Armenian Genocide: 100 years of conflit in the Caucasian Region

Today (24th of January 2015) we celebrate a century from what is called for many as the first genocide of the 20th century. And it happened in a very turbulent region of the world, very close to the european continent. What happened there was a result of what was happening for centuries and was one reason for many of the conflits that still exist in this area.
But let's go back to 1915 to understand better what occurred there.
The caucasian region map was quite different from the present. In the beggining of the 20th century Armenia was between 3 big nations: Persia, the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire. Armenia is one of the oldest nations in the world but its boards were not defined in the same shape like today.
Being in a territory where many conflits occurred among the centuries and being placed between the East and the West, many cultures, religions and beliefs had been spread in this areas. And also with all the invasions and occupations, the diaspora was a natural consequence of this situation.

It was estimated that 2 million of armenians were living in the Ottoman Empire and after the massacre and deportation, 1.5 million died. In 1915 the Ottoman Empire was participating in the World War I together with the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires. At this time, the ottoman religious authorities declared a 'holy war' - jihad - to all the christians, except their enemies: among the enemies were of course the armenias. Many of the military authorites started to accuse the armenians of betrayal, arguing that they were helping the russians. On 24th of April the real massacre started: first the intellectual armenians were arrested and brutally executed, and then the rest of the armenians were forced to leave their homes with nothing and sent to walk in the Mesopotamian dessert with no food or water until they died. They were forced to walk under a extremly hot sun and if they stopped to rest they were immediately dead. At the same time, organizations were formed in the Ottoman Empire in order to eradicate any christian presence in the country, by persecution, destruction and dead. The result was obvious: when the massacre ended in 1922 only 388000 armenians were still living in the Ottoman Empire.
But the tensions did not finish then.

The religions differences

As you already figured the religion is a controversial subject in this area. The crhistians and muslims were co-existing in the same territory for centuries, but this living together is far away from being paceful.
The official religion of the Ottoman Empire were the Islam but they allowed the existence of religious minorities. However, their rights were not tottaly respected and their social status was below the statusof the muslims. Eventhought the armenians lived together with the ottomans. But the religions tensions had been always there and it was a question of time until a conflit based on religious questions get started.
After the genocide the religious issue continued to be a problem. With the end of the Ottoman Empire and later the Soviet Union, many countries were formed in this region besides Armenia: Azerbaijan and Georgia too. Like Armenia, the main religion in Georgia is the christianity. But like Turkey, the main religion is the Islam. There have been some religious tensions in this region in the last decades, especially between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Armenia Genocide memorial in Bikfaya

Conflits between Armenia and Azerbaijan

The problem is far away from being solved. The main issue is the authority in the Nagorno-Karabakh republic, a non-recognized sovereign republic that was part of the soviet republic of azerbaijan when it was integrated in the Soviet Union. After the fall of the comunism in the region, the authority over this territory is being disputed between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The religious freedom is legally recognized in all this countries but over the decades many inccidents and discriminations have occurred.

The lack of civil rights

Besides the religious rights, many other problems related to the civil rights persist in this region, especcially the LGBT ones. The same-sexual activity is recognized in all these countries. But only of them had signed the UN declaration and in none of them the sam-sex relationships or marriages are legally recognized. Not also the adoption. The same for the absense of anti descrimination laws, that only exist in Georgia.
There are also some improvements that need to be done in gender equality between men and women in the domestic and labor worlds.

The Eurasia is a place of tensions and conflits which are far away from being solved. Unfortunately many situations like the armenian massacre could happen again.

Eurovision 2014: what happened in one year after Conchita's victory?

Whitin excatly one month will start the Eurovision 2015 with the first semi-final. Of course the dimension of this contest goes beyond the week of the competition. Since October unitl March are released the songs for the next edition and of course after the end of the contest, people and the media continue to talk about the recent edition. The dimension of the talks and the media's cover depend a lot of the controversies of that edition. And last year was one of the years with more controversy in the History of Eurovision. And the big part of that controversy was caused by just one person: CONCHITA WURST.

In this article I will talk about some of the reactions about Wurst's victory and some of her biggest moments.

The victory: support from the West and hate/indifference from the East

Last year's contest was another contest in which the people didn't have a big consensus about the winning song, unlike some past editions like 2013 or 2012. Austria was one of the favourites but, some bad comments and reactions about that character made the chances for Conchita's victory many difficult. But the truth was that, surprising for some and expected for others, Conchita did win the contest with the 4th biggest points awarded in the grand final. But even with only 4 countries not voting for Austria, Europe last year was tottaly divided into 2 parts. Despite the 12 points from Israel, the other 12 countries that gave the maximum points to Austria were all from the West (Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Ireland, Finland and Sweden). Conchita was clearly the winner in the West but not so clear in the East. Even being in the TOP3 points from Lithuania, Ukraine, Romania and Georgia, the fact is that 3 of the countries that didn't give a single point for Austria were from the East too (Poland, Belarus and Armenia). And of course I need to mention all the polemic and the boycott threats to participation in the contest from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Many voices, even from politicians and ministers especially from Russia accused Conchita for giving a bad example for the kids and to violate the good values of tradition, And the comments became even worst, saying that Conchita should die and burn in hell.

The truth after all was that the big part of Europe supported Conchita and her song.

Of course the controversy was intensified after the show especially between Conchita and Russia. But of course the problems were not only between Russia and Conchita.

Just a few days after Conchita's victory  Angel Dzhambazki, an european congressman from Bulgariam said that Conchita is a genetically modified organism. That sentence is very hard to understand since Conchita only put implants on brest and long hair: according to her press conference after the grand final, Conchita is still a man.

The controversy with the Christian Religions

Of course the Conchita's caracther was also a controversy issue for the christian religions.

And in that subject, we saw two opposite reactions.

First, the negative and absurd comments from the orthodox Patriarch of Serbia that blamed the gays and the Conchita's victory for the storms that happened in the Sava River and caused the death of dozens of persons in the Balcan region. It's very strange to see that a Austrian singer that won in Denmark was responsible for storms that happened... in Serbia. Even more strange is the fact that the pedophile priests or even the gay ones are not responsible for nothing. 

One the other side, we received an amazing positive reaction from the Arcebishop Schonborn from Vienna who said that "In the garden fo the Lord there's space for everyboy", which is clearly and anti-hate message for Conchita. This surprising reaction received a positive feedback and support not only inside the catholic church but also outside it.

Presence in important places 

After Conchita's victory, she performed in many places, including of course the gay parades and other gay-friendly events in many cities. But I would like to highlight the presence and concert in the European Parliment, a way to show that in the European Union there's shouldn't be place for hat and homophobia Unfortunately, in some of its members the hate still persists. I would love to see the  Angel Dzhambazki's reaction in front of Conchita Wurst.

In all the editions we face lots of controversy about many subjects. But one of the most controversial was last year's edition. But despite all the bad reactions and comments the truth is that Conchita is one of the most famous winners from recent years and, brought attentions to the Eurovision from people that usually don't pay attention to that contest.

What about this year? We have already some controversies but they will not be so big like last year!

Eurovision 2015: Vienna is comming (II)

Here are my cooments: this time I will do like before - comment two countries in each message.

THE NETHERLANDS - Trijntje Oosterhuis with "The Walk Alone"


In 2013 The Netherlands surprised us with the artist and the song they had chosen to represent their country in Malmo. And for the first time since there are semi-finals, The Netherlands took part in the Grand Final, finishing in the TOP10 (9th place), something that never happened before since 1999. But the surprises from this country that was "lost" in the competition with very bad results between 2005 and 2012 didn't stop here. Last year, with another internal selection by the dutch broadcast (AVROTROS) The Netherlands reached the final again finishing in 2nd place and winning its semifinal, achieving the best result for the country since 1975.
With this wave of good luck the AVROTROS used the same method to select its representative for this year contest. The artist chosen is Trijntje Oosterhuis a very famous dutch singer with a solid career and a great voice. The Netherlands was one of the first countries to present its artist and song. After the good reaction by the selection of Trijntje, there were many expectations around the song. One month after the annoucment of the artist the broadcaster presented the song, already considered by the artist an uptempo song.
This year The Netherlands tries to achieve the final and a place in the podium with a style a little different from the previous two years. However, considering the big number of ballads present this year and the quality of Trijntje's voice the qualification is almost sure. The song doesn't bring anything new in terms of musical quality and it will be very hard to amaze the audience with an amazing performance but the jury will definitely support the dutch song and with the help of Belgium and France - the countries that usually give more points to The Netherlands - voting in this semi-final we will see this country in the Final.


FINLAND - Pertti Kurikan Nimipäivät with "Aina mun pitää"

I don't know exactly how to start. If we make some research on the internet (foruns, youtube, social networks) it's practically impossible to see somebody making good comments about this song. It wasn't the favourite of antbody: in fact, it's almost always in the last place. But the true is this - They win the 'Uuden Musiikin Kilpailu 2015'.

Pertti Kurikan Nimipäivät is a finish punk-rock song created in 2009 consisting on adults with developmental disabilities. The participation in the finish documentary "The Punk syndrome" and the concert with Mr. Lordi made this band very famous in Finland.
But despite that, the victory of this band was very unexpected. Like always, the finish festival is very different in style of what its neighbours present and rarely has the quality to win or even finish in a good place in the Grand Final. This year wasn't different. Howerver there were a few songs with the capacity to bring a good result to Finland, including the 2nd ranked, "Satin Circus" with the song "Crossroads", which was the favourite of the jury and many people on the social networks (including me).
Surprisingly the victory was to Pertti Kurikan Nimipäivät. Honestly I can't find anything good on the song, even because it has only 1:30 minutes (something possible in the Eurovision according to the rules). It's impossible for me to understand the quality's voice of the singer and even the melody.
But if it's true that the people can be mean about the song, it'a not also true that they can be mean about the artists. Calling them bad names just because they have mental disabilities is being rude and prejudiced.
Maybe the people will vote on this song for pitty, but one thing is voting for pitty in the babushkas in 2012 for example, with a song that we could easily listen without having a headache and another thing is this music. And unfortunately from the countries that give more points to Finland only Denmark will vote in that semi-final.
I can predict a very bad result for Finland this year.

The singular growth process of India (I)

Generally, the economic growth process is a sequence that starts with the loss of importance of the agricultural sector (either the percentage of GDP or in percentage of the workforce employed) and an increase of the importance of industry first, and services next.

As the economic growth nears maturity, the dominant sector is the services, followed generally by the industry and then by agriculture.
However, the economic growth process of India was deviated from this common process, going straight from agriculture to the leadership of the service sector.
The lack of industrial development was due in very of the presence of a stifling regulation, especially in the legislation about the work and the policies about the small size industries.
Another unusual aspect is the permanence of the same distribution of the employed population among the diverse sectors: the majority of the employed population still remain in the agriculture.

The IT related activities still represent a small parcel of the service sector. The sub-sectors that had increase considerably due to economic liberalization were the business services, comunications and banks.
However, due to high qualifications, and technic capacity of human resources in IT field, we expect that this will the sub-sector with the higher increase in the next years.
And could India have a sustained economic growth in the future, without the industrial sector? The most likely scenario is no.
The manufactured production will be a way to India have a sustentable growth, and will contribute to the poverty reduction.
One of the fundamental variables to the manufactury development will be the increase in qualifications and skills of the rural population.
A more qualificated population together with a liberalization of agriculture, would allow an exit of workforce to the more procutive areas.
This process will fortify the pruduction level of the rural areas and generate a bigger work suplly to the manufactury activity.
Through this process, India will have a economic path similar to its asiatic neighbors, and could also have a biggest urbanization of its territory.

In the last 50 years, India has change its isolation policy (namely, domestic view policy): the increasly economic liberalization and gradual opening to the world economy, boosted the economic growth rate and lifted millions out of poverty.
If these reforms are maintained and move forward at the same rytm and intensity in the next 10-15 years, then the economy could increase in an average of 6%/year.
However, if the reforms will be deeper , the GDP coul increase an average of 7-8% per year in the same period.
In 2020 India would be the economy with thw higher annual economic growth, and the 3rd biggest economy in the world (behind China and USA). Its GDP per capita also could duplicate in the same period of time.
This projection will only be possible if the demographic conditions remain the same. And these conditions will be discussed in the next message.

Eurovision 2015: Vienna is comming (I)

Yes I'm back with my comments about the Eurovision's entries. This year we are going to Vienna, and I'll start to comment the choice from my own country.

PORTUGAL AND LEONOR ANDRADE

Like in some many years in the past, the portuguese public broadcast (RTP) held the 'Festival da Canção' in March to select its representative for the Eurovision Song Contest. In the last years we have watched some changes in the selection process. The same happened this year, with the (re)introduction of two semifinals, one final and a super-final. In the semifinals and in the final three songs were chosen - two by the public and the other but the composers - to advance for the next round.
Despite the differences the Fetsival received the same criticisms by some people about the repetition of the same music style and the weakness of the songs. Also this new method of asking to all the composers to  select a music from the 'competition' to advance to the next round was very criticized. However, the public agreed with almost all the qualifiers from the semi-finals. The same we cannot say about the qualifiers for the super-final with many people expecting to see Yola in this last round. After all, the public with 100% of decision power, chose Leonor Andrade to represent Portugal in Vienna in May.

This year we had the return of one of the symbols of the portuguese participation in the Eurovision: Simone de Oliveira, the portuguese representative in  1965 and 1969. Simone de Oliveira was qualified for the final but missed the qualification for the super-final. As for the other participants, most of them were known from their participation in some portuguese talent shows (like the winner) and/or from previous participations in the Festival, like Filipa Baptista in 2009 (that failed to qualify from the semi-final) and Teresa Radamanto in 2007 (that was in the super-final). Like in the previous years, we could see that there are really good voices in Portugaal. Unfortunately the voices are underused and their potential are not fully availed.

This song has definetly many aspects to be improved and Leonor and her team have a long and hard work to do before May. However, even with better and strongest voices in the final, as Yola and Teresa, it's amazing to see Portugal choosing a different style to represent it in the Eurovision.

This year the semifinal where Portugal was allocated is not very hard, but it will not have the political voting from Spain and France, the two countries that usuallt give more points to Portugal. However, improving the performance a qualification is really possible.

The public intervention in the startegic sectors

New year, new life! And it's time to refresh my blog. I will start this new "season" of messages by starting a set of messages about the challenges for the future of the European Union.

The public intervention of the EU-instituions in the strategic sectors

Despite the fact that the EU have some responsabilities on the strategic sectores of the economy, there is no rules or legislation about how to define and how to intervent in the strategic sectors. There is no legislation that defines in which sectors the State needs to intervent. Usually the public intervention is a result of the historic tradition.
Inside the European Union, there is a belief that in the southern countries, the publci intervention os excessive (which can be supported by the current debt crisis) but it's nothing more than a myth. If we see the weight of the public intervention in the total of the economic's activity, we can see that in the Nordic countries is much higher. However, there is no limitation about how far the State can intervent in the economy: not even in each member.

In the last decades we saw among the majority of the EU-members a decrease in the importance of the State's role in the economy. Why is that happening, even not existing legislation about that? Mainly for three reasons:
- the increase in the intern market's dimension;
- the economic liberalization and globalization, which brought the international competitiveness;
- the privatization of the public business sector (an inspiration of the anglo-saxon model);

The big consequence of the decrease of the public intervention is the redution of the instruments the governments can use to make its intervention.
Currently with the redution of the public companies, we see the States giving benefits to the private companies, under the previous authorization of the European Institutions. So, even taking in account the reality of each member, the EU needs to take part on the intervention due to the importance of the sectores not only for the stability of the respective member, but also for the stability of the EU.
There is also another reason for the public intervention: the public economic interest services (different from the social interest services). These services are the activities that don't have the profit maximization as a goal, but a social purporse instead. So the sustainability is guaranteed by the Government.

From the pratical experience, the European Union defined some sctores that can be considered strategic such as:
- Water supply and distribution;
- Energy (the supply and distribution of energy is giving many problems between countries all over the world, including inside the UE, which gives a special attention to this sector);
- Transportation;
- Telecommunications (not only important because allow people to communicate, but also because the telecommunications sector are essential to the functioning of the economy - the vulnerability of our lives is big now because of the privacy questions);
- Defense industry;

To conclude this first message, the criteria that define the protectionist politics at european level, give more importance to the economistic side, withiout giving the right importance to the social and ambiental impacts of the proteccionism.

Porque não conseguem os economistas prever uma crise? (Parte I)

Fazer previsões sobre o futuro da nossa situação económica tornou-se uma grande incógnita

Desde 2008 que o cidadão comum tem recebido quantidades gigantescas de informação sobre a crise económica. Vimos pelos ecrãs dos nossos televisores, ouvimos pela rádio ou lemos em jornais ou pela internet inúmeras notícias e artigos com informação sobre a actual situação económica. A situação chegou ao ponto de o cidadão comum debater assuntos de teor económico como um expert no assunto. Mas o mais curioso é que o cidadão comum parece que conseguiu prever que a crise financeira de 2008 inicaida nos EUA iria afectar seriamente a Europa e que esta não iria acabar em 2009 como muitos economistas afirmaram.
Então, porque os economistas, analistas e estudiosos reagiram de forma tão impotente e estupefacta perante o que se passou na economia mundial nos últimos anos?

Crash de 1929 vs Crise de 2008

Muitas têm sido as comparações feitas entre o crash de 1929 e a crise de 2008. E de facto podemos encontrar no crash de 1929 um dos exemplos que justifica tamanha surpresa dos economistas face ao desenrolar dos acontecimentos na economia internacional nos últimos anos: o excesso de confiança no sistema económico que os levou a acreditar que a economia não poderia passar por uma crise semelhante ao crash de 1929.
O que está na base do que se passou com a economia mundial recentemente, é a consequência dos ciclos económicos e toda a perplexidade e impotência com que os economistas reagiram, mostra o pouco avanço que foi feito pelos cientistas económicos na área da análise, previsão e explicação dos ciclos económicos. E quando os economistas não conseguem ter esta visão de longo-prazo que englobe fases de expansão e declínio, está a falhar o que é mais importante na ciência económica: visão global, pensamento estratégico e capacidade de actuação antecipada e prevenção.
Isto pode chegar a parecer ridículo mas é a verdade. A governação das nossas sociedades centra-se quase exclusivamente na previsão de curto-prazo e muitas vezes apenas se governa como reacção aos fenómenos que acabaram de ocorrer, sem conseguir antecipar qualquer situação por mais iminente que se encontre de ocorrer.
De facto, o excesso de confiança e a crença de que a economia mundial estava "protegida" contra quaisquer crises de carácter devastador, foram os motivos da negligência face aos indicadores, tanto nos anos 20 do século passado, como na primeira década deste século.
Há no entanto obviamente, bastantes diferenças no mundo entre 1929 e 2008. E infelizmente essas diferenças fazem com que a actual crise tenha consequências ainda mais devastadoras e mais duradouras do que a de 1929, ainda para mais pelo facto de que, ao contrário do que até muitos economistas afirmaram, o mundo sofreu duas crises distintas, desde 2008.

Crise de 2008 e crise de 2010: crises financeiras vs crises económicas

Outro factor que explica a impotência de muitos economistas e decisores políticos em reagir a esta crise, reside no facto de na verdade ter ocorrido não uma mas duas crises. Sim é verdade: em 2008 o mundo foi brutalmente atingido por uma crise financeira, esta unicamente causada pela mão do Homem, e provocada pelas consequências da sua obra. Mas em 2010 o mundo sofreu outra crise: desta vez uma crise económica, fruto da evolução do planeta e do próprio ciclo da natureza e que não é fruto da mão do Homem.
Não se devem portanto confundir crises financeiras com crises económicas, se bem que as primeiras podem ajudar a implosão das segundas, como de facto aconteceu em 2010.
Uma crise financeira, sendo única e exclusivamente consequência da acção do Homem, pode ser evitada ou pelo menos pode ver os seus efeitos atenuados. No entanto uma crise económica faz parte das condições do planeta e a Humanidade tem que aprender a viver com ela.
Se analisarmos a História da sociedade humana é fácil constatar que a um período de crescimento e expansão da actividade e aumento da riqueza produzida se seguiu um período de crise com contracção da actividade, aumento do desemprego e redução do rendimento dos agregados económicos. E a frequência com que estes ciclos mudam tem até alguma regularidade, mesmo tendo em conta os factores extraordinários que podem ocorrer: e nestes factores extraordinários encontram-se as acções provocadas pela mão do Homem, como as crises financeiras.


É possível concluir pela História económica que o Homem ao "complexificar" a ciência económica, está a torná-la indomável e algo difícil de analisar e de estudar o seu padrão, agindo preventivamente.
Solução? Aquilo que tem sido apresentado e defendido por vários pensadores: o regresso às origens.