crookedtimber.org Open in urlscan Pro
173.236.244.71  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

GET https://crookedtimber.org/

<form method="get" class="search_form" action="https://crookedtimber.org/">
  <p>
    <input class="text_input" type="text" value="To search, type and hit enter" name="s" id="s" onfocus="if (this.value == 'To search, type and hit enter') {this.value = '';}"
      onblur="if (this.value == '') {this.value = 'To search, type and hit enter';}">
    <input type="hidden" id="searchsubmit" value="Search">
  </p>
</form>

Text Content

 * Home
 * Comments policy
 * Subscribe




THANKS TO 250 DAYS #NOGOV, SURREALISM FLOURISHES IN BELGIUM

by Ingrid Robeyns on February 18, 2011


Congratulations to Belgium, which holds since midnight the world record cabinet
formation after the elections now exactly 250 days ago. Being the founders of
surrealism, the Belgian people decided to celebrate this with people’s parties
in open air, especially a big one Gent. The poster says ‘steun onze helden’,
that is, ‘support our hero’s’, but this should be interpreted as ironically as
possible. The people organising and attending these parties are fed up with the
Belgian politicians who are unable (or unwilling?) to form a coalition and
govern the country. If you want to see another piece of Belgian surrealism,
watch the Flemish comedian Geert Hoste giving an interview to CNN in which he
comments on the situation and the festivities.


It’s been absolutely impossible to keep up with all the twists and turns in the
many different stages of the many attempts to form a government, but basically
the upshot is that the biggest francophone party (the PS, a socialist party), is
diametrically opposed to the biggest Flemish party (NVA, a democratic
flemish-nationalist party). They are diametrically opposed in ideology (NVA is
not only a nationalist, but also a conservative party), ideas on how to reform
(or not reform) the country, and in political culture too.

On twitter, the key word to follow commentaries on the Belgian political
situation has become #nogov, and it’s interesting to follow the comments by
Belgian politicians and political scientists. But since the Belgian professors
are less likely to use surrealism in their statements, it’s also become quite
depressing to read their commentaries: many of them are increasingly desperate
about how the hell we are going to escape this mess. Plenty of ideas around, but
none of them that has, so far, been able to attract the approval of a political
majority.


SHARE THIS:

 * 
 * Tweet
 * 

{ 39 comments }

1

x. trapnel 02.18.11 at 10:14 am

I take it that you don’t find the silver-lining interpretation–hey, if it’s been
250 days without a government, maybe even the worst-case scenario (dissolution)
isn’t that bad?–particularly comforting?

2

John Quiggin 02.18.11 at 10:49 am

Two diametrically opposed parties is not, in itself, a problem; in fact, it’s
more or less the norm. So the big question is why the PS can’t ally with a
Flemish left party, or, less appealingly with a Francophone
conservative/nationalist party. Is there some party that is considered “out of
bounds”, like Sinn Fein or Die Linke, thereby making a majority coalition
impossible?

3

Ingrid Robeyns 02.18.11 at 11:03 am

John, NVA is the biggest party in the country, and the party demanding the most
radical reforms of the structures of the state. I don’t think they are
considered ‘out of bounds’. They stand for a political program that many people
don’t like (very rationalistic, and with much weaker financial solidarity
between the different geographical parts of the country), but they are not
undemocratic. So to ignore them would not solve anything.

There is an unwritten rule in Belgium that each coalition must consist of
parties of the two big linguistic groups. Having only a coalition of francophone
parties could, I think, nummericlaly not led to majority,and having only a
coalition of only flemish parties would be seen as a great insult (perhaps even
provocation) to the francophone people (and rightly so, in my view).

The other theoretical alternative, for PS to form a coalition with leftist
parties in Flanders, doesn’t get a majority either. The majority of the Flemish
voters vote right-wing (or center-right).

All parties by now agree that some structural reform of the country is needed,
so they are all committed to that vague general goal: but the disagreements are
about how to fill in this vague general commitment to a state reform.

4

mealworm 02.18.11 at 11:08 am

Why can’t NVA form a coalition with Francophone right-wing parties?

5

vasi 02.18.11 at 1:55 pm

@John, the party outside the cordon sanitaire is Vlaams Belang, which apparently
wants to deport all the immigrants or some such. Lovely.

@Ingrid, is there some reason a centre-right coalition wouldn’t work? NVA + both
Flemish and Wallonian Christian Democrats + Mouvement Réformateur + Flemish
Liberals would seem to make a majority. Would the Wallonian parties refuse to
support the NVA?

6

Randy McDonald 02.18.11 at 2:06 pm

If it’s impossible to form a Belgian national government, why bother keeping
Belgium around?

7

Steve LaBonne 02.18.11 at 2:08 pm

> If it’s impossible to form a Belgian national government, why bother keeping
> Belgium around?

As long as they keep the beer coming I don’t care what they call the successor
states it comes from. ;)

8

Randy McDonald 02.18.11 at 2:27 pm

Walloon waffles is alliterative, too!

But seriously. If the Belgian political scene has become so profoundly divided
on ethnolinguistic lines that it’s impossible to form a viable national
government, and the main things keeping the country together are the problems
associated with coming apart as opposed to any positive sentiment …

9

salazar 02.18.11 at 3:00 pm

@6: If you split Belgium, who gets to keep Brussels?

10

BJN 02.18.11 at 3:29 pm

@9
The Israelis of course.

11

piglet 02.18.11 at 4:12 pm

> The people organising and attending these parties are fed up with the Belgian
> politicians who are unable (or unwilling?) to form a coalition and govern the
> country.
> 
> Is that the reason for them being fed up, that they are not “governing the
> country”? Is it not possible that people might like it that way?

12

Hektor Bim 02.18.11 at 5:19 pm

I think the reason people keep Belgium around is that they fear the consequences
of the breakup. The big prize is Brussels, geographically within Flanders but
culturally largely Francophone (among its Belgian citizens).

Neither party wants to give up Brussels, and the stronger party (Flanders both
demographically and financially) wants to keep hold of Brussels. The weaker
party is more invested in the state of Belgium for historical and current
balance-of-transfer reasons, so it doesn’t want to split.

13

roac 02.18.11 at 5:41 pm

Assuming a split, is there measurable sentiment in either of the presumptive
rump states in favor of enosis with France/the Netherlands?

14

salazar 02.18.11 at 7:00 pm

@13: I haven’t heard of Flanders re-uniting with the Netherlands (keep in mind
the split from the Netherlands is what created Belgium in the first place). But
there’s minority sentiment in the Walloon lands for union with France. How
strong that “rattachiste” movement is, I can’t tell.

15

roac 02.18.11 at 7:05 pm

Thanks.

My understanding is that the 1830 revolution was largely about religion (the
border between Belgium and the Netherlands pretty much marking the limit of what
the Duke of Parma was able to take back from the United Provinces). Am I wrong?
and if I’m right, is the religious issue still important?

16

sean 02.18.11 at 7:33 pm

@Ingrid, is there some reason a centre-right coalition wouldn’t work? NVA +
both Flemish and Wallonian Christian Democrats + Mouvement Réformateur +
Flemish Liberals would seem to make a majority. Would the Wallonian parties
refuse to support the NVA?

a cross-linguistic group won’t work, because one of the NVA’s basic demand is
some form of devolution/ division, on the premise that (these days, not always
historically) the Flemish part of the country is a net payer of taxes and the
Francophone part a net consumer. and no politician, no matter how right wing –
especially a right wing one – is going to enter into a coalition that
necessarily involves higher taxes and lower spending for their own electorate.

the PS, being notionally leftist, and thus willing to contemplate unpleasant
realities, is willing to discuss with the NVA, but the basic premise of the
Flemish nationalists – that they’d rather be Netherlanders, thank you very much
(i’ll add here that there’s a significant minority of Netherlands citizens
living in northern Belgium, because the costs are lower and the commute to work
in the populous southern NL cities is easier) – is anathema to any Francophone
politician, because, well, the Francophone part of the country can only lose by
any devolution or partition.

and no deal can be done, or unilateral split done, until the status of
Brussels-Hal-Vilvooorde can be sorted (they’re Fraconphone – and
internationalist/ EU – districts in the middle of the Flemish part). it’s a bit
hard for the Flemish nationalists to unilaterally secede when they have the de
facto EU capital in their territory, but there’s absolutely no benefit to them
to moderate their demands; thus the stalemate persists.

17

praisegod barebones 02.18.11 at 8:25 pm

Clearly making a bid for the H.D.Thoreau Good Government Prize

18

chris 02.18.11 at 8:38 pm

There is an unwritten rule in Belgium that each coalition must consist of
parties of the two big linguistic groups.

Aren’t there any parties that have substantial support in both linguistic
groups? That seems rather odd.

19

Norwegian Guy 02.18.11 at 9:05 pm

My understanding is that the 1830 revolution was largely about religion (the
border between Belgium and the Netherlands pretty much marking the limit of what
the Duke of Parma was able to take back from the United Provinces). Am I wrong?
and if I’m right, is the religious issue still important?

Could it be that a shared Catholicism was one of the things that kept Belgium
together? 1830 was before nationalism became really important, and religion was
still a primary concern. But after society became more secularised, religion is
no longer able to trump the ethnolinguistic divisions.

20

Andrew Edwards 02.18.11 at 10:26 pm

My immediate reaction to that poster was “this is EXACTLY how Canadians would
react too”.

I wonder if there is something about binational countries and being willing to
take political humour just a shade too seriously…

http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2000/11/16/bc_dorisday001116.html

21

Colin Reid 02.18.11 at 10:35 pm

@15: The Catholic/Protestant border in the Low Countries lies much further north
– indeed, Catholics are now the largest religious group in the Netherlands. Few
Flemings want to become Dutch, but in terms of religion, culture and dialect,
they have a lot in common with the southern Dutch (less so with Hollanders and
people in the eastern Netherlands).

22

piglet 02.18.11 at 11:36 pm

“If you split Belgium, who gets to keep Brussels?”

this crisis may require an American solution: declare Brussels a Federal
European enclave. Let’s be generous though and give them a voting member in the
EU Parliament.

23

Myles 02.19.11 at 1:58 am

I wonder if there is something about binational countries and being willing to
take political humour just a shade too seriously…

As a Canadian, I say: you can never take political humour too far. Canadian
politics needs more harmless random surrealism. Heck, it’s more interesting than
whatever the Canadian government is doing right now.

24

tomslee 02.19.11 at 2:19 am

@Myles. Heck, it’s NOT more interesting than whatever the Canadian government
is doing right now. (http://bcblue.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/oda-doc.jpg)

25

Chaz 02.19.11 at 2:27 am

If the Flemish want to secede they should stop crying and get on with it
already. The question of what to do with Brussels could be easily answered by
having a referendum in Brussels. I am guessing they would choose Wallonia, which
means the Flemish nationalists really have no excuse for being so demanding.
There is not very much Flanders in between the borders of Brussels and Wallonia.
Brussels could function as an exclave perfectly well. Or, if the Flemish
nationalists want to insist on perfectly contiguous states anyway, then the
solution is simple: give the bit of land between Brussels and Wallonia over to
Wallonia. There are a hell of a lot less Dutch speakers in that bit of land (and
Brussels too) than there are French speakers in Brussels.

You say that no one would ever make a Flemish-only coalition, because it would
offend and disenfranchise the Walloons. It seems to me that a party which has
based its whole existence on resentment of Walloons would not be bothered by
that; in fact it seems like a Flemish-only government is the only way they could
get their demands. But I guess maybe the leftist Flemish parties won’t play
ball? If the NVA are basically unwilling to work with anyone, then it seems like
the only answer is a broad coalition of the Flemish left plus Walloon parties
from both the left and the right. Which I guess explains all the arguing.

26

piglet 02.19.11 at 2:34 am

“take political humour just a shade too seriously”

I don’t know what that would mean. Btw it’s Carnival time! Is Carnival big in
Belgium? You’d think it is since it’s Catholic. A world record in anarchy sounds
like a heaven-sent Carnival theme. And I really like the Volksfeest poster. It
doesn’t look to me like the sky is falling in Gallia Belgica.

27

Myles 02.19.11 at 3:00 am

@Myles. Heck, it’s NOT more interesting than whatever the Canadian government
is doing right now. (http://bcblue.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/oda-doc.jpg)

I haven’t been following l’affaire Oda too closely, but this seems more pathetic
and sad than anything else. Certainly it is a rather poor competitor to
Berlusconi.

Where the hell do the (Cdn.) Tories find these losers? I wish if they are going
to do scandal, at least do scandal, instead of this numbing tedium. I want to
see Ministers of Finance caught on the same yacht as shady Russian oligarchs,
Foreign Ministers caught in the lap of Moroccan exotic dancers, Defence
Ministers found entertaining himself by gratuitously firing bazookas up in the
forests by his cabin, Prime Ministers choking on pretzels and calling people
bigots, Heritage Ministers disbursing arts funding to favoured pornography
studios, Bilingualism Ministers caught on the mic mercilessly stereotyping
Quebeckers and Newfies, International Trade Ministers running rum into Saudi
Arabia, and if they are going to confine themselves to lying, at least lie with
flair; instead of numbing denials, say that you were “economical with the
actualité.”

Bev Oda, I have seen scandalous politicians, I knew scandalous politicians,
scandalous politicians were constant amusement for me. Bev Oda, you’re no
scandalous politician.

28

jacob 02.19.11 at 5:03 am

Well, there was Maxime Bernier and his crime moll girlfriend, but, yes, compared
to Burlusconi, that’s small potatoes.

29

Myles 02.19.11 at 5:35 am

Is there a political version of Wife Swap? You know, Berlusconi can get a
two-week respite from Italian newspapers, while Stephen Harper can work on his
tan for a bit. Or to be truer to the plot, Berlusconi can swap with Sarkozy, so
he gets to deal with his compatriot Carla Bruni for two weeks, while Sarkozy
could merrily carouse with various exotic dancers for a bit; entirely up his
alley.

I would definitely watch that. The Saudis would be disqualified, of course,
given that with up to four wives they can hardly be expected to play by the
rules. I seriously think that Berlusconi-in-Ottawa has genuine surrealist
artistic value; someone could write a bad opera about it. And while Harper is
enjoying his vacation, he can get a half-decent suit made, and find someone to
give him a half-good haircut.

Given how unlikeable Harper basically is, the least he can do, if he can’t get
the country to laugh with him, is to get the country to laugh at him.

30

Ingrid Robeyns 02.19.11 at 6:59 pm

Chris @18: it may seem odd from a comparative international perspective, but the
answer is ‘no, there are no such parties’, because all parties have either an
entirely francophone identity, or an entire Dutch-speaking identity. Citizens
vote on parties of their own ‘voting district’, and those are divided (roughly)
along linguistic lines (there are tiny exceptions, e.g. their is one francophone
member of the Flemish Parliament). So political parties and political
representation more generally are entirely ordered according to linguistic
divides, which means that there does indeed not exist any party that has the
support by voters of all linguistic groups.

31

Randy McDonald 02.20.11 at 12:08 am

@Ingrid: This is where Canada’s quite different from Belgium, not only because
of institutions which cut across provincial and ethnic boundaries but because of
the relatively blurred nature of the boundaries and the bonds between the two
solitudes. Half of English Canadians belong to the Roman Catholic confession
like the near-totality of French Canadians, the two major language groups don’t
fit neatly into two hermetically sealed political divisions (though much more
than a century ago), the Liberals and Conservatives depend heavily on support
from Francophones, “English Canada” isn’t a single monolithic political entity,
neither English Canada nor Quebec is a clear economic loser, etc.

On a separate note, why do Flemish nationalists want to keep Brussels as their
capital? Apart from the apart lack of interest in the Bruxellois in being
citizens of a non, non-Francophile, Flemish state, wouldn’t the incorporation of
a large restive language minority risk creating independent Flanders a sort of
mini-Belgium still caught up with language struggles?

32

Myles 02.20.11 at 12:10 am

On a separate note, why do Flemish nationalists want to keep Brussels as their
capital?

That’s simple: money.

33

Randy McDonald 02.20.11 at 2:13 am

So, because of money and history, Flemish nationalists would like to keep the
language conflicts going, just in a more localized form. Grand.

34

hix 02.20.11 at 2:42 am

To reinforce myles point, the difference is extreme, just look at the Eurostat
regional gdp map.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/mapToolClosed.do;jsessionid=9ea7974b30e8578759e6762942158dd988aecaddf246.e34SbxiOchiKc40LbNmLahiKb3uQe0?tab=map&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tgs00006&toolbox=types#

Brussels 221, the next richest region 136.

35

Myles 02.20.11 at 4:37 am

It’s the third richest NUTS-2 region, behind Inner London (No.1) and Luxembourg
(No.2).

However, Wallonia is poor enough that it is actually below the EU-27 average
(it’s 83% thereof), while Flanders is reasonably above that average (it’s
116.2%). Something’s pretty obviously wrong with the Walloon economy.

On the depressed economy front, I just found out that there’s a good-sized
Walloon diaspora in the (now also economically hopeless) state of Wisconsin.
Funny how that works.

36

Ingrid Robeyns 02.20.11 at 12:30 pm

You have to be careful when interpreting these regional GDPs. A lot of the
Belgian economy is concentrated in Brussels, especailly the headquarters of big
companies, which means that regional GDP goes up. But to the best of my
knowledge the population is much poorer than the population in Flanders (not
sure how it compares with the Walloon region). Most people working in Brussels
do not live in Brussels – and I think (but would like someone to confirm/rectify
this) that many more high-skilled workers in Brussels live in Flanders/are
flemish rather than that they are walloon people.
So if Belgium were to be split and Brussels were to become a separate nation,
either there would be huge flow of immigrant-workers (living in Flanders/Walloon
region but working in Brussels). But it may well be that some/many companies
would move from Brussels to Flanders, since it is generally perceived as having
a much more company& innovation-friendly policy, and more skilled workers, than
the Walloon region.
So I think the ‘money’ argument doesn’t get us very far. My hunch is that the
real reasons are a mixture of history and nationalism: Brussels was really
regarded as part of Flanders until not that many decades ago, and it seems that
most people (across the globe, really) don’t like to give up territory. As we
know from history, giving up territory is seen by many nationalist as a huge
blow. So the Flemish nationalists attach great historical/ideological value to
Brussels.
Not that I personally support those sentiments. I’m with those who argue that if
it were to come to a split, the people from Brussels should decide themselves
what they want.

37

Alex 02.20.11 at 3:17 pm

Also, isn’t part of the problem that defining Brussels is itself problematic –
if you count the suburbs, it gets a lot more Flemish, and the question then
becomes one of where the city’s administrative boundary should be set.

38

Akshay 02.20.11 at 6:40 pm

Can we assume that people are negiotiating in good faith? Or is this part of a
verelendungsstrategy by the NVA to end Belgium with a whimper, if not now, then
at the next crisis foretold, in ten to fifteen years?

As for Brussels, IIRC it is by income the poorest region(!) in spite of the
artificially inflated GDP figures. White flight will gradually turn the inner
city into an immigrant ghetto. Unemployment is very high. The rich live in the
nominally Flemish (for now, ad. #BHV) suburbs surrounding the enclave. I don’t
know if&how current federal arrangements are causing this weird result for a
potentially wealthy city, but I have to wonder whether the Bruxellois themselves
won’t revolt at some point against them.

39

hix 02.20.11 at 6:45 pm

The Brussels nuts region has arround 1 million inhabitants just like the
surrounding nuts region. Since the surrounding region is quite rich, im not
buying that theres that much commuter distortion. At least its not nearly enough
to make the median Brussel inhabitantion poorer than the median in the Flamish
regions. Besides, control over the high paid jobs and corporate headoffices is
valuable independent of higher inequality or commuters from outside.

Comments on this entry are closed.


 * RECENT COMMENTS
   
   * Harry on The Left and THE LEFT: Responding to the crisis of soft
     neoliberalism
   * politicalfootball on The Left and THE LEFT: Responding to the crisis of
     soft neoliberalism
   * engels on The Left and THE LEFT: Responding to the crisis of soft
     neoliberalism
   * engels on The Left and THE LEFT: Responding to the crisis of soft
     neoliberalism
   * Chris Bertram on The Left and THE LEFT: Responding to the crisis of soft
     neoliberalism


 * SEARCH
   
   


 * ARCHIVES
   
   Archives Select Month June 2024  (2) May 2024  (13) April 2024  (18) March
   2024  (14) February 2024  (18) January 2024  (29) December 2023  (16)
   November 2023  (21) October 2023  (14) September 2023  (11) August 2023  (21)
   July 2023  (28) June 2023  (13) May 2023  (15) April 2023  (14) March 2023
    (19) February 2023  (12) January 2023  (20) December 2022  (20) November
   2022  (20) October 2022  (21) September 2022  (16) August 2022  (19) July
   2022  (14) June 2022  (13) May 2022  (15) April 2022  (12) March 2022  (15)
   February 2022  (11) January 2022  (17) December 2021  (14) November 2021
    (14) October 2021  (17) September 2021  (12) August 2021  (13) July 2021
    (12) June 2021  (11) May 2021  (24) April 2021  (17) March 2021  (18)
   February 2021  (17) January 2021  (18) December 2020  (25) November 2020
    (21) October 2020  (16) September 2020  (17) August 2020  (13) July 2020
    (16) June 2020  (15) May 2020  (25) April 2020  (18) March 2020  (18)
   February 2020  (15) January 2020  (13) December 2019  (13) November 2019
    (12) October 2019  (12) September 2019  (23) August 2019  (20) July 2019
    (10) June 2019  (16) May 2019  (17) April 2019  (17) March 2019  (20)
   February 2019  (13) January 2019  (31) December 2018  (19) November 2018
    (20) October 2018  (24) September 2018  (20) August 2018  (17) July 2018
    (29) June 2018  (26) May 2018  (26) April 2018  (19) March 2018  (40)
   February 2018  (27) January 2018  (30) December 2017  (23) November 2017
    (28) October 2017  (23) September 2017  (25) August 2017  (28) July 2017
    (24) June 2017  (24) May 2017  (42) April 2017  (32) March 2017  (27)
   February 2017  (24) January 2017  (36) December 2016  (28) November 2016
    (31) October 2016  (37) September 2016  (22) August 2016  (29) July 2016
    (27) June 2016  (41) May 2016  (33) April 2016  (34) March 2016  (36)
   February 2016  (40) January 2016  (39) December 2015  (37) November 2015
    (32) October 2015  (32) September 2015  (27) August 2015  (33) July 2015
    (38) June 2015  (35) May 2015  (54) April 2015  (35) March 2015  (35)
   February 2015  (43) January 2015  (40) December 2014  (29) November 2014
    (28) October 2014  (34) September 2014  (40) August 2014  (40) July 2014
    (38) June 2014  (28) May 2014  (41) April 2014  (44) March 2014  (34)
   February 2014  (30) January 2014  (31) December 2013  (38) November 2013
    (39) October 2013  (49) September 2013  (53) August 2013  (37) July 2013
    (47) June 2013  (41) May 2013  (43) April 2013  (47) March 2013  (39)
   February 2013  (33) January 2013  (35) December 2012  (31) November 2012
    (30) October 2012  (27) September 2012  (31) August 2012  (27) July 2012
    (38) June 2012  (47) May 2012  (37) April 2012  (34) March 2012  (44)
   February 2012  (39) January 2012  (43) December 2011  (53) November 2011
    (47) October 2011  (35) September 2011  (32) August 2011  (48) July 2011
    (33) June 2011  (37) May 2011  (58) April 2011  (35) March 2011  (62)
   February 2011  (50) January 2011  (48) December 2010  (53) November 2010
    (42) October 2010  (50) September 2010  (40) August 2010  (37) July 2010
    (41) June 2010  (59) May 2010  (57) April 2010  (47) March 2010  (53)
   February 2010  (42) January 2010  (40) December 2009  (46) November 2009
    (53) October 2009  (60) September 2009  (50) August 2009  (60) July 2009
    (57) June 2009  (68) May 2009  (54) April 2009  (80) March 2009  (86)
   February 2009  (50) January 2009  (76) December 2008  (64) November 2008
    (64) October 2008  (76) September 2008  (64) August 2008  (48) July 2008
    (77) June 2008  (59) May 2008  (60) April 2008  (86) March 2008  (75)
   February 2008  (74) January 2008  (63) December 2007  (78) November 2007
    (83) October 2007  (85) September 2007  (73) August 2007  (66) July 2007
    (80) June 2007  (73) May 2007  (80) April 2007  (66) March 2007  (85)
   February 2007  (81) January 2007  (73) December 2006  (73) November 2006
    (95) October 2006  (97) September 2006  (91) August 2006  (106) July 2006
    (102) June 2006  (110) May 2006  (110) April 2006  (106) March 2006  (118)
   February 2006  (99) January 2006  (94) December 2005  (74) November 2005
    (71) October 2005  (132) September 2005  (116) August 2005  (94) July 2005
    (117) June 2005  (105) May 2005  (112) April 2005  (161) March 2005  (125)
   February 2005  (108) January 2005  (104) December 2004  (120) November 2004
    (150) October 2004  (170) September 2004  (171) August 2004  (148) July 2004
    (157) June 2004  (145) May 2004  (152) April 2004  (172) March 2004  (168)
   February 2004  (173) January 2004  (157) December 2003  (172) November 2003
    (143) October 2003  (147) September 2003  (168) August 2003  (96) July 2003
    (102)


 * 

 * * RSS - Posts
   * RSS - Comments


 * PAGES
   
   * Comments policy

 * February 2011 M T W T F S S  123456 78910111213 14151617181920 21222324252627
   28  
   
   « Jan   Mar »


 * BOOK EVENTS
   
   * Charles Stross / Various
   * China Miéville / Iron Council
   * Chris Mooney / The Republican War on Science
   * Dani Rodrik / One Economics, Many Recipes
   * Doug Henwood / After the New Economy
   * George Scialabba/What Are Intellectuals Good For?
   * Joseph Carens / The Ethics of Immigration
   * Levitt & Dubner / Freakonomics
   * Sheri Berman / The Primacy of Politics
   * Susanna Clarke / Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
   * Yochai Benkler / The Wealth of Networks


 * CONTRIBUTORS
   
   * Belle Waring
   * Chris Armstrong
   * Chris Bertram
   * Eric Schliesser
   * Eszter Hargittai
   * Gina Schouten
   * Harry Brighouse
   * Henry Farrell
   * Ingrid Robeyns
   * John Holbo
   * John Quiggin
   * Kevin Munger
   * Macarena Marey
   * Maria Farrell
   * Miriam Ronzoni
   * Paul Segal
   * Serene Khader
   * Speranta Dumitru


 * FINE PRINT
   
   * Banner courtesy of David Krewinghaus
   * Comments Policy


 * LUMBER ROOM
   
   * 11D
   * 3 Quarks Daily
   * Ampersand
   * Atrios
   * Balkinization
   * Best of Both Worlds
   * Blood and Treasure
   * Brad DeLong
   * Cosma Shalizi
   * Daily Kos
   * Daily Nous
   * Daniel Drezner
   * Digby
   * Digressions and Impressions
   * Ed Felten
   * Edge of the American West
   * Fabians UK
   * Joshua Marshall
   * Juan Cole
   * Kevin Drum
   * Lawrence Solum
   * Lawyers, Guns and Money
   * Making Light
   * Marc Lynch
   * Marginal Revolution
   * Mark Kleiman
   * Maud Newton
   * Michael Froomkin
   * Miriam Burstein
   * Naked Capitalism
   * Political Theory Daily Review
   * Russell Arben Fox
   * Slugger O’Toole
   * Sociological Images
   * Steven Johnson
   * Suburban Guerilla
   * Talk Left
   * Tapped
   * The New Inquiry
   * Timothy Burke
   * Unfogged
   * Washington Monthly


 * OLD WOOD
   
   * Astra Taylor
   * Brian Weatherson
   * Corey Robin
   * Daniel Davies
   * Eric Rauchway
   * Jon Mandle
   * Kieran Healy
   * Micah Schwartzman
   * Michael Bérubé
   * Montagu Norman
   * Niamh Hardiman
   * Rich Yeselson
   * Scott McLemee
   * Ted Barlow
   * Tedra Osell
   * Tom Runnacles


 * META
   
   * Log in
   * Entries feed
   * Comments feed
   * WordPress.org


 * RECENT POSTS
   
   * The Left and THE LEFT: Responding to the crisis of soft neoliberalism
   * Sunday photoblogging: lunchtime
   * Avoiding people because of what you suspect they might think
   * Reports of a death exaggerated
   * Sunday photoblogging: Kilmainham Gaol


 * TAGS
   
   Add new tag Alan Greenspan autism Barack Obama Bill Clinton Biology books
   Bruce Bartlett capabilities capability approach Carl Menger China climate
   change conservatism Daniel Rodgers Ellen Schrecker Ethics Friedrich Hayek
   George Scialabba seminar George W. Bush Germany Seminar GOP internetpolitics
   John Kenneth Galbraith Jude Wanniski labor unions limitarianism Ludvig von
   Mises Ludwig von Mises Matt Yglesias Milton Friedman Netherlands Obama Oliver
   Wendell Holmes Paris Paul Krugman philosophy Ronald Reagan Schenck v. United
   States seminar on David Graeber's Debt sustainability tesco art banksy mural
   van der Bellen wealth worthwhile Canadian initiatives