythology, he says, is true. In his Empire Club address, for example, he concluded that public services are more accessible in the provinces that get equalization payments than they are in the provinces (Ontario and Alberta) that "pay the freight."

The consequences, Mr. MacKinnon says, have been evident for years. Inexorably, Ontario grows less competitive: "Like any manufacturing jurisdiction, Ontario now has to compete with China and India. [At the same time] its per capita income has been falling [relative to the Canadian average] for 15 years. It is about to fall below the Canadian average. It would be far better for the rest of Canada if Ontario did not have to pay for government programs in six or seven of the other provinces."

"Sadly, if Ontario falls into recession today and its output declines, its citizens will still have to come up with nearly half of the annual increases guaranteed for equalization payments in coming years," he says. "Equalization is now largely decoupled from Ontario's economic performance." Equalization, in other words, requires that Ontario keeps paying - whether it is rich or poor.