[PHOTO] Carapaces on Covehead Beach, Prince Edward Island

The fishing community of Covehead is embedded inside the Prince Edward Island National Park, and has a wonderful white sand beach. Many things remain on this beach other than the sand: shells, plastic leavings of visitors, and more.

[BLOG] Some Monday links

• Beyond the Numbers suggests that talk of an African demographic dividend may be overstated, in that the young cohorts need--among other things--education.


• Crooked Timber's Chris Bertram talks about the ethics of open versus closed borders, suggesting that the latter is only acceptable if there actually are other ways to help.


• The Dragon's Gaze notes exoplanet WTS-2 b, a hot Jupiter set to spiral into its orange dwarf sun in 40 milion years.


• The Dragon's Tales notes that the ancestors of the Americas' indigenous populations apparently hung out in Beringia for ten thousand years before moving south, observes that Moldovans now have visa-less travel rights to the European Union, and comments on the still unknown composition of Mars' moons Phobos and Deimos.


• At A Fistful of Euros, Edward Hugh argues that Abenomics in Japan is turning out to be a huge, expensive, mess.


• Language Hat observes that many Soviets learned Polish in order to partake in the freer and more cosmopolitan literature of Poland.


• Language Log notes a new Chinese word for nerd.


• Lawyers, Guns and Money notes that many religious conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage just don't get it.


• Marginal Revolution observes that China is now India's largest trading partner.


• Savage Minds features a guest post from anthropologist Douglas La Rose talking about debt.


• Torontoist notes Doug Ford's media tour against police chief Bill Blair.


• The Volokh Conspiracy's Ilya Somin argues that migration should be talked about in light of the needs of immigrants, too.

[LINK] "Fascism, Russia, and Ukraine"

Timothy Snyder's article in The New York Review of Books makes the important point that, whatever an imperfect Ukraine's flaws, they are substantially less than that of a Russia that really is much closer to a fascist state than a more pluralist (if chaotic) Ukraine. See also Snyder's more recent blog post "Ukraine: The Haze of Propaganda".

The future of this protest movement will be decided by Ukrainians. And yet it began with the hope that Ukraine could one day join the European Union, an aspiration that for many Ukrainians means something like the rule of law, the absence of fear, the end of corruption, the social welfare state, and free markets without intimidation from syndicates controlled by the president.

The course of the protest has very much been influenced by the presence of a rival project, based in Moscow, called the Eurasian Union. This is an international commercial and political union that does not yet exist but that is to come into being in January 2015. The Eurasian Union, unlike the European Union, is not based on the principles of the equality and democracy of member states, the rule of law, or human rights.

[. . .]

The protests in the Maidan, we are told again and again by Russian propaganda and by the Kremlin’s friends in Ukraine, mean the return of National Socialism to Europe. The Russian foreign minister, in Munich, lectured the Germans about their support of people who salute Hitler. The Russian media continually make the claim that the Ukrainians who protest are Nazis. Naturally, it is important to be attentive to the far right in Ukrainian politics and history. It is still a serious presence today, although less important than the far right in France, Austria, or the Netherlands. Yet it is the Ukrainian regime rather than its opponents that resorts to anti-Semitism, instructing its riot police that the opposition is led by Jews. In other words, the Ukrainian government is telling itself that its opponents are Jews and us that its opponents are Nazis.

The strange thing about the claim from Moscow is the political ideology of those who make it. The Eurasian Union is the enemy of the European Union, not just in strategy but in ideology. The European Union is based on a historical lesson: that the wars of the twentieth century were based on false and dangerous ideas, National Socialism and Stalinism, which must be rejected and indeed overcome in a system guaranteeing free markets, free movement of people, and the welfare state. Eurasianism, by contrast, is presented by its advocates as the opposite of liberal democracy.

The Eurasian ideology draws an entirely different lesson from the twentieth century. Founded around 2001 by the Russian political scientist Aleksandr Dugin, it proposes the realization of National Bolshevism. Rather than rejecting totalitarian ideologies, Eurasianism calls upon politicians of the twenty-first century to draw what is useful from both fascism and Stalinism. Dugin’s major work, The Foundations of Geopolitics, published in 1997, follows closely the ideas of Carl Schmitt, the leading Nazi political theorist. Eurasianism is not only the ideological source of the Eurasian Union, it is also the creed of a number of people in the Putin administration, and the moving force of a rather active far-right Russian youth movement. For years Dugin has openly supported the division and colonization of Ukraine.

The point man for Eurasian and Ukrainian policy in the Kremlin is Sergei Glazyev, an economist who like Dugin tends to combine radical nationalism with nostalgia for Bolshevism. He was a member of the Communist Party and a Communist deputy in the Russian parliament before cofounding a far-right party called Rodina, or Motherland. In 2005 some of its deputies signed a petition to the Russian prosecutor general asking that all Jewish organizations be banned from Russia.

Later that year Motherland was banned from taking part in further elections after complaints that its advertisements incited racial hatred. The most notorious showed dark-skinned people eating watermelon and throwing the rinds to the ground, then called for Russians to clean up their cities. Glazyev’s book Genocide: Russia and the New World Order claims that the sinister forces of the “new world order” conspired against Russia in the 1990s to bring about economic policies that amounted to “genocide.” This book was published in English by Lyndon LaRouche’s magazine Executive Intelligence Review with a preface by LaRouche. Today Executive Intelligence Review echoes Kremlin propaganda, spreading the word in English that Ukrainian protesters have carried out a Nazi coup and started a civil war.

[BRIEF NOTE] On the advantages for the economy of Ukraine with Europe, in Europe

Back on the 14th of last month, I linked to a post at the Wall Street Journal's Emerging Europe blog about the Ukrainian economy. Author Alexander Kolyandr argued that Ukraine's economic stagnation has much to do with its unsettled politics, and that--in turn--Ukraine's political issues aggravated its economic issues. (Volatile prices for raw material exports and the old state of Ukrainian industrial plant didn't help, either.)

Ukraine’s gross domestic product in constant 2005 U.S. dollars was at $97 billion in 2013, compared to $113 billion in 1992, according to U.S. statistics. The performance looks even less impressive compared to that of the neighboring Russia, whose GDP expanded to $1 trillion in 2013 from $684 billion in the first post-Soviet year.

Using the more conventional measure of GDP adjusted for purchasing-power parity, Ukraine’s performance seems better, as its economy expanded to $341 billion from $267 billion, or about 28% in 20 years. Because Ukraine’s population shrank over the period, GDP per capita expanded by 46% to $7,532 from $5,163.

But those numbers don’t look so impressive next to Russia’s, where GDP grew by 125% for the same period, while the GDP per capita was up by 137% to $18,670, more than twice that in Ukraine.

[. . .]

A string of Ukrainian governments lacked the political will, the clear vision and experienced economists to launch economic reforms and privatization similar to those in Russia or Central Europe.

At the beginning of its independent existence Ukraine’s leadership saw excessive dependence on Russia and nation-building as a primary problem, while the inheritance of the communist system was not given sufficient attention. Unlike in Russia, not to mention the Baltic states, much of the old Soviet establishment persisted in Ukraine. “The old communist elite simply changed their party cards for the national insignia,” as economist Anders Aslund put it.

Ukraine recovered somewhat in the mid-2000s thanks to cheaper foreign loans, abundance of capital and high prices for metals. But all that halted in the 2008 financial crisis, and the country’s economy is yet to reach the pre-crisis level.

Writing for Bloomberg BusinessWeek, Charles Kenny argues ("Why Ukraine Really Would Be Better Off In Europe" that Ukraine would be better off aligning itself with the European Union than with the putative Eurasian Union.

In 1989, average income per capita in Ukraine was $8,629. By 1998, that had collapsed to $3,430. In 2012, GDP per capita had recovered somewhat—but at $6,394, it was still 25 percent below its level of nearly a quarter-century earlier. That puts Ukraine in the middle of the pack of former Soviet states, if you exclude the three Baltic economies of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, which are already members of the European Union. But compare Ukraine with four of its former Communist neighbors to the west: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania. The average GDP per person in those nations is around $17,000—and they in turn are poorer than West European countries. If Ukraine builds trade and financial ties with Russia and central Asia, it will be a midranking country in a middle-income club. If it builds these ties with the EU, it will be a relatively poor country in a rich club.

To be sure, being poor relative to everyone else isn’t a great recipe for rapid growth, despite the apparent advantages of being able to borrow technologies, techniques, ideas, and money from richer countries. Indeed, the last 200 years have been a period of incredible global income divergence—poor countries have grown more slowly than rich countries. In 1870 the world’s richest country was about nine times richer than the world’s poorest country. By 1990, that gap had grown to a 145-fold difference. The past 10 years have seen poor countries growing faster than rich ones in average–income convergence—but they are the historical exception.

[. . .]

Nonetheless, regions within countries often do converge—in the U.S., the gap between rich and poor states has traditionally fallen by about 2 percent a year (although that process has slowed in the past couple of decades). Within regional groupings of countries, there is stronger evidence that poorer countries benefit. From 1937 to 1988, poorer parts of Eastern Europe (Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria) grew faster (pdf) than richer countries (Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary). The story is similar in Latin America (Brazil, Mexico, and Columbia grow faster than Peru, Venezuela, Chile, and Argentina). The Economic Community of West African States is following a similar pattern. Perhaps of most relevance to politicians and protestors in Ukraine, there’s some evidence of convergence within the European Union—although perhaps unsurprisingly, newer members are converging toward a common income with each other faster than they are converging to the EU average.

There’s nothing automatic about convergence within regions. Take Greece, which had an average income worth 82 percent of France’s income in 1981 when it joined the European Community, and had income of only 74 percent of France’s 30 years later. But there’s still an opportunity for Ukraine in Europe—take Portugal, where incomes have climbed from 59 percent of France’s average when it joined the European Community in 1986 to 71 percent 26 years later. The potential for catchup is even greater for the former Soviet Republic, since its current income per capita is only one-fifth that of France.

When it comes to convergence within economic communities, the evidence suggests that two lessons of real estate apply: First, you’d rather be the last house on the right side of the tracks than the first house on the other side. Second, if you want your investment to appreciate, it’s best to be the cheapest house in an expensive community than the luxury condo in a lousy neighborhood.

[URBAN NOTE] "Toronto election: Which conservative mayor?"

Matt Elliott's column in today's Metro, about the way in which multiple right-leaning candidates in the upcoming Toronto mayoral elections, outlines Toronto's situation. The election of left-leaning Olivia Chow is starting to seem like a done deal. (But what else will come?)

With both Karen Stintz and John Tory officially signing up to join Rob Ford and David Soknacki last week, there are now four major right-of-centre candidates in the race for Toronto’s top office. It’s a situation that already has some pundits worrying about vote-splitting, fearful that a fractured electorate will pretty much hand the mayor’s job to Olivia Chow in October.

[. . .]

They’re all taking a different approach. Stintz, for example, is positioning herself as Mayor Mom, talking up her ability to relate with tales of mortgages and her kids’ soccer games. The positive approach is good, but she sure risks coming off as pandering.

Tory, meanwhile, has taken a more business-oriented approach. His platform so far is limited to repeating the words “livable, affordable, functional.” The subtext there isn’t hard to read, especially with his emphasis on the word “functional.” If Ford’s 2010 campaign was about stopping David Miller’s gravy train, Tory’s is all about stopping Ford’s crazy train.

Speaking of Ford, he is — somehow — still in the race, and still talking up his free-wheeling brand of right-wing politics. It’s mostly based on discredited budget numbers, but Ford remains great at telling voters what they want to hear. He’ll promise low property taxes and improved services. He’ll rail against the evils of debt and revenue tools then vote to increase taxes and debt for a subway. For Ford, math is no obstacle.

Which contrasts him nicely with David Soknacki, who leans heavily on math that actually adds up. His approach is policy-heavy, nerdy and, well, boring. But it also harkens back to the days of pragmatic and sensibly efficient governments run by Progressive Conservatives like Bill Davis and David Crombie. They weren’t splashy, but they were effective.

[LINK] "Trying to make sense of Loretta Saunders' death"

As I noted last week, the murder of Inuk student Loretta Saunders in Nova Scotia has become something of a national event. The face of Saunders has been used to give reality to the faces of the hundreds of First Nations women who have been murdered or disappeared in past decades in Canada. Saunders' thesis advisor at St. Mary's University, Darryl Leroux, contributed a powerful essay (originally published at the Halifax Media Coop), talking about his reaction and what Saunders' death means.

Even as I write this, as the tears wrack my body and the letters on my keyboard blur, none of this seems real. I was always so worried about Loretta. She presented all of the vulnerabilities to which indigenous women are prone, through no fault of her own.

I reread her thesis proposal last night and was reminded of how deeply she was aware of being a product of a Canadian society intent on destroying and eliminating indigenous peoples. That last word, “eliminating,” may seem extreme to some, but it is now so charged, so raw, so very real. Elimination. [Deep breath] [Deep breath] [Deep breath] Elimination.

Lying in a ditch along the Trans-Canada Highway. I simply cannot get this image out of my mind.

So many friends want to discuss the details of the case with me, they want to dissect it like they were the lead characters in a crime drama, the same ones that actually promote the incarceration and elimination of indigenous peoples and peoples of colour from society. What in the world makes somebody think that I want to listen to them piece together Loretta’s murder.

This is not a crime drama, she is dead. Murdered. What is wrong with those people? What were they thinking? If it’s not friends acting like sleuths, it’s the media acting like buzzards, circling and waiting for somebody to surrender like fallen prey. No more than 5 minutes goes by between the police announcement of Loretta’s murder and my inbox and voicemail being filled with requests.

If you’re reading this, take it as my statement. I refuse to speculate about Loretta’s death. What I do know is that our society has discarded indigenous women and girls in much the same manner for generations. These people were playing out a script that we all know intimately, but never acknowledge.

It's our doing, which Loretta articulated so clearly in her writing -- theft of land base, legalized segregation and racism, residential schools for several generations, continued dispossession = social chaos.

[LINK] "Government prostitution survey full of ‘loaded’ questions"

I submitted my own answer to the government prostitution survey described by the Ottawa Citizen's Derek Spalding some time ago, and I did notice a certain bias. All the more reason to put something in to try to counter the bias!

Federal Justice Department staff on Monday launched an online survey aimed to solicit public input on the works it’s been left with by a recent Supreme Court decision.

However, local experts questioned the approach taken by the Conservatives.

It assumes prostitution is dangerous and that all sex workers want to be saved, said Chris Bruckert, associate professor in the criminology department at University of Ottawa. She also criticized government for not conducting town-hall style consultations where people have more time to unpack their opinions about prostitution laws.

The online survey and accompanying background information will be posted on the Justice Department website until March 17.

[. . .]

The Conservative party, at least in part, has already stated support for a European approach to solicitation laws that criminalizes people buying sex and human traffickers who force others into prostitution. Under this Nordic model, which has already been touted by Winnipeg MP Joy Smith as the best way to update Canadian laws, prostitutes are not punished criminally.

Smith last week released a report that called for a similar model in Canada. Despite criticisms, she stands by her report and the government’s survey.

“Our government is consulting Canadians on the best legislative response to prostitution,” she wrote in a statement Monday. “The harm caused by prostitution to women, girls and vulnerable populations has been well documented by women’s and First Nations organizations.”

Smith’s comments were similar to the background information provided with the online survey. The document indicates “it is generally acknowledged that prostitution poses risks to those involved and to the communities in which it is practised.”

Bruckert calls this a “loaded assertion” that misses the point of the Supreme Court decision, which — she says — determined that Canadian laws were creating risks to people working in the sex trade.