Open Europe reports that new Greek elections now seem likely as a technocratic caretaker administration takes over after failure of any party to form a governing coalition. However, it is hard for anyone to imagine a sustainable coalition resulting from the new elections, either.

The debate among German leaders is whether to pull the subsidy plug now or later. If money is cut off for Greece now the nation's economy could collapse even before the new elections. One wonders whether in that event the present number two party, the public employee-dominated Syriza, will gain or lose. Their whole claim is that Germany is bluffing. How credible will that claim be once the Germans follow through?

Whenever the collapse occurs and Greece pulls out of the Eurozone--or is thrown out--the cost to the French government alone is estimated at between 50 billion Euros and 58 billion, not counting private banks' exposure. The official amount alone comes to about $1,200 US for each Frenchman. Germans and Dutch will be hit for comparable sums.

Then, after Greece, comes potential collapses in Spain, Italy, etc.

The big spending gravy train is in a slow rollover.

Photo Credit: Getty Images

It isn't The Hunger Games, but for a non-fiction book, Indivisible by James Robison and (Discovery Sr. Fellow) Jay Richards is doing very well. It's now number 24 on the Top 100 Bestsellers of the Year at Barnes & Noble. Our folks are right between John Grisham and Stephen King, make of that what you will.

The Open Europe organ of the European Union is a commendably fair daily account of news about Europe--from within Europe itself. Today brings the news I haven't seen much elsewhere that a possible (or is it probable) collapse of the Greek government's agreements on austerity measures already is being discounted by European central banks.

Reports an Open Europe headline, "Belgian and Irish Central Bank Governors suggest a Greek exit would be manageable".

Euro finance ministers were meeting today as conflicting stories come out of Greece. One is that polls show support for staying in Europe and using the Euro. But other polls show no appetite at all for sacrifice. The way this commonly is represented is, "We stay in, the Germans pay our bills." That doesn't sound so good to, say, the Germans.

Continues Open Europe, "Luc Coene, Governor of the Central Bank of Belgium, said in an interview with the FT (Financial Times) that, 'I guess an amicable divorce [between Greece and the eurozone] would be possible, but I would still regret it.' Patrick Honohan, Irish Central Bank Governor, told a conference in Estonia at the weekend, 'Things can happen that are not imagined in the treaties...Technically, [a Greek exit] can be managed...It is not necessarily fatal, but it is not attractive.'"

Open Europe also notes that "Der Spiegel reported over the weekend that, according to a leaked document from the German Finance Ministry, even if Greece leaves the euro, it will still require financial support and as an EU member, this could be provided by all EU member states. However, today's front-page of the magazine still calls for Greece to leave the euro." (My added emphasis.)

Meanwhile, in Britain, the Cameron government's Foreign Secretary William Hague says this would not be a timely occasion for a vote on whether the UK should reduce its ties to the EU. I'd say he's got that right!

The good news today is that unemployment has dropped from 8.2 percent to 8.1 percent, entirely because so many workers are dropping out of the job market and no longer are listed as "looking for work." These are "discouraged workers."

When all of us lose our jobs and finally give up hope of finding new ones America will reach zero unemployment and zero employment at the same time. Then President Obama can boast that we have finally achieved a balanced economy.

Liberal Seattlites, which is to say nearly all the politicos and media, are eager to deplore the anarchists who trashed the downtown on May Day, but they are just as eager to assert their sympathy for the concerns of the Occupy protestors. The anarchists, they declare, are detracting from the reform appeal of the Occupy crowd. The trouble is, those fine Occupy folk don't necessarily see it that way.

A Seattle Times editorial this morning preached to the Occupiers, "The reminder for the legitimate marchers is to never forget their efforts are ripe for exploitation by costumed poseurs from a graphic novel" (the anarchists). The Times and other writers want the Occupy movement to focus on "educational" efforts to show how the economy was damaged and the Great Recession caused by privileged elites (banks and the "One Percent," I guess). "Help citizens understand what happened and how it can be corrected," proposes the Times. "Next time the crowd could be 10 times larger. And the feckless punks even more irrelevant."

Maybe the Occupy people could gather in city parks to read out loud past Seattle Times editorials on the roots of the recession.

You would think that the term"Occupy" meant "hold peaceful demonstrations," instead of, well, occupy public buildings and spaces and shut down normal business activities. Of course, that is not how the Occupy movement has been defined since its beginning, how it broke the law last fall and set up camps at Westlake Mall and the Seattle Community College campus, and why it is not disposed to disown the anarchists and bar them from its ranks. Indeed, last year, the Occupy movement really was "10 times larger", but the "feckless punks" were just as "relevant" then.

Occupy members themselves are refreshingly unencumbered by the the bourgeois illusions of the media and political left. For example, deep in The Times' own news story today on the riot aftermath, we learn that "Ian Finkenbinder, an Occupy Seattle member who helped organize the May Day protests" says "he doesn't 'support or condemn' the property destruction and violence." (My emphasis.) Finkenbinder, a fellow with a dazzling pink Mohawk, displayed in a front page Times photo, said "he wasn't surprised by the turn of events, given the public anger with the government and corporate America. 'When you have the inequality we see today, there will be a few broken window,' he said."

So, maybe Mr. Finkenbinder is not exactly the best instructor to conduct a course in economics.

If progressives do want such an educational course they might start by presenting the public with more than one point of view on what really did cause the economic meltdown, and what perpetuates the slow growth economy the nation is enduring now. It isn't just elites on Wall Street, a good number of whom, by the way, are liberals in good standing. (Does the name Jon Corzine ring a bell?) Rather, it largely is the government, aiming to do good with mandates for sub-prime mortgages and doing damage instead.

Meanwhile, there is a reason that places like Seattle and Oakland and Berkeley tend to have riots and less progressive cities do not. Elsewhere, there is less cooing over "legitimate" radicals.

It's not so difficult to understand, George Gilder (author, The Israel Test) quipped at a Los Angeles synagogue: the reason that President Obama is so much more popular with American Jews than he is with Israeli Jews is that the Israelis are "smarter". The fact that so many evangelical Christians oppose Obama actually is a plus for him in the eyes of some Jewish voters in this country and yet irrelevant in Israel. In an extensive article in this month's Commentary magazine, another Discovery Institute fellow, the radio commentator and columnist Michael Medved tries to explain the strange aversion many Jewish voters in the U.S. have toward Christians in general and evangelicals in particular. It's not so difficult, they are secular liberals first, and Jews second, if at all.

Regardless, the reason politically conservative Christians tend to support Israel is hardly out of some domestic political calculation about winning Jewish support in this country. Nor is it from some belief in acceleration of the religious end times (who supposes that Christians spend a lot to time on that subject anyhow?). Israel is so important to the US--evangelicals, Catholics, and a majority of everyone--because of its cultural legacy, its democratic example, the growing economic contributions it makes to the US economy, and, of course, regional defense. If some liberal American Jews can't see that as clearly as conservative Christians, that's their problem.

However, it may not be such a big problem. We are still early in the 2012 election cycle, but there definitely does seem to be some movement evident among Jewish voters, http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-still-behind-2008-pace-jewish-voters/511516. Jewish voter support for President Obama is slipping substantially from his 2008 margin of 78 percent, Michael Barone reports. It's now 61 percent. Romney is at only 28 percent, but these percentages are soft. Support for Obama is high on health care and the economy, but much lower on defense and foreign policy. The relative weight of these issues may change, and with them the numbers.

Seattle's anti-WTO demonstrations of December, 1999 were something of a template for rioting in the 21st century: high tech, high self-confidence by the entitlement generation and reckless disregard of collateral damage. "Occupy" is a son-of-WTO production, the pathetic gyrations of frustrated youngsters in the throes of political confusion. These unfortunate kids think they actually are accomplishing something.

They don't know much about history; don't know much about economics. Don't know how to get a job, for that matter. But they know they are really, really mad.

This morning, Seattle public radio (the station that regards conservatives as non-existent) was very excited about the day's events. A professionally cheerful police representative said that the force was out to protect both the demonstrators and the public and certainly hoped everyone had "fun" exercising their First Amendment rights; but, alas, he said he also had evidence that there were elements determined to make the protests violent.

Not so, said the Occupy spokesman, also on the program. If there was evidence of threats, the police should provide it. Otherwise, it would seem that the only threat to the peace was from the police department itself. So, the Occupy spokesman was suspicious of the police but had no words of admonition for any would-be disrupters of the peace.

Well, the day was still young when little black shirted provocateurs with face masks were out on the street attacking stores, the police and (a big mistake) news reporters. And, just as in the WTO riots, the shrouded petty terrorists were also hypocrites. Kids trashing the NIke store wearing Nikes on their own feet.

Photo credit: Kirotv.com

In the clash of world views, unborn babies do not have rights so far as the left is concerned. Some even believe in the reductio ad absurdum of post-birth abortion. However, in the same left wing world--say, the world defined by the New York Times--plants do have rights. They are a "who", not a "what".

Part of the effectiveness of Alice in Wonderland as satire is that the occupants of the story don't get the humor. Thus, the same Times that brings us articles justifying infanticide bring us articles calling for plant rights. Discovery sr. fellow Wesley J. Smith, long a critic of the cheapening of human rights, this weeks takes on the peas-niks.

Photo Credit: Deviantart.com

Mainstream media reporting on the death of Charles Colson (1931-2012) has fastened like an angry lobster on his conviction and prison sentence in the Watergate scandal. Not to stretch matters, but that emphasis is a little bit like headlining the death of St. Paul as "Saul (aka 'Paul'), Onetime Persecutor of Christians."

The significance of Charles Colson was what happened as a result of his conviction and imprisonment, not what happened before. At a dinner party in the 1990s, the legendary Meg Greenfield -- editorial page editor of the Washington Post, columnist for Newsweek, and DC trendsetter -- was joking about the latest politician who had been caught breaking the law and now claimed to have found religion and forgiveness.

"Chuck Colson, he was the only sincere one!" she exclaimed.

Well, there may have been others, but there was little doubt that Colson, author of Born Again and founder of Prison Fellowship, was indeed sincere. He was committed to real reform -- the kind that starts in the heart and then extends a helping hand. Among his realizations was the need for committed orthodox Christians of various denominations to work in tandem. His project called Evangelicals & Catholics Together, undertaken with Catholic writer George Weigel, among others, helped forge a new basis for cooperation among believers that seems obvious only in hindsight.

One of his elaborations of that theme was the need for people with compatible programs in the fields of ministry, education and public affairs to help promote one another, not just themselves. This isn't easy, because under a general banner there normally are many competing groups trying to raise funds, each pushing its own organization. Chuck moved beyond all that. Serious, low key, pastoral, whether in a crowd or in private, Chuck Colson was the statesman of grass-roots politics. Discovery Institute, let us acknowledge, was one of his beneficiaries.

Continue reading "Chuck Colson, Social Conservative Statesman" »

The seemingly boring topic of sound currency is not so boring when it begins to hit home. The United States may be about to experience the pain first hand as nations switch from dollars to other currencies, such as the Chinese Yuan. Nations that are rivals for economic power, such as China and Russia, already have switched in many cases. Japanese trade with China is now in Yuan. Nations that are rivals for political power, such as Iran, are making deals in other currencies, also to thwart the U.S.

In a piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Scott Powell, a fellow in Discovery's new Center on Wealth, Poverty and Morality, describes the decline and possible fall of the dollar that is accompanying our spendthrift national budgeting. It hasn't happened overnight, says Powell.

"What saved the greenback after Richard Nixon removed the U.S. dollar from the gold standard in 1971 -- ending the postwar Bretton Woods international financial order -- was making the dollar the reserve currency of the world. This began with Saudi Arabia agreeing in 1973 to accept only dollars as payment for oil in exchange for U.S. protection of the Saudi monarchy and its oil fields. By 1975, the reserve currency status of the dollar was firmly established, with all OPEC members agreeing to trade only in dollars."

Those days are over. Decisions to back the greenback can be changed to decisions to challenge the greenback, and that seems to be just what is happening.