THE SOCIETY OF OWNERS VS THE PUBLIC SOCIETY

Consumers face their other responsibility: as a voter [1]

My current job is to support, coach and teach a new generation of students to become legal professionals in the arena of International and European law. Our program is new, and thus we have ongoing discussions among the members of our faculty on the development and scope of the various elements of our curriculum. One area is Corporate Law. We concluded last year, with our first group of students, that we came only half way convincing our students that business and commerce is worth studying, both from the legal point of view and its wider context, from the view of the general public interest.

It is not uncommon for law students to harbor a distinct preference for matters of public interest, such constitutional law and human rights and for the causes that can be associated with it. Especially our students coming from countries with a recent background of conflict and war tend to be highly motivated in these areas. Rules that govern the conduct of private citizens or their (business) associations seem popular only with those who look out for a commercial career themselves, either as a corporate lawyer or simply as an entrepreneur.

But even for those students with a predominantly “public” outlook, there is a good reason to develop a keen interest in the rules of business and commerce. First of all: most of the rules that govern commercial processes have the public interest at their heart. We all benefit from effective commercial or corporate legislation and its compliance, both from the view of private predictability (pacta sunt servanda) and from the point of view of (public) accountability.



Secondly, we live in a time when many call for a fundamental reassessment of the rules of private enterprises, for instance of financial institutions and capital markets. This happens after a significant period which saw considerable public property move to the private sector and in which the rules of the market enjoyed a great popularity even as the – alleged - mechanism for improved service and cost reduction in areas traditionally belonging to the public domain.

Thirdly, corporations grow into ever larger conglomerates, assuming (or strengthening) a global market control surpassing the scale of control in the hands of any currently existing (international) public institution.


Royal Dutch Shell: more powerful in the world than many single nations

“While the amount of mergers continue to climb, statistics indicate that the average size of the smaller American law firm have decreased, reflecting an overall lean in the industry towards the megafirm.” [2]

The need for new rules regarding financial institutions today is perhaps most strongly felt in the US, following the collapse of major banks. But even the recent election of a new US President can not overnight swap away the greatly increased influence and actual power of large, multinational financial and other commercial corporations. But they will, by virtue of this irreversible development of increased scale and economic influence, increasingly become subject of public scrutiny at the same time. Or at least: this is what we should wish to happen.



It is therefore paramount that legal professionals, professionals especially of International and European law!, should fundamentally understand the principles and mechanics of corporate law and essential elements of private law (such as torts, contracts, litigation), at the same time. This will be in the interest of the scope and effectiveness of corporate law as much as those of public international law. The rules governing the owner (mostly: the owner of capital) should be well balanced against the interests of society, i.e. the public interest.

But what is the definition of “public interest”? When do we wish to be regarded as free consumers and when should we stress our responsibilities as a citizen? As experience tells us, this definition is in evolution all the time. We have to establish and reestablish our sense of public interest every time and again. We live in such a time; a time of some profound redefinitions. This most certainly is one of them: the redefinition of capitalist’s duties and privileges versus the interest of the lager society’s well-being.

An other important principle that drives the conduct of private business is the principle of freedom. In the western world we have clearly chosen for free enterprise and the primacy of consumer autonomy (of which the idea of a free market economy is a necessary corollary). Despite all regulations of both corporate responsibility and product composition, our economies are largely based on real-time consumer preferences. At the same time we allow for a wide range of mechanisms aimed at influencing consumer behavior.

A cynical view would picture this state of affairs as nothing less than a situation comparable with mass slavery. Consumers have no real choice, we are all driven by greater powers to empty our pockets largely to satisfy theirs. Indeed, we can stage our world as an epic drama not of capitalists and consumers but of vicious predators versus the enslaved masses. Enslaved not by force but by seduction. Consumerism is slavery in the disguise of sweets, candies and endless entertainment with no other purpose than to satisfy the selfish desires of the ignorant.




Lawyers indeed can look at private enterprise, public responsibility and consumer behavior with a great deal of cynicism. Much of our current legislation stems from this – kind of – basic lack of trust (in humanity), however may – politically – be professed otherwise. Legislators are humans too, one must remember.

Nevertheless, at crucial points in history legislation came about that was founded in trust, and that projected a new perspective of hope and improvement, for instance at the level of constitutions or acts of independence (“We the People….”), or at the level of national legislation, such as increased voter’s rights and civil rights. We say: yes of course! But this is not always self-evident. Quite a few treaties, and quite a few national laws had been subject of severe strife before they came about. The soul of any law is the struggle it took to get there; history, debates, memo’s and parliamentary questions.

Equally, when we look at corporate law and market regulation from a positive view: that it should all be there to benefit consumers and to benefit the entrepreneurs who service all those various markets, and not simply to restrict them, or curtail commercial innovation, etcetera. And at times, businesses are crucial as partners in times of change and ongoing – and uncertain – innovation. And this is where the private and the public meet again, at many intervals, for instance in our present time.



Above I mentioned the relatively limited influence of a US President even in the face of major economic crises. But one should say that the influence of this office potentially is very great, as the historic example of F.D. Roosevelt convincingly demonstrates, and not just his. Perhaps I can refer you to a speech of President-Elect Obama, which he held back in February this year [3], standing in a GM Car plant and explaining his view on the desired economic policies. At that time, the financial crisis had not yet surfaced. Yet he was making his point right in the hall of one of the big automobile corporations, General Motors, the same corporation that right now begs for public = taxpayer’s money.

We should as much be critical of the public ideologies as of the market ideologies which govern the rules, but also the debates. And we should be very interested in the development of both, exactly in this forthcoming period of shifting paradigms in almost all spheres.

All of the above is to encourage a sense of curiosity among our students in the corporate side of (international) public life, not in contrast but rather to strengthen their emerging competences in overall international law.

Owners do have entitlements, and so have consumers, but there is our responsibility as a voter too. We all must have some common sense of the forces that drive us to more or less cooperation in the modern world, whether they stem from greed or the desire for power, superstition or whatever kind of idealism. Corporate law is one such territory where careful balances have been stricken. It serves freedom and competition, but it secures their broader responsibilities (or potential liabilities) too.

-----------------------

[1] ) This essay was originally written as an introduction to the scope and relevance of (International) Corporate Law in the curriculum of the International Bachelor of Law program at The Hague University.

[2] ) (The Illinois Business Law Journal, Nov 13 2007, “Megafirm Merger Mania”:
http://iblsjournal.typepad.com/illinois_business_law_soc/2007/11/megafirm-merger.html).

[3] ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3R9g5iQcZE&feature=related

It is up to each new generation to articulate its own vision of life

Three generations between 1800 and 1900

History is the ongoing story of successive generations. Yet we are used to perceive it as a gradually unraveling tale in which generations are just a coincidence, an arbitrary addition to all the other pieces of a chess board. But we are not simply the bystanders in a play. We create the various acts of the play ourselves, each one at a time. The generations make their own choices and they make their own mistakes.

What constitutes a generation? The transition between generations often happens only gradually and sometimes two or more generations belong together for having lived out the same convictions and the same themes of their time or epoch. The true divides between generations or periods can only be established afterwards. For instance, I have come to perceive the generations of my parents and grandparents much in the same light, even though there have been substantive transitions within their time. But both carried the last period of nationalist strife and imperial conflict on the soil of Europe, with two World Wars and a simultaneous acceleration in the industrial and technological development of the western world.

When my own generation came of age a distinct rift slashed the connection with the generation of my parents. The nineteen sixties led our world to an entirely new outlook, a transition process which took well over twenty years, up until the end of the eighties. We entered the childhood years of global communication and information and thus of a new period of renewal and change of which we yet have to see the end.

I am part of the so called (Baby) Boom generation, born after 1940. I strongly identify with this generation. I hope I have contributed to the records of my generation in my own very modest way, for I do wish that the character and the dreams of our generation carry through into eternity. Our generation above all is connected with the future. We had visions of the year 2000, a paradise of mechanization and luxury. A world of blue skies and private jets flying through the cities, of Rock Music and holograms, and of a horizon of high rise apartment buildings and industrial food production. When on Jan 1st 2000 (or 2001, which was the proper first day of the Millennium) we woke up, there were still cows grazing in the fields, gassy cars driving around, in ever longer queues, we still had classical music and normal Television, even though everything had been expanded and modernized along the way. Back in the sixties we couldn’t dream of an Information Age, but in 2001 it had solidly arrived.


Two generations: the 1920s and the 1950s

It is my experience that when time moves on, our perspective of the past evolves with it. I find this an utterly fascinating phenomenon. One can sense that the days we can still remember change in color, in relative importance or in their actual meaning, as I can see with more clarity about the transitional period between the sixties and the early nineties. It took those decades to finally shrug off the last remnants of the convictions and adversities which had shaped the larger part of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

But most likely any contemporary assessment of our recent past will be superseded by another. Decades that loom large in our own memory will shrink to mere seconds in future accounts of our time. Some Presidents will be forgotten and some will become legendary. Innovations which today do not seem significant will in future time seem huge and decisive, whereas other developments will fade away in blurry tales.

We do have the advantage, of course, that our time is a period of immense record keeping at ever larger scale. Hardly any incident, small or great, can escape future researchers: our time will offer its records on a golden plate, however flexible the context in which they may be presented to generations after us.

I would very much like to write the history of humanity strictly from the viewpoint of successive generations, the collective of all individuals in each distinct period . I am not the only one thinking in those terms. This I conclude from a brief search on the Internet. One website [1] describes the past six hundred years – the period between 1400 and 2000 – as a succession of some 24 distinct generations, be it from a predominantly American viewpoint, each with its own characteristics. For instance, the generation which faced the Depression and World War II is called the Missionary Generation (F.D. Roosevelt e.a.), and their period is labeled as “The Third Great Awakening”.

---------------------------------------------------
The Silent Generation (Artist, born 1925-1942) grew up as the suffocated children of war and depression. They came of age just too late to be war heroes and just too early to be youthful free spirits. Instead, this early-marrying Lonely Crowd became the risk-averse technicians and professionals—as well as the sensitive rock ‘n rollers and civil-rights advocates—of a post-crisis era in which conformity seemed to be a sure ticket to success. Midlife was an anxious “passage” for a generation torn between stolid elders and passionate juniors. Their surge to power coincided with fragmenting families, cultural diversity, institutional complexity, and prolific litigation. They are entering elderhood with unprecedented affluence, a “hip” style, and a reputation for indecision. (AMERICAN: Colin Powell, Walter Mondale, Woody Allen, Martin Luther King, Jr., Sandra Day O’Connor, Elvis Presley; FOREIGN: Anne Frank, Mikhail Gorbachev)
--------------------------------------------------

I would limit the number of generations to two or three per century, allowing for a broad definition of successive periods, and covering an average of forty to fifty years per generation. We may have to distinguish “early” and “late” varieties of certain generations but they should have largely lived in a continuum of style, advancement, cultural preferences, political paradigms etc. Based on this I have made my own identification of generations between 1800 and 2000. But this is just a first broad brush attempt.


A view of five generations 1800 – 2000 (years of birth):

1790 – 1840 – The Generation of the Restoration (Politicians and Literary figures)

1840 – 1880 – The Generation of Romance and the Bourgeoisie (Victorians)

1880 – 1935 – The Generation of Mass Wars and Invention (Entrepreneurs and Generals)

1935 – 1980 – The Generation of the Popular Revolution (Rock Bands and Managers)

1980 – 2020 – The Generation of Information and Communication (Global Culture)


Every generation is transitory to some extent. In our personal lives we may have developed a clear sense of ‘generation identity’ yet at the same time we are caught in between. We grew up as children of the older generation and we aim to be connected with the generation of our children (and if possible, of our grandchildren). In my framework we can experience at least two distinct periods or generations in one single lifetime.

As a rule, history is described as a tale of wars, leadership policies and great events. The underlying developments and shifts in society do not always get the attention of historians that they deserve.

But history is not simply about the dreams and victories of Kings and Popes, of Emperors and great movements. It must also be about the dreams and convictions of the people. Why not consider history from the perspective of the ordinary man: a good civilian with a keen eye for the things that happen in this world, who intelligently observes the ongoing flow of human passion, the pleasures of the masses and the great thoughts of literature, and who may somehow participate in them or even be part of their creation.


Three generations between the 1960s and 2005

What dreams and convictions were passed on from one generation to the other, what dreams persisted even longer? For instance, the dreams of Jesus Christ or the idea of one Europe as it once was cherished by Charlemagne. And what dreams never got another chance? It is interesting to note that each generation has its thoughts about the end of time, some Apocalypse or Doomsday. But then, we all have our vision of Utopia, or Paradise too. Where has humanity come after we segregated from the kingdom of the animals?

When I try to distinguish my generation (born in the 1950s) from the generation of my parents (born in the 1920s), one single theme stands out: their loyalty to the order of their parents versus our desire to dismantle it. Historic events (i.e. WW II versus the emergence of popular culture) have had a significant influence in shaping these characteristics. It didn’t come with our blood, it came with opportunity and the right economic, demographic [2] and cultural context .

Thus, every generation faces the challenge of achieving its authenticity in the eyes of history. No generation would wish to be cast aside as mere transitory. Each generation faces its struggle of independence of the parents’ generation, each generation creates its own convictions, passions, and fashions. And this applies to the individual too, even though we do not all go to the very limits. Nevertheless we have the freedom to re-invent everything however it suits us.

But even if we accept the idea of a history of humanity as a tale of successive generations we can not, nor should we wish to escape their interaction with the larger historic events. It is impossible to understand the scope and impact of the popular revolution(s) in the nineteen sixties without reflecting on the Cold War, the war in Vietnam, or on any other major issue of the time. Obviously not. We are not talking about separate histories but about another viewpoint from which to relate to largely the same facts. Still it remains an open question to what extent the various elements of ‘history’ truly interact and how they relate in terms of cause and effect. What was the true impact of John F. Kennedy’s assassination from the perspective of the ‘people’s history’? It may become more important to understand these interactions as we have moved well into the age of the masses, of an ever growing world population with many interconnections.

If it was still possible at the time of my parents’ and grandparents’ generation to see ‘history’ as a largely regional affair – for instance: European history, or American history – and to define their progression from a defined social viewpoint (the distinct social segments to which the members of their generation belonged), this will become increasingly difficult for the subsequent generations. Traditional segmentations and class distinctions are rapidly being replaced by dynamic networks both at regional level and beyond. Our virtual reality is becoming a prime reality in which we fulfill many different functions – and satisfy many different objectives or desires. It is probably realistic to say that at this stage it is impossible to assess the ultimate implications of this development, especially the implications for ‘history’, from whatever perspective without some global perspective guiding it.

It has been a fashion for some time to flirt with the idea of ‘the end of history’, following Fukuyama’s famous publication of the late 1980s. The concept has been much debated, often without sufficient consideration to one of Fukuyama’s key points. His thesis on the course, and driving factors, of ‘history’ included the requirement of ‘thymos’, the desire for recognition that pushes certain individuals to project ambitions beyond well trodden paths. Already, some two decades after the self-proclaimed victory of free market capitalism and liberal democracy over any remaining totalitarian system, it is clear to us that History has not stopped there. Foundations for new historic themes are being laid right before our eyes. They are new themes compared with the issues of power and people’s influence of the Twentieth and Nineteenth centuries, such as Climate control, world population, international security, global political and economic institutions and so on. As yet we can not determine how or what ‘history’ will come out of this. It requires the hindsight of people living some hundred or more years from now.

New generations will continue to inhabit our planet either in tranquil succession or with massive bangs. Their future stories, much as the stories of past generations, will be the ongoing tale of humanity, indeed, like Fukuyama said, until de very last man.

-------------------------------------------

[1] ) Generations in history - http://www.fourthturning.com/my_html/body_generations_in_history.html

[2] ) Some time in the early eighties I attended a business course at which we had a professor of demographics as a guest lecturer. In a persuasive presentation he pictured the course of history entirely as a function of demographics, for instance contrasting a more restrictive elderly society with a young and boundless society, societies which are conducive to a stable democracy and societies which are prone to absolutism or authoritarian rule.

Obama is the reminder of a President we never had

Some men see things and ask why?
I see things and ask, why not?
(Robert Kennedy, 1968)

This is the major significance of Barack Obama. He is the Robert Kennedy who didn’t get the chance. Yes we can! is exactly the recommendation that Robert Kennedy left us, before he was shot to death. Indeed, why not? More than any other Presidential candidate, Robert Kennedy practiced the oratory and operated out of a heart similar to Obama’s.

Kennedy’s assassination followed the assassination of Martin Luther King, which was some half year before. And the death of both of them could be seen as their ultimate, personal sacrifice to help end a war which very few people could still consider justified. The war in Vietnam.

There is an almost bizarre similarity between both the circumstances and the public atmosphere of 1968 and those of 2008. But this time it is a Democrat who won, not another Republican – however little comparison can be made between McCain and Nixon.

Nevertheless. Nixon almost single-handedly crushed the hope of an entire generation. He protracted the War (eager for an honorable withdrawal and nothing less) and he corrupted the entire office of the US President.

This most certainly is not the expectation we have of President-Elect Barack Obama. It is highly important for our world that any further comparison with 1968 and the subsequent years fails from this point.

OPPORTUNITY, MR PRESIDENT-ELECT

My warm congratulations to Barack Obama on a watershed victory

“The choice in this election isn't between tax cuts and no tax cuts. It's about whether you believe we should only reward wealth or we should also reward the work and the workers who give it," he said. "John McCain calls this socialistic. I call it opportunity."

(Sen Barack Obama, just a few days before Nov 4th 2008, election day)



Nov 4 2008 has turned out to become a day of great hope and anticipation. Ever since I spotted Barack Obama in the summer of 2007, I have set my hopes on his election, as did so many other people once he caught their eyes and their imagination.

But I never dared to hope too strongly. The sense of pain after John Kerry lost the elections in 2004 was far to great to ever wish to experience it again. Yet, over the past few months, Obama’s chances of winning the presidency became ever more serious. And still I did not dare to project his ultimate victory. Only tonight the floodgate of hope and anticipation finally burst open.

Barack Obama represents opportunity as it only rarely has reached the office of the US President. Obviously there is no way we can say that he will seeze all the opportunities ahead, as on his way he will have to successfully tackle many issues – severe stumblingblocks -, largely the legacy of his Republican predecessor George W. Bush. In doing so, the main thrust of his initial months as the US President should not be to further enstrange the public from this recent past, but to offer reconciliation.

Still, however this may be, Mr Obama will be the first US President in many years to inspire a great many people around the world who will take his election as a wake up call to ignite new imagination into our world in all dimensions.

I have often made the comparison between the atmosphere – and opportunities – of our present time with those of the early sixties, when I was still a young boy with an emerging awareness of the greater world around me. It was in 1963 when I first visited the United States, 11 years of age, and ever since I have been fascinated by the vibrations of entrepreneurship and imagination all around me coming out of the American soil. Mr Obama will need all these vibrations when he faces the tremendous challenges ahead, none of which need to be clarified at this point.

George W. Bush enjoyed a silver spoon upbringing and his presidency started off with a healthy America delivered on his White House doorstep. Barack Obama made this journey to Washington all by himself and he will pick up an America in financial and moral disarray, both domestically and in the world outside. It is in the interest of all Americans to cast partisan divisions aside ans start amend these huge deficiencies. Not one Barack Obama can ever complete that task. It will have to be thousands of people, from both sides of the political spectrum, to restore America’s greatness, in a new perspective and abundant with new opportunity.

HISTORY IS MADE BY AMBITION

Tuesday November 4 2008 will be a decisive day for history. It will be proven by a record turnout of American voters.

On one side, there is an experienced aged Senator with limited imagination and out to return some respect to (and) for the established powers. He seems a reassuring prospect for many, especially for those who see nothing in change and rather stick up a good defense to keep what they have.

On the other side a man who is already the epitome of change, by virtue of his candidacy, and who professes ‘change we can believe in”. He is an inspiration to many, whatever the critics say about his rhetoric versus his actual accomplishments.

History is made by people who see a road well in advance of others. Who can see the opportunities, and the threats, in their proper context, and in their proportions. And perhaps it is even better to say that such people can look beyond mere opportunity and see its potential too.

A famous example is the historic ignition of man’s quest for the Moon. “Within this decade we will send a man to the Moon…” (John F. Kennedy, 1961). It happened, most certainly in part because of the explicit presidential thrust behind it.

We do live in a time when every presidential thrust in quite a few ambitious directions will be highly appreciated. This need not be just the American president. Nor was it just any single American president in history who pursued and completed the job. An important aspect of the presidential responsibility is to seek and retain the proper allies, inside and outside. So did every great American president, at least if we take the rank of greatness from a recent expert panel who assessed all 43 presidents on their historic ‘turf’.

And if history - which is always by hindsight – is determined by the greatness of human ambition, so must be our future. Many sizeable challenges lay ahead affecting the sustainability of our human existence on this entire planet. We can not remain in the squabbles of the past, as many of today’s conflicts and struggles still largely are. We don't actually have to go to Mars, and perhaps we should not go, at least not until some pertinent issues on Earth have effectively been resolved, such as Climate change, resources, habitat etcetera.

Many US Presidents have given good examples. Even the unlikely ones. Harry Truman is considered one of the better presidents. He achieved this against all initial odds. He succeeded a giant, in a highly complex period. Both McCain and Obama at least have the possibility to rise to the challenge, perhaps in both cases against the initial odds.

What the world should hope for is that all Americans will be able to stand behind the one who wins, and that the will be able to do so for his full term.

TRUTH AND THE DELIVERY OF JUSTICE

A tribute to all victims of crimes without cause


My students know that I am a vivid watcher of movies and that at many occasions I derive stuff for my lectures out of them. Invariably a good story is the mother of many good thoughts.

A few nights ago I was with some young friends, and we watched a movie called Spun. The people in this movie, men and women in their late twenties, all were wasting their lives. They moved pointlessly, largely to secure (or ‘score’) a sufficient quantity of drugs to trade and drugs to use. They could have been hippies in the early seventies or junkies in any other period, up to today, coming from nowhere and having no prospect whatsoever of a stable, sensible occupation, let alone of any escape from their marginal existence. The movie was highly reminiscent of another intoxicated movie called Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, in which the two main characters pass through the story soaked with marihuana and cocaine. They are the kind of movies that make you stoned without taking a single milligram of the stuff yourself. You swallow the misery on the screen as if it is your own depressing existence.


A scenefrom Spun

A life without prospect is not simply a subject of fiction. We can see people in our own world who have nowhere to go and live in chronic desperation. There are those who vegetate in utter loneliness even when they share their nightmares with other unfortunate individuals, like the young people in Spun. They have no idea what to do, they have no sense of their larger environment, or rather their sense has become increasingly distorted through their chronic disenchantment with life. Deep down many harbor a strong grudge against the world outside, or against particular elements of that world: parents or older people, school, politicians, authority, against everything ‘normal’. Most of their actions are on impulse, both positive and negative – especially negative to others – when grudge becomes anger and anger turns into hate. I remember walking in the center of Amsterdam one night with a few friends. In front of us was a small group of young men of apparent Moroccan background. In passing I said: “Good evening gentlemen”. Immediately one of the young men, a boy really, turned around, facing me with a vicious, angry expression and waving his fists in a threatening way. He yelled:: “Whaddaya want!?” I gently explained that I wished him a pleasant evening. Again he waved his fists at me. We then took a few steps aside and passed this group in some haste, continuing to enjoy what I can call my Amsterdam too. How does anger and hatred make people deaf for any sign of goodwill? What did I represent in the eyes of these young men?

If a world of anger and suspicion starts to become violent, the context is created in which people become capable of horrendous acts, such as brutal theft and other physical violence, murder even.

It is highly unfortunate that such senseless desperation only recently struck an innocent young Dutch women working on the Caribbean island of Bonaire. She met her end not because of some passionate rage. Her killer simply wanted her possessions, her bag and whatever was in it, and when she tried to defend herself he smothered her, out of fear. From the way I understand it, he had no intention to kill her, it just happened as he didn’t know how to stop and how to silence her otherwise for the outrage he had already committed.

And a few days ago one of the students came to me in great anxiety telling me that the morning before she was robbed of her laptop and her cell phone – in her own home. It turned out, as was corroborated by a witness who lives on the other side of the street, that two young men of Moroccan origin had entered her room through the window (she lives on the ground floor, street side), quickly snatched the two items from her desk and disappeared the way they had come. It all happened in an instance, just as she was taking a shower. The window had been slightly open, but the shutters were down. They had cut their way through it. In the end, she said to me, the theft was one thing (her parents had already offered their help to replace them); what had shocked her was the brutal intrusion of her privacy. Although I didn’t ask this in so many words, I am quite sure that she realized the danger that she would have faced had she caught the two burglars when they were still in her room. I guess she was lucky in a way, for it could easily have turned much more violent.

In the movie Spun one of the main characters has fun with a girl and she is playfully chained on a bed, when suddenly he is called away. As he doesn’t want to lose her, he simply leaves her as she is, naked, chained and mouth taped, and he takes off. The girl has no clue what to make of it and she grows increasingly fearful the longer he stays away, even fearing for her life, for this is the kind of situation in which many women have ultimately faced the vicious grin of a killer. We are led to believe that the young man, stoned as he may be, has no ill intent and that he will return, either to continue his bedroom session or to free the girl from her chains and let her go. At one point he does return and offers his apologies, yet keeps her chained while trying to comfort her. She manages to cry out and curse him for being such an asshole – after which she realizes that she has a better chance if she would go along with him and let him cuddle her. Again he is called out, and again he tapes her mouth and eyes and leaves her chained on the bed. Now she becomes really desperate. It takes a while before the situation is resolved. The movie keeps you in suspense about the girl’s ultimate predicament. She finally manages to escape. In the end it is another girl who unexpectedly becomes the oblivious victim of a suicide bomb explosion.

Many tragedies originate from some passion becoming the obsession of a devilish phantom inside, who smothers every remaining reason and compassion and who unleashes some brutal force that sees no other way than to silence adversity forever. It is ultimate moment of broken trust, when innocent play turns into horror or when an innocent student sees her privacy ripped away by senseless boys. We all feel raped to some extent. It can happen to you too, and to me, at any time.

Our first response to such incidents – and outright tragedies – is that, surely, the culprits must be caught and they should not escape their punishment. If anything, our sense of justice must be satisfied. In our civilization we do not take an eye for an eye, but any outrage against the order of society must be repaid in kind, one way or the other. And there is increasing concern about the aggression and disorder caused by certain elements in our society, such as those young men – many of them just children. Increasingly in our society there is a general resentment against people of particular backgrounds, like the Moroccan boys, or indeed, against young people from our own Caribbean islands. We rather wish they were not here, that we could somehow send them back to where they came from or where their parents came from. Most of them are actually born of our own soil.

In the end, the delivery of justice nor the initial assessment of the truth – of what really happened at the spot – can be limited to a mere reflection of the crime itself. We have to establish truth and justice in its wider context. We have to accept that the most effective response may not necessarily be punishment and retribution. We should recognize that in a wider context we see the mirror of a far greater failure than the single failure of young individuals (or their parents) to grow up as responsible people or to align with the general order of society. It is always our failure too.

We live in a time of excessive wealth and of excessive materialism. Most of it is fascinating too, of course, but much of the opportunities we create, both in terms of education and care and in terms of jobs and income, is simply unreachable for quite a few young people, particularly those who are caught in the middle of geographic and cultural transition. Their days are filled with pictures of a far away Dreamland, the birthplace of their souls, their island in the Sun or the arid mountains of Morocco, and with the reality of a world which in their own mind is hostile, uninviting, confusing and essentially inaccessible. The waving fists of the young man in Amsterdam were the expression of a boy who saw me as the symbol of everything that was denied to him.

I am not suggesting that we should harbor a sense of guilt because of this. I do not feel personally responsible for the lack of prospect in the lives of just anyone, or for the perceived hostility of my world. The only thing I suggest is that in order to free our society of aggression and hatred, we should always aim to address the situation at its very roots. And this inevitably includes aspects for which we do hold responsibility, whether individually or at the level of our political system. At least we have the opportunity – and the responsibility – not to ignore but to properly address the wider context – the wider ‘truth’ – of any incident that passes our way, for instance when we are a lawyer directly dealing with such cases and even when we are a prosecutor. This applies to local theft and murder as much as to the greater outrages of our time such as genocide and terrorism.

We should also recognize that at the other end of the scale there are those who take, or rather: grab, what they can get their hands on, far in excess of what they deserve, or far in excess of any reasonable distribution of affluence within society at large. The current ‘global financial crisis’ is the immediate outcome of the cumulated greed of people whose lives already are incomparably comfortable. You don’t need to be a communist or some other leftist idealist to take exception to irresponsible speculation or to the sky high bonuses of men (indeed, men only) who have the power to intimidate their environment into paying them. And you do not have to abandon the principles of a free market economy to be critical of the enormous spoil it creates in its wake or the gross imbalances it allows in the attribution of its benefits. Markets, as people, are imperfect, however close we get to full competition based on the fullest information both in the hands of customers and of competitors. Our greatest imperfections as human beings are our greatest weaknesses, our tendency to succumb to temptation, our greed, selfishness and so on. It takes hugely great minds to effectively control these innate weaknesses.

For me, when it comes to it, trust is first of all the assumption that all of us accept the basic rules of our society – the basic rule of law. This does not necessarily mean that we have to follow each and every rule at any given time (for instance: that we stop at every red light even if there is no other traffic in sight). There are too many rules for that matter. Nor does it mean that we are capable at all times to live up to our commitments. And I am even prepared to take a ‘yes’ for a ‘no’ if circumstances so dictate. Each of us will experience this daily struggle between the promises we make and our actual possibilities to honor them. I don’t mean this kind of trust, however important it may be to us.

What I mean is the basic trust that every other person essentially cares, that those whom we associate with do no willfully inflict us any harm. For instance, it is the kind of trust that was willfully broken between one of our own students and a man whom he thought was his friend, someone he had known from his earliest youth. As a result, this student now faces the serious possibility of being stripped of his freedom and of being convicted for something he emphatically has not done. It is at such moments that any of us would take the greatest trouble to help avoid such predicament, as in this particular case we at least have been able to help secure the best possible judicial attention, at the highest possible level, up to and including the European Court of Justice. Well, if that is not a profound satisfaction of the rule of law!

I am writing this essentially as a tribute to anybody who falls victim to somebody else’s misery, to somebody else’s misguided and perhaps even rotten life. But of course I am writing this too as an inspiration to all those who aspire to respond to such cases, whether in the delivery of justice or in the amendment of the wider, underlying societal injustice. Our contribution can take many forms.

And perhaps we should not simply dwell on the nature and causes of human disenchantment and of lives wasted alongside the spoils of our modern world, and allow ourselves to be inspired by some vision of beauty and happiness, not just for the happy few but for all. For we should never stop to contemplate such utopia, however unreachable it may seem. Each of us can make just this tiny contribution that, who knows, one day will prove to be the proverbial butterfly creating a hurricane. So what should inspire us?

This personal essay basically started as a recommendation to watch certain movies. And as I was contemplating this question about some contrasting inspiration, I asked myself: if Spun and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas are the kind of movies that project the darkest possible outlook of our existence, when our fantasies essentially become self-destructive, what then are the movies which do exactly the opposite and project the ultimate positive, creative fantasy?


Legend of Spyro: Dawn of the Dragon

I realized that these movies in fact arrive in abundance. And they are not just movies. Imagine a life in utmost positive fantasy, the ultimate frontier of creativity where you can ‘imagineer’ any possible world. It is the world of the creators of animated movies and computer games which saturate millions of laptops and Playstations across the globe in an ongoing flow, one after the other. Imagine what life that must be, to get up every day and let your mind travel the widest universe of your imagination, and actually do something profitable with it. Similarly, I highly enjoy watching animated movies and I do occasionally play with Playstation (I have a good young friend who has lured me into it). Just as an example, you can watch any of the recent animations, such as Ratatouille, Wall-E, Horton, Bee-movie and so on and truly relish in their colorful expression of joy or even happiness, whatever the story, as they all have a pleasant ending.

This joyful feast of animation doesn’t preclude more serious messages. In fact I believe that many animations are made by people who make fun in a highly creative way but who cherish more serious thoughts too (moreover, isn’t enjoying good fun an essential prerequisite of the ability to be serious?). Again let me illustrate this with an example out of one of the movies, Horton and the Who’s. The happy and gentle elephant Horton faces gross injustice in his effort to bring the world of the Who’s - which is an invisible world of tiny little people on a spec – to safety. Horton is met with disbelief and distrust, especially of one dominant female kangaroo, who refuses to accept that such tiny world could even exist and who sees Horton’s dedication to ‘people on a spec’ as nothing less than a threat to the order of her community, which she wishes to preserve at all cost. I am reminded of the happy ballads, songs of love mostly, of four long haired English boys, calling themselves The Beatles, who created an outrage among the parents of my generation, over forty years ago. It is hard to imagine, that these lovable songs actually unsettled the entire established order of my time. Even the many young people of the sixties who ended up in hefty scuffles with the police, in actual fact started their actions of protest and resistance out of sheer playfulness, not out of malice. Provocation was the game of my youth, not aggression. In the end The Beatles won, and so did Horton the elephant.

Anyway, the point here is that there is no limit to our imagination, if only we dare to mobilize it. Anyone can be inspired by the examples in history, such as Walt Disney and The Beatles, and by the examples in our present time. There is no limit to the imagination of a better world, in which human beings can truly enjoy their lives. And there is no actual need to succumb to the dictates of consumerism, to material greed an affluence, or to lose our hope and self-respect out of mere material adversity. The greatest wealth we can experience is the wealth that comes out of our own hands, however hard fought.

We do know however that people who do succumb to it and who can not envision their lives other than by comparison with the fortunes of others, are ultimately capable of great atrocities. Rather than merely threatening with punishment whoever transgresses the basic rules of civilization we should seek to offer the perspective of happiness and use our creative potential to such perspective as much as we can, even if at the same time we need to establish our response to the damage that has already been inflicted. Similarly, when we face the challenges of cultural and ethnic diversity, we should not emphasize the differences and the problems, we should emphasize everything that is pleasant and joyful about a world in which we can celebrate our differences, and make integration a thoroughly inviting party for all.

Such are the thoughts and musings that can arise out of fiction. Whoever would think of Johnny Depp or Jim Carrey (Horton’s voice) to be the agents of mindful excursions to the psychological and judicial dilemma’s of our time? Basically I think the answer is that moviemakers, animators and game creators all share the same profound interest, each in their own special way, that sustains a successful lawyer, legislator or judge. We may have to accept fate and misfortune, but we do not need to accept willful malice, neglect or indifference, at any level, in any cause, anywhere on our planet.

As a conclusion I wish to share one observation perhaps with great emphasis. Whatever miseries, misfortunes or outright trauma’s we may have to overcome in our lives, we still have the choice to make these our strengths and not our fatal weaknesses. I have seen many beautiful young people come out of a life of abuse and neglect. It is absolutely possible to offer so many more young people the same perspective of beauty.

True justice helps to serve the truth. Every unfortunate incident must be assessed against its wider context, its true causes and circumstances. In the end, we should not be satisfied simply by the actual response – through punishment or retribution – to any given incident, but by the degree to which we have been able to help avoid such incident recurring in the future. All of us are able to create our own stories which can become the parents of yet another generation of good thoughts.

INTERNET CONNECTS ALL THE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD

Dreams and whispers of humanity are floating on the world wide web

Many of us do the occasional – or habitual – chatting on the Internet. Nowadays we have countless options to meet people, either people we already know (for instance: friends on msn) or people we do not yet know.

In both directions we anticipate something. We may even be very eager, especially when we have an actual and preferably immediate ‘date’ in mind. I am referring to the chat rooms on the Internet, which exist in many different categories or virtual clubs.



Although blogging and chatting are two widely different exercises, they do have a communication dimension in common. I also enjoy publishing my blogs because of the response they often generate and the meeting – or clash – of minds with people who share at least part of my interests (though not necessarily my opinions)

I have numerous interactions on the Internet, with friends, associates, students and many other people with whom I correspond, but whom I have not (yet) actually met ‘physically’. Don’t say virtual reality isn’t to some extent reality too: we share real thoughts, real pre-occupations real opinions and most of all: real feelings.


Chat rooms can be found in the most unlikely places

The habit of chatting is an utter satisfaction in my own life. I can not say it otherwise. But indeed, part of the fun of chatting is the anticipation. The idea of whom we actually wish to meet (a mate, a partner, a friend, a supporter… etc…one’s own children….) is just as much a part of the fun as actually achieving it.

I can say that approximately 80% of my life would haven been entirely different, in almost all dimensions of my life, had I not started chatting ten years ago. Personally, professionally, my social network…very much everything.



Most of all I feel utterly connected with the countless people whom I met in the course of these ten years, wherever on this Planet. For each and every aspect of my life I have a living connection with another human being, people of many different nationalities, most of all young people, but not exclusively.

And if this is true for me, at the age of fifty six, then this must be true - in whatever measure - for many hundreds of millions of other people.

We must be able to ultimately overcome the wish for any War, in any place in our world, if we continue to multiply our human connections across the Globe in generations to come.



Of course, other societal processes will have their influence too, for the better or for the worse. For it seems that Internet is powerful enough not only to spread goodness but also to disseminate discontent, discrimination, and outright malice.

Such processes may include great social and political revolutions, or they may include the smaller watersheds, for instance at the time of US Presidential elections. Most certainly communication and reaching the youth are to sides of the same coin that Senator Barack Obama has already picked up, I believe, and Senator McCain does not appear to have remotely grasped. But these are remarks at the side.



My main point is not a political one nor is it one for the short term. It is the long term potential (and its short term implications) of this process of ongoing connection.

For let us not think that it is just a process on the Internet. It serves as a trigger for all other processes, ultimately including important political processes. My professional development but also my entire professional identity are molded and energized by the Internet, not exclusively but to a substantial extent.

And I see young people and their very extensive exchanges among each other, in many different networks ( Facebook, Hyves and the like are supporting it). Images, thoughts and feelings that float around in the trillions every day on the world wide web.

If US Presidents want to the read the record of all conversations of all Americans of any given day, they would be astonished to know how much love and friendship is exchanged on the Internet as may be the incidental malice or terrorist intent.



I have nothing to hide, or should I say: everything “of me” that I have exposed on the Internet is truthful and nothing that I should be ashamed of in any way. I actually want readership. And even if this does not count in the same way for all of us, we can still consciously guard our privacy in the way we choose.

The other side of the coin remains: every politician of our time, whether US Presidential candidate, member of congress or parliament, every public official, but also artists and professionals of all trades should see this generation of communication as a glorious beginning of a new time.

THIS WILL BE THE PRESIDENCY OF BARACK OBAMA

Senator Barack Obama

A courageous and youthful man, senator of Illinois, is waving at a crowd of hundreds of thousands in Berlin, not far from the Brandenburger Tor, the stage of many events in history that mark our progress from fighting Kings and Emperors to a genuine global civilization.


Berlin July 24, 2008

I believe this picture will be the key message of his presidency.: the message of unity and reconciliation. “We can not afford to be divided,” he said. And right he is, of course.

Reconciliation will no doubt be a strong theme in Obama’s (possible) presidency, bridging the many divides which hamper the preservation – and the continuity – of even some of the most primary conditions of our life on Earth. Well indeed, we are still at some distance of this shining prospect of a unified global community.


Obama with French President Sarkozy

Obama has been photographed with many important leaders of the world in Europe and the Middle East. They have allowed this even though the Democratic party still has to officially nominate him as their candidate. He has taken away every opportunity from McCain to do likewise and shake some leadership hands too. McCain knows that any such attempt would still ignite just a shadow of the attention that was given to Obama.

When he speaks he commands attention from the beginning to the end. Obama has grasped the sentences of the future to become his own in way that is reminiscent not only of a number of past presidents, but also of other leaders such as Martin Luther King. In Berlin he spoke in his capacity of American citizen, which only emphasizes his achievement, indeed as a citizen, and as a Senator, to attract such huge crowds well before he has does anything remarkable to history itself.

Well before the final presidential campaign Obama has alreadyrisen to stardom. He consistently performs at a level of high expectations. It is what makes him highly vulnerable at the same time. Everybody realizes that. But the sense of hope that he has managed to mobilize and help demonstrate, this time in front of a huge crowd in Europe, is something that, I hope, an increasing number of people in the United States will not want to relinquish just like that.

Our minds will crisscross the world in infinite variety

Connecting in the new virtual world of Second Life

Joining the new age of mass connection

The telephone is a nearly extinct species in our new age of communication. It is now a residual component of a complex of functions to which we get ourselves connected. The education of us, slaves of new toys of communication, is abysmal. I-Pods and I-Phones are thrown at us like meat is thrown to the lions of the Coliseum. Those who run fast will most enjoy it.

I will absolutely buy an I-Phone, but I have not yet decided when. First, the price was prohibitive. Now there is a second version, better and much cheaper. So I decided to have a closer look at the I-Phone. Then someone said: the touch screen system is hopeless if you need to dial phone numbers.

I hesitate. It is inevitable that I take a closer look at the options, before making a move. In doing so I need to establish more precisely what needs I have, too.

I have concluded that over the past years my needs have evolved.



I need to increase my internet mobility. I do not want any third party dependence where it concerns my access to the internet, anytime and anywhere;

I also want to fully personalize – and centralize - my telephone access (by having just one telephone number);

I need a far greater mobile document retrieval or file storage facility than I have now. Each time I want to use or share a document I need to mail it to my various mail-accounts;

It makes sense to centralize my incoming and outgoing e-mail but also better organize and - partly - archive it.

But otherwise it is about communication, at least this is the case in my own life. Some 70 – 80 % of my present social life is conducted or supported by the internet (MSN, e-mail) and mobile telecommunication.



I want to be connected anytime and everywhere. It should be simple – i.e. easy to access and to handle – and it should be reliable. Also, I want to read, write and publish regardless of my location.

I believe we can all make such or similar assessment of our needs. This is particularly relevant at a time when new devices and new functions are being marketed in rapid succession. Indeed, if we do not wish to simply become docile consumers and allow our entire lives to become almost entirely directed by software programmers and telecommunication companies, then we should become pro-active users, on top of our own business and lifestyle. We should co-create the industry that serves us and not let it dominate us.

Ultimately every individual will become permanently connected. We may from time to time switch off, for instance when we sleep or when we are in a theatre or private party. Otherwise people will become a kind of internet or telecommunication device of their own, with many functions imbedded in our cloths or in just one slick rectangular device that does it all for us with a mere touch or sound of our voice (well, something like the I-Phone).

We will create our own permanent personal connection with the rest of the world and communicate, share, create and publish whatever we wish to share with others at smaller and larger scales.

I believe that this far from a prophetic view, for I do not describe anything impossible today. Most likely I am just re-iterating what is already in the instructions of existing devices, such as the I-Phone or other mobile communication facilities.



But the challenge is to turn those possibilities into their effective use. Across the board our world’s available technology far exceeds the grasp of it among the large majority of its consumers.

Our technology has become as incomprehensible for the average person as are the mechanisms of nature that sustain the cycle of life. Human technology is the third evolution of life itself [1].

If we wish to be connected as a human being, or as a business man, to the networks world wide of other human beings and business men, we should do so with a great clarity of mind as to what it is that we take out of it and perhaps most of all: what we want to put into it. We should create the proper identity (or even: identities) to maximize the benefits of being connected.

I am always there, from wherever you are, unless I am asleep.


-------------
[1] ) The first evolution is of all physical nature and its laws. The second is the mechanism of life as we know it on Earth (Carbohydrate based self-replicating process).

The future of American Royalty

About the Grand-Dukes and princesses of the United States

Uncle Edward Kennedy and his niece, the crown princess Carolyn of the United States of America came in the news briefly after one another. Edward Kennedy underwent a very serious brain surgery, and Carolyn Kennedy became visible as one of three top-advisers appointed by Obama to help him find a suitable candidate for the vice-presidency. A remarkable fact in itself.


One step removed from becoming Obama's running mate - Carolyn Kennedy

But then I was thinking. Will they remain unique, the Kennedys? Or is there the prospect of a lasting American Royalty, a true American nobility in the classical sense, with young lady Chelsea Clinton to follow - and so on? One could also think of the ‘royalty’ of Hollywood, of which quite a few members combine movie work with political activism, up to and including the governorship of California. The memory of Ronald Reagan can still stand out as their great example.


Next in line for the Clinton's - their daughter Chelsea

And even without using the comparison with old age or “ancien regime” distinctions of royalty and nobility, on can still ask the question: what exactly is the nature and identity of the – present – American elite?

I am posing this question, one could say, for a very personal reason too. For I have been brought up with an absolute certainty about the nature and identity of the American elite as it existed some thirty to forty years ago.

I could not have had a better example of American history and civilization then the person of my American grandmother, who also had the name of Carolyn. At old age she would be greeted everywhere by everybody as if she were a grand old queen.


The Pilgrim Fathers arriving at Plymouth, MA, 1620 - the birthplace of the early New England elite

However, my grandmother was all but royal. She was brought up, in the 1890s and early 1900s, with a total disgust for hereditary nonsense and with a great sense of republicanism. She was the daughter of a long line of Americans, starting at the very beginning, on the shores of New England. In 1620 one of her forebears landed near Cape Cod with the company of the ship “The Mayflower”, who later became known as The Pilgrim Fathers. “We have Mayflower blue blood”, my father often said jokingly. Nonsense, of course. Over a million people - if not more - can trace their origins back to the ealry settlers of America.

The Bush dynasty (lasting or only temporary?) - George W.'s daughter Jenna at her marriage

One of my grandmother’s great-great-great-grand-mothers was hanged in Boston – around 1660 - for speaking up her mind about the rigid theocracy of New England’s Governor Winthrop. Her name was Mary Dyer, and her statue can still be seen in Boston. She left some six children and a husband.

The principle of self-government and of the irrelevance of religion in public life thus became the very foundation of my grandmother’s American upbringing before she arrived in Holland in 1920, aged 30 (where she would live as a grand lady of Amsterdam for all her remaining 65 years).

But when I sense the current sentiments and ‘trends’ in the United States, I can see that the present elite is quite different from the ‘pure’ New England and US elite of the 1890s and early 1900s as I remember it. Indeed Hollywood today is very much at the forefront, as are politicians who have Hollywood qualities. For my grandmother, only true merits, not the cosmetics, counted. Yet she also had the sense of the imaginative, and of experimentation. My memory of her generation and the aristocracy she represented is of great dedication, achievement and joy, but otherwise filled with no-nonsense and good common sense.

This is I always have perceived the United States and the character of the American elite. But I am afraid I am talking about an American sentiment that is now almost entirely extinct.


Hollywood royalty - Jennifer Lopez

Still there is air of a US royalty or nobility, often influenced – of course – by greater or lesser financial success, etcetera. – but – as in the case of the Kennedys – dynastic projections play a role too. It would truly be interesting to have a peek in the future of this family. And yes, perhaps even of Chelsea Clinton.

The most intriguing royalty at present, I believe, is the Princess of Massachusetts, Edward’s most likely successor, his niece Carolyn Kennedy. Obama has drawn her in just one step away from becoming his true running mate. If this is not a flirtation with royalty and succession in a classical sense! I am convinced that Obama is well aware of the pro’s and con’s of this ‘picture’.

The forthcoming Presidential election increasingly becomes one which draws us closer to a new historic watershed. But what and when it will be, we can not foretell at present. Perhaps not in another four years. And perhaps the moment is imminent.

The greatest challenge for the Presidential campaign

It may have been important for the electorate of the primaries to see the difference(s) between the shrinking number of remaining presidential candidates. I think there remains very little room for doubt as regards the differences between the last remaining two candidates. In almost all respects they are each other’s opposite.

In almost every respect the future will be progressively colored by the man who finally will emerge as the winner of this election.

Yet, at this stage, the differences are not what really matters. They are clear and everybody can make their own assessment of them. No further campaign to stress the many opposing views will be necessary.


Barack Obama

What seems paramount though is which of the two candidates can best be expected to create a bridge or create many bridges across the divides both inside America and in the international world. Not the difference, but achievement of consensus and reconciliation would be the greatest potential contribution of the next American President.



John McCain

Ironically, this is probably the only quality in which the candidates seem highly compatible. Both McCain and Obama are men of balanced nature. Both project a sense of reconciliation, each from his own vintage point.

Reconciliation is not just a point on the agenda of the President once he is in office. In my view, it will indeed be the candidate who already starts this process of crossing bridges during the campaign, who will win the Presidency.

Will us await a – final - US Empire?

The history of Rome most certainly can serve as the precedent most close to the origins and development of the ‘Washington Republic’, the United States of America.

In Europe, by and large, the Imperial stage preceded the Republican. In Rome it was the other way around. The Roman Empire succeeded the Roman Republic.

The Presidency of George W. Bush has brought the world closer to the image of a US Empire than any presidency before him. It is not simply by the present day US actions in many parts of world that one could reach such a verdict, but by the authoritarian way in which the policies have been conducted: with the greatest disinterest in the opinion of right minded people, and forgetting the most basic rules of a democracy.


America's great monument of Republicanism

What we should not forget, of course, is that the United States were born out of great disgust for imperial and uncompromising attitudes of the King of England and the whole system that he headed. And it is democracy and republicanism that the US tries to sell to (or enforce on) the rest of the world, not mere military authority - or so it is officially said.

But we could also ask the question whether the US should be some kind of exclusive inheritor of the Roman mantle in the first place. The US can not exist without Europe the way it is, and for Europe this is similarly true in respect of America.

Washington, Paris, Berlin, even Rome itself, all share in the legacy, one might argue.

Europe obviously has no interest in US Imperial tendencies. Far from it. But we have been very unwilling or incapable so far to offer our own alternative to a world driven into new imperialism. The project Europe is a project exactly against that.


The multi-faced leadership of Europe

I believe at this point many in Europe would interrupt, and say: but why do you think that the US isn’t an imperial state already, particularly if you include the mechanism of free markets of which the US are masters, if not the Master?

Of course we could seduce the American people into electing a new President who is most amenable to European interests. What could we – I mean Europe - promise the American people in return? In particular: what could we promise them as a solid alternative to protracting the Iraq and Afghanistan disasters? It is impossible to think of solid solutions if the US and Europe are not in it together, and leveling. This process of itself would also countervail tendencies towards imperialism within the US.


A great innovator of the world's popular music, Elvis Presley

Could the US, like the Romans in their time, say that they are the first great nation of its kind ever, even without political and military imperialism?

The US have become accustomed in the past century to accept all the attributes of a world leader, not just in political terms, but also in terms of innovation and cultural development. We only need to contemplate the figures of Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Walt Disney, Louis Armstrong, and so many others to illustrate this point.


The US President who first took America across the bridge of world leadership

I have myself been raised with the great American example being omnipresent in my parents’ home, with our grandparents and with our relatives in the US. This is the US of which I am personally proud. And I certainly recognize the great influence of American inventiveness on our daily lives, everywhere in the world. In the movies we watch, in the mobile phones and laptops we use, in almost every aspect of our material and cultural world.


The instrument that has made the millions of us connect to the world, almost 24/7

But I can no longer be proud of a United States of America that leads the world on the basis of lies and pure self-interest. “Those who are not with me are against me!” Remember? One could say that these words were a blow to democracy, but perhaps even to genuine Republicanism itself. You always take a vote. You always listen to arguments.

But President George W. Bush refused to do so, and the British Prime Minister Tony Blair went on his knees for the President despite this. As the saying goes, Roosevelt and Churchill would have turned around in their graves.


The wrong single face of Europe?

There is one thing which most likely distinguishes the United States from the Roman world. There is always hope for the better. And there have always been leaders, at the right time, to help the Americans cross that bridge.

Are we at the verge of such a transition of leadership? I am careful not to be too hopeful in this respect. I wouldn't like another disappointment, such as in 2000 and again in 2004. Perhaps we should still bide our time for another four years and endure protracted opportunism and discontent, driven not by the people, or their representatives, but by the directors of America’s big multinational corporations. For if anything imperial can still arise, especially out of the US, it is not the Presidency, it is Corporatism (not dissimilar to the struggle within ourselves: between the consumer and the citizen).

Perhaps to regain control over corporations and their standards across the world, is one of the greatest challenges of the next US President. If may be preferable, actually, if a Republican does that job, not a Democrat. But in terms of public leadership it is very much possible that the immediate, strongest prospect is offered at the latter's side of America’s political fence.

Perhaps the lesson is that, whether or not the history of Rome has anything to say to the present American world, nothing that we hold self-evident today, is necessarily self-evident tomorrow. History can ebb and flow in many different, unsuspected ways. But that the decision of the American people in the forthcoming five months is a very crucial decision too for a great many people across the world and the course of this new century.