How the world would have voted in the US presidential election

The Economist's Global Electoral College.

What's bigger than a landslide?

Cosmopolitan Democracy, the movie

It's 90 minutes long, but this video from a conference on cosmopolitan democracy is worth the time. As a result, I've ordered two books by Daniele Archibugi, The Global Commonwealth of Citizens: Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy, and Cosmopolitan Democracy: An Agenda for a New World Order.

You can watch the video here.

I learned that cosmopolitan democracy is much bigger in Europe (which makes sense), the world may love Obama, the first cosmopolitan president, even more than the US does, and Keynes had a idea in the 1940's for an international currency clearing house that is fascinating. Another well-made point is that United States has been a force in opposition to authoritarianism around the world, a fact the world appreciates, but Bush screwed everything up. Hopefully we'll get back on track.

Btw, the site that hosts the vid, globaldemo.org, will be getting more of my attention soon.

"Global New Deal"

I'm looking forward to the G-20 meeting this April. Gordon Brown is calling for a "global New Deal" to ameliorate the global economic slowdown, and a reform of the international financial system. Other Euro leaders concur. 

Read the article here.

Expanding the EU, sort of

This is from last summer's Economist. If economics is driving integration, this development might accelerate the process. Does money trump culture? 

Club Med http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11707183

The Med's Moment Comes http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11703160

The view from Club Med http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11735453

Sarko's Southern Dream http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11751636

I like the idea of wedding the know-how and experience of an aging EU with the labor and energy of a youthful northern Africa and Middle East. I haven't seen anything new on this idea since July's Economist.

Rereading Appiah, #2

From page xv of Cosmopolitanism, (quoted from Christoph Martin Wieland)

Cosmopolitans... regard all the peoples of the earth as so many branches of a single family, and the universe as a state, of which they, with innumerable other rational beings, are citizens, promoting together under the general laws of nature the perfection of the whole, while each in his own fashion is busy about his own well-being.

The perfection of the whole. I think we've moved slightly in that direction, but only inches compared to the miles that are necessary. I'm curious as to the mechanisms necessary to continue this promotion of perfection of the whole. It's something I intend to pursue.

Rereading Appiah, #1

From page xiii of Cosmopolitanism,

The challenge, then, is to take minds and hearts formed over the long millennia of living in local troops and equip them with ideas and institutions that will allow us to live together as the global tribe we have become.

Appiah meets evolutionary psychology. How long until a critical mass of people realize we have become a global tribe?

The Beginning

For the first time in my life, I worked hard on for a political candidate... and it was all good.

Here's hoping Barack Hussein Obama, President-elect of the United States, will be the first one president world I want him to be. I wish him all the best.

Now that all the work and hullabaloo is over, I promise to get back to blogging.

Financial crisis may lead to financial integration

Bretton Woods was an momentous step in human integration that 99% of the world's population knows nothing about. That was 60 years ago. It's time in our increasingly integrated world to take another step. I don't know if there is a specific "engine of history". It's been argued that religion, culture, and our human nature are candidates, but I know that economics is important in driving history. What European leaders are contemplating (read the Economist article here) should be the guide for the world. They meet with Bush today, and it is likely that the current administration will balk. But the day will come, hopefully sooner than later.

Culture wars in Gaza

Let Islamist's govern. I've heard that idea before. Islamists are more appealing as opponents to regimes than leaders of regimes. The bloom quickly is off the rose once the Islamist leadership can't run an economy while more worried about head scarves. Of course, I wonder when the United States will tire of it's nutty Republican Party. Perhaps that proves the idea wrong. 

Here's the link to Matt Yglesias' take, Culture War in Garza, and here is the link to the original NYT article, Watching 'Friends' In Gaza: A Culture Clash. 

Nationalism, Clash of Civilizations, and One World

One problem with Huntinton's Clash of Civilizations is the divisions within the so called civilizations. Matt Yglesias comments on an article about Asian nationalisms.  Read Yglesias' short take here in, Nationalism in Asia, or, read the original in the Washington Post, So Far, It Just Isn't Looking Like Asia's Century.

Ditto Matthew Yglesias

Another defense of Obama's cosmopolitanism. Read here. 

"Cosmopolitan" as a pejorative

Giuliani, the New Yorker's New Yorker, derides Obama's cosmopolitanism.

Andrew Sullivan of the Atlantic won't forget it (read here). Neither will I.

Appiah on Bloggingheads

Wow, Appiah is on bloggingheads.com. Let's hope we see more of him.

Watch it here. http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/13246?in=00:29:38&out=00:35:18.6

"This Isn't the Return of History"

Fareed Zakaria believes Russia's bullying in Georgia is a strategic blunder, not a return to the bad old days. 

Economic growth is producing new centers of influence. And that's leading to greater national pride, confidence and assertiveness. But there are also powerful new countervailing forces—yes, of globalization and integration—that are working to mitigate nationalism and unilateralism.

Read it here in, This Isn't the Return of History

Joe Biden, Universalist

Is Biden a cosmopolitan? He's definitely a universalist according to this quote from the Bork hearings. Read this from Oliver Willis.

Reality filtered.

While she gave a nod toward Pakistan's barely rekindled democracy, Condoleezza Rice was throwing some bon mots of support to Musharraf today. This administration sees everything through the filter of the imagined existential threat of Islamic extremism. Never mind human rights or democratization, damn it, Musharaf was on our side against the terrorists. You know, the ones hiding out in the badlands of his NW Pakistan. 

I have always thought that Pakistan was by far more potentially dangerous than Iraq, Iran, or Afghanistan. But why are we always afraid of the messiness of heading toward liberalism? Let's throw some real weight, transparently, in support of that. 

How about a little more praise for democracy in this instance, and a little less for the opportunistic authoritarian?

I believe democracy is a universal value. This administration has poured tons of ink into speeches and declarations in support of democracy. How about some real action? Keep moving forward, inch by inch.

How tolerant?

Appiah, in Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers (Issues of Our Time), talks about universality with differences. In his view, there can be universals along with local differences. How far does that go? Are there some practices and behaviors that it is acceptable to be intolerant of? Honor killing? Too much fossil fuel consumption? This also gets into individual rights, but I'll deal with that separately. Are there universal values? Appiah says that it's more important to agree on the "what" of values, and less on the "why". I think that's an acceptable stage in the evolution of common values. Here's an interesting passage on tolerance.

Some relativists confuse two different senses in which judgments can be subjective. The view that moral judgments express desires means that they are, in one sense, subjective. Which judgments you will agree to depends on what desires you have, which is a feature of you. But, in this sense, factual judgments are subjective also. Which ones you will accept depends on what beliefs you have, which is similarly a feature of you. From the fact that beliefs are subjective in this way, therefore, it does not follow that they are subjective in the sense that you are entitled to make any judgments you like. Indeed, to go from the first claim to the second is to make one of the moves from "is" to "ought" that furrowed Hume's brow. It's to commit the naturalistic fallacy. So even on the Positivist view there is no route from the subjectivity of value judgments to a defense of toleration. Toleration is just another value.

Not every cultural practice is acceptable in light of human rights. Tolerating all differences on cultural grounds is not cosmopolitanism. This gets into centuries-old, deep philosophical controversies, but I'll keep working on it. It intersects individual rights which I'll get into later. 

"Universal" health care

Our increasingly integrated world is witness to the (not always) free flow of ideas, goods, people, and now health care. Increased transparency, disparity in costs, and the compelling need of health care makes this development inevitable. One of the concerns about free trade of goods and services has been falling wages in advanced industrial countries. At the same time, however, wages should rise in developing countries. It's going to take awhile to balance the world economic system out. I think one of the important roles left to the nation-state is to make this transition occur smoothly. Furthermore, will better medical service reach the rest of  the populace in medical tourist locations, like Thailand or India? On net, I think this is a positive development. It's definitely in the One World direction. Optimistically, this may push reform on both sides; rich countries will have to reform their costly systems, and people in developing countries will demand better health delivery when they see what top flight care looks like. I might be too pollyanna-ish. Of course, what if giant first world health care providers start buying up foreign providers? We'll see.

From the Economist, Operating profit.

"But costs have long been much higher in America than in poor countries, so this alone does not explain the new exodus. Two other factors are now at work. One is that the quality at the best hospitals in Asia and Latin America is now at least as good as it is at many hospitals in rich countries. The second, more worrying, factor is that America’s already imperfect insurance safety net is fraying."

Human contact and universal generosity

Does this apply to glad-handers and close talkers? Anyway, we should probably be more generous with our pats on the back.

From the Economist, A touch of generosity

"PEOPLE touch each other a lot, even strangers. We shake hands, slap backs, kiss and caress. Such behaviour can increase co-operation, which is good from an evolutionary point of view. It has even been shown that waitresses who touch patrons tend to be tipped more generously."

The human universals of exultation and defeat

It's true. You don't think about it, you instinctually jump up and thrust your fists skyward. It just happens.

From the Economist, Victory is mine.

"WHETHER you are a gorilla, a four-year-old child, a politician or an Olympic athlete, the signs of victory are obvious for all to see: the chest inflates, the head is thrown back and the victor displays a strutting and confident air. Shame at being defeated is equally recognisable: the head bows, and sometimes the shoulders slump and the chest narrows too..."