quantumspirit said:
Do you have fears of the hard-right Bush administration, of how this would affect your country? Less security and privacy, that Bush and his hacks would find a way to seek economic leverage over your country?
Yes. As I live in the Netherlands, the government unfortunately chose to ignore the general opinion that we, as a country, should not support the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. I have no idea why, because popular opinion was against it, with Germany and France standing up to the US and taking the UN security councel with them (basically), and with the economy collapsing, it would be fairly safe to have sent over a pollite 'thanks, but no thanks.' Holland hasn't been big on the international stage since the 17th century, and it's way too small for that, so why even bother?
Has it already affected affairs where you live?
Well, not in everyday life, but since Bush's support rate is about 15% over here (and that was before the 2004 elections), you can imagine the debate it sparks. You should hear the jokes my university professors make.
I think it signals something deeper, though, and I notice that politics are polarising over here as well - though less on a religious discours.
I know that the EU constitution was defeated, but were there a lot of negative ads against it?
No, but that was just about exactly the problem. First, the government decided to hold an election about a topic that was far too complicated to be understood by reading the flyers they distributed. Second, the administration decided to hold these elections at a time when less than half of the population supported their policies. Third, they went on a campaign that was so vehemently pro-constitution that the only way to outdo it would be to install a dictatorship. Fourth, they refused to grant the 'no'-camp more subsidies, meaning that their budget was about a hundred times smaller.
So in short, people were asked to vote yes on something they didn't understand by people they didn't like after a blatantly biased and impossibly one-sided campaign. No wonder everyone voted against it.
So did I, because I think The Netherlands should stand up for itself more and the constitution didn't grant proportional rights up to what I considered a reasonable degree. I also thought the constitution was weak on animal rights. I liked the legal aspect, but I didn't want to see my country's reputation as the underdog forever cemented by some obscure, illegible treaty.
Pfwew. Rant over.
Does our corporate elite have as much control over your media as it does ours
The major media company over here is Endemol, which is run mostly by John de Mol, who is impossibly rich. Unlike, say, Rupert Murdoch, he doesn't bother with politics (though I imagine that he has sufficient tax incentives to vote fairly right-wing). In fact, all he does is make shows that are insulting because of their vulgarity and stupidity (he is, after all, the guy who gave the world 'Big Brother') and not their political bias. Pretty much the same goes for every other commercial channel. The State-owned channels are neutral in that they give every political party some time to air commercials. There are some christian, catholic, socialist or muslim channels (a relic from the 1950's), but they, too, get equal airtime.
Hope that answers your questions.
Guantanomo-like base in the Tir-border area? At any given time there are about a dozen U.S. military personnel in Paraguay, all stationed here in the Asuncion Embassy. The rumor about a US military base in the Chaco is years old, and about as accurate as the one about Francisco Lopez´s buried gold.
