The Shadow Government

The Morning After

2005-09-19T08:02:00.000-05:00

As I am typing these words, 21 hours have elapsed since voting closed in the German election, and nobody is still any wiser. The following are the preliminary official results:

Party: Percent of Vote (Seats)
SPD: 34.3% (222)
CDU/CSU: 35.2% (225)
Buendnis '90/Die Gruenen: 8.1% (51)
FDP: 9.8% (61)
Linke.PDS: 8.7% (54)
Other: 3.9%

Still, nobody knows what the next Government is going to look like. Both Merkel and Schroeder claim to have the biggest party in the Bundestag and therefore claim the "Regierungsauftrag" or the order of the President to build a government for themselves. Right in this case is Angela Merkel, as the SPD's claim assumes that the CDU and CSU should be looked at as seperate parties, which in the case of the Bundestag has historically not been done.

If we look at the number of seats, there is only a 3-seat difference between SPD and CDU, due to the incredibly complex over-hang mandates. Should the SPD do well in Dresden I, which has yet to vote, they could gain as many as 3 mandates due to mathematical cascade effects. This does not require any crazy results, just a decisive win for the SPD. If this includes the direct manadate, the CDU would also lose a seat, thus making the SPD the largest party. This all, however, is unlikely, as the CDU won the surrounding districts this past Sunday, so the best the SPD can hope for is a tie. If that happens, we'd be in a position like never before, with no party having a clear claim on the chancellorship.

Reflections on the German Election

2005-09-18T16:46:00.000-05:00

As I am typing these words, it has now been nearly 6 hours since voting finished. However, the preliminary offical result has not been announced, and only very little is known for certain. Let us recap that:
--There will be no more Red-Green Government
--Black-Yellow, against all their statements to the contrary, failed to bring about the change they hoped for.

In light of these facts, German politicians used two opportunities to make fools of themselves. First the "Berliner Runde," in which Merkel, Westerwelle, Stoiber, Schroeder, Fischer and Bisky rewarmed their stump speeches, and then "Sabine Christiansen" in which lower party officials did much the same. The one thing that worries me is that the Chancellor made a horrible impression in the Berliner Runde, yes, he seemed almost drugged/drunk, and insulted both his fellow politicians, as well as the moderators. He seems over-confident, indeed arrogant as Mr. Stoiber said in light of election results which would lead to a tie at best.

Most interestingly is the case FDP. They won everything, but lost the Government, as their vehemont promises that they will not enter any coalition other than Black-Yellow appear to hold true even after the hammer came down. Personally, I cannot at all comprehend what led to their gaining so many votes. One thing is for certain, Mr. Gerhart's assertations that it was because of their "clear election manifesto" was wrong. Statistics show, indeed, that it came to massive vote splitting, with 65% of FDP voters voting for the FDP with their second vote, and for the Union with their first. Just what Westerwelle had advocated. My explanation as to why would be that most new FDP voters did indeed want Black-Yellow, but were put off by the Union's unclearness, and by their fear of a Grand Coalition.

The big loser of the day was Angela Merkel, who, throughout the course of the campaign, lost around 15% for her party. As a commentator for the Tagesthemen put it, even if she indeed moved into the Federal Chancery, her first day in office would also be the beginning of the end for her. In her party she always had to fight for power, for example, by pushing Friedrich Merz from the top of the party. Her position is now significantly weakened, and even though the Premiers of the CDU states all still pledge allegiance to her, the CDU masses are starting to distance themselves from her, to blame her for the third worst result for the Union ever.

Also interesting is Muentefering's attempt to start to split the CDU and CSU by stating that the SPD was indeed the strongest party in the Bundestag, comparing his party to the CDU alone, and not to the Union. While this makes some sort of sense, it's never really been seriously done before, and must be a deliberate move at such a delicate hour. Personally, I am still hoping for a SPD-Green-CSU coalition, since the CSU are indeed the christian SOCIALIST union, but I am, of course, dreaming.

Several key questions remain: Who will end up being the strongest party? Will Dresden I decide the election in two weeks? Which coalition will rule the country, and who will head it.

Intersting in all this is the President, Koehler, who gives the responsibility to form a government to some politician, traditionally the chairman of the strongest party. That is looking to be Angie Merkel, but who would he give it to in case of a true Red-Black tie, which is a serious possibility? Though he has his origins in the CDU, Koehler has shown himself to be extremely independent, and his influence in the coming days and weeks will be interesting to observe.

More later, once the preliminary official result is known.

German Election Results

2005-09-18T11:22:00.001-05:00

Here are your German election results as of 18.10 MEST:

SPD 33.8%
CDU/CSU 35.7%
Buendnis '90/Die Gruenen 8.4%
FDP 10.4%
Linke.PDS 7.7%
Other: 4%

Winner: FDP
Loser: CDU/CSU

Coalitions:
NO BLACK-YELLOW MAJORITY
NO RED-GREEN MAJORITY

Possible Ruling Coalitions:
Red-Red-Green (Won't happen because of Linke refusal)
Traffic Light (Red-Yellow-Green) Won't happen because of FDP refusal)

Grand Coalition (Red-Black) Possible, but Merkel is said to be against this
Black Traffic Light (Black-Yellow-Green) Little discussed, no vehemont Green Denials

More later!

We're back!

2005-09-16T16:50:00.000-05:00

Hello All!
I am glad to announce the rebirth of the Shadow Government. We may not have posted in a few months, but we are here to stay!

To begin with, a quick overview of German Elections, which are this weekend:

Let's get started with a rundown of the parties just for the fun of it:

To begin with we have the Union, which is kind of a permanent coalition between the CDU (christian democratic union) and the CSU (Christian Socialist Union). They always only have one candidate between them, this time it's Angie Merkel. They always sleep together because the CSU exists only in Bavaria, but is insanely strong here (they are expected to get either all or all but one of the directly-voted seats here). Merkel has a doctorate in physics, by the way, and is married to a professor of chemistry.

<>Then we have the SPD (social dems), which is the traditional left party in Germany. They're Schroeder's bunch and still refer to their party members as "comrade" (or Genosse en allemand). Schroeder, by the way, is on wife number 3 and was born to a widowed mother who received alms --a true red boy.

Then there are the FDP, or the Free Democrats. They're bastards. They call themselves the "liberals" but are actually right-of-center. Over the course of the Federal Republic, they've gotten into bed with both major parties, but for the past 21 years have been firmly allied with the Union. They don't have a chancellor candidate, but what is called a "top candidate." His name is Gudio Westerwelle and he is gay, which is a big deal here.

Then there is the "Buendnis 90/Die Gruenen", or just the Greens. This party has only been in existence for maybe 30 years. Their top candidate is Joschka Fischer, who is the current foreign minister. He is a sexmachine. Their color is, naturally, green.

New on the Scene this year is the Leftist Party, or simply "Die Linken." This is a curious bunch made up half of the PDS, which is the renamed SED, which was the ruling party of East Germany. They're quite literally communists. The other half of the Leftist party is the WASG, which is the "voter's union for work solidarity and right." This was founded by an ex Chairman of the SPD, who is now just angry at everyone. This party has vowed not to enter any coalitions. They sell themselves as the "true left" because they argue that all the other parties have moved right-of-center and are essentially making the same politics just under a different name. They also promise the voters everything they want to hear, since they know they'll never be in power. They have two candidates Oscar Lafontaine from the WASG and Dr. Gregor Gysi from the PDS. Their color is red.

So, that's half the story. The other half is how the parties could possibly mate up in coalition. Officially, parties have made it known that they will only come together in two constellations: Red-Green (SPD and Gruene) and Black-Yellow. Currently Black yellow is polling at slightly less than 50 percent, and the three other parties at just more. Just a shame that the Leftists positively refuse to rule with the SPD, and the SPD refuses to join them, that leaves a few unofficial alternatives:

The Grand coalition: SPD and Union. Rumor has it, Merkel wants to avoid this at all costs. It’s happened once before in German history, but is of course very instable and a big self esteem killer for the two big parties. It’s also awkward because the parties oppose each other on so much.

The Traffic Light coalition: Red-Yellow-Green. Unlikely because Westerwelle positively stated that unless Black-Yellow has a majority, he will lead his party to the opposition benches for another 4 years.

Red-Red-Green: Though it’s been denied by all parties involved, it makes practical sense if they would have a majority. Unfortunately the Leftists are really, really disliked and have said they would not ally with anyone under any circumstances.

<>There is also a provision in the German constitutions saying that if the newly elected parliament can’t elect a chancellor with a majority after 2 tries, a plurality would suffice for the third try. It’s never been tested, but rumor has it Merkel may make use of it if she doesn’t have a majority and just hope and pray the leftists don’t vote for Schroeder in round 3. She would then turn around and ask the question of confidence, thus dissolving parliament and having new elections again. If she does it, I swear I will bite her someplace painful.

Here are the current poll results according to the ARD (First German Television):
SPD: 34%<>
Union: 41
Greens: 7
FDP: 6.5
Leftists: 8.5

<>It should be noted that the SPD has been catching up a lot in the past week or so. Also, the Leftists are seriously losing ground and about every 5^th voter in Germany is as of yet undecided.

Voting ensues from 10-6 on Sunday with the preliminary results being declared at 8.

<>Why do I say preliminary and not official results? Weeeellll, as if this whole election wasn’t strange enough, one the candidates of the NPD (far-right, nationalist party) decided to die in Dresden. German law says that if a direct-mandate candidate dies before the election, the vote has to be delayed long enough to print new ballots etc. that means that this district won’t vote until the first few days of October. Since this is a tightly contested district and since this is such a close election, Dresden district 1 could decide the election –two or three weeks afterwards.

Ok. That was the easy stuff, now it’s time to get technical:

The Bundestag is the lower house of parliament and elects the Chancellor, but you knew that. It is composed half out of direct-mandates, or candidates that run in a district and get the most votes –first past the pole. On my ballot, I have a column for the direct-mandates and a column with a bunch of parties in it. That’s the so-called second vote. Here, you don’t vote for a person, but a party. These votes are tallied state wide, and that state’s second votes are tallied and mandates are handed out to the parties in proportion. Then the parties are required to always take the top people from their party lists, which are compiled in advance. So, in Bavaria, all but 1 one the districts last election sent a CSU direct candidate from Berlin, but in the second vote a lot of Greens and Reds made it.

Now we get to something I don’t even fully understand. The above mentioned system works out well if parties receive roughly the same number of seats in both votes. If a party receives more direct mandates than it should according to the second-vote proportions, it comes to something called over-hang mandates. This just means that the party gets to keep those seats and the Bundestag is actually enlarged by that many mandates. This is usually a small number, usually less than 4 in total, but again, because it’s so tight this time, the overhang mandates might decide the election.

Lastly, I am going to give you a quick overview of the party platforms:

Union:

Raise the VAT
Lower the Income tax
Strike tax exemptions on a big scale
Prevent Turkey from entering the EU
No more foreign assignments for the Bundeswehr
Re-strengthen the German-American Relationship

SPD:

Create a People’s Insurance for everyone
Continue their current politics
No VAT raise
Allow Turkey into the EU
Create an independent Foreign policy

Greens:

No GM foods
Shut down Nuclear reactors
Tolerance and non discrimination towards immigrants and other minorities
Have day-care available free of charge to all mothers starting in the first year of their child

FDP:

A lower, but fair tax system
Agree on most everything with the Union
No VAT raise

Leftists:
Raise taxes for the most wealthy

Octuple the amount of money payed out for those without work
Raises taxes throughout
Disallow companies from exporting jobs
Essentially, redistribute both wealth and power from those who have it to those who don’t

Habemus Papam --Now What

2005-04-19T18:19:00.000-05:00

Dear Readers:
That, which we have anticipated has happened. 115 Cardinals in Rome, in the shortest Concalve in the past 100 years or so selected the ultra-super-conservative Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as the head of 1 billion Catholics. He chose the name Benedictus XVI (or Benedict XVI in English). The Sede Vacante has now ended. Those are the facts.

Beyond that, everyone can but speculate. We can look at Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger's track record, but many Catholics are quick to point out that the Cardinal and the Pope are not the same man. They claim that in his previous role as Prelate for the Congregation for the Preservation of the Faith, he had to be "the enforcer", and will not be as hardcore in his new position. But that is all speculation.

So, why in the name of God (pun intended) did the 115 Cardinals choose a 78-year-old German instead of the field of other candidates? Why not choose Arinze, to reach out to the battered African congregations? Why not the Archbishop of Milan, a solid candidate? The world will never know, the vow of silence the Cardinals swore is absolute.

Here is my take on it: This was a mistake of monumental proportions. The ultra-right Benedict is unlikely to attract more people to a church who's enrollment is already falling. His anti-birth control stances are likely to endanger the lives of countless shortsighted Africans and South Americans who read the Church's line as meaning "well, just don't use birth control" rather than "don't have sex at all." His anti-ordination-of-women stance is likely to alienate the liberals in the church. But as the Pope in his previous life as Cardinal said: The church must shrink before it can grow.

What bothers me is that this old man, whoom the Cardinals undoubtedly chose as a transitional pope could cause signifcant damage to the world (though I may find it cute, I really don't care about the Catholic Church that much). Considere the above-mentioned birth control issue, never mind women's rights or the closing of the east-west gap.

His election seems to be part of a world-wide swing to the right, which can be seen (with exceptions) in the political climates from America to Germany to Canada to Australia. I am not going to speak of the world-wide conservative conspiracy (because it odes not exist), but I am concerned. Why are people suddenly afraid of progress, of change? I like traditiona s much as the next man (as can be seen by my excessive interest in the Conclave), but not when it comes to improving people's lives or maintaining the status quo.

I would love to hear some comments on this, and am very likely to follow this up.

Your Servant,
René Hammarskjöld
SecState
Shadow Government of the USA

WTF Is Going on in Rome Continues

2005-04-18T20:23:00.000-05:00

Sorry I haven't been keeping up with what's going on. I'll make them up eventually

If you are concerned who will be the next pope, perhaps you'll be interested to see what some betting odds are:

http://www.oddschecker.com/betting/mode/o/odds/124960x/mbid/5714253

Enjoi!

WTF is going on in Rome --Part II

2005-04-14T17:20:00.000-05:00

Today we get down to brass tacks, and talk about the actual convoluted election process for the pope, known as the conclave. I hope you enjoy my ramblings, as. . .

Rene's Handy Guide to the Conclave Continues. . .

History of the Conclave
The election of the pope has a long and somewhat mixed history. In the extreme beginning, the main duty of the pope was to be Bishop of Rome, and he was thus selected by the priests of Rome. However, as the dioscese of Rome gained more and more influence, the selection process also became more and more interesting. Gregory X decided that after his election (which lasted over two and half years, really!) decided that a new method was needed to elect a pope. He found his answer in the conclave --a process in which the Cardinals were isolated from the outside world. Interestingly enough, he also stipulated that after a certain period they be restriced to one meal a day, and later still a simple diet of bread, water, and wine. His attempts at hastening elections essentially worked, the first conclave only lasted 1 day, the next 7. However, throughout history, some popes decided to revoke the conclave in favour of a different method of election. The conclave did incessantly return, however, and has been used in its present form since the late 16th century.

How it Works Today
As one can well imagine, over the centuries of use, the conclave has evolved into a highly ritualized event. I shall try to take you through the approximate chronology of how things proceed. I have tried to include as much of the details as possible without making my account completely unreadable:

The canonic laws stipulates that the Cardinal-Electors and their entourages (referred to as conclavists) be completely cut off from the rest of the world. In previous years, this has been done by walling-off parts of the Apostolic Palace adjacent to the Pauline and Sistine Chapels. Cardinals were forced to sleep in makeshift rooms (cells) which usually served as storage chambers or stairwells. This year, for the first time, Cardinals are housed in a quasi-Hotel with real rooms in the Vatican and will be bussed to the Sistine/Pauline Chapels each morning. They will, however, still be completely cut off from the world literally, and by blocking media outlets.

While in the Conclave, each Carinal may be accompanied by two conclavists (ecclastical persons or priests), unless he is sick, in which he may have a third conclavists. Also locked into the conclave are medical personel and priests to take confession. Exactly how that will be handled this year, with the seperate buildings is widely unknown: in the past, the sealed off portions of the palace would be connected to the outside world through 4 ports, all of which were guarded.

Before the actual voting and politiking begins, a few points of business must be taken care of. All Cardinals and their conclavists are sworn to a strict vow of silence concerning the proceedings --if they break their vow, they face an ipso-facto excommunication. This all takes place during the service in the Pauline Chapel the morning of the first day of voting, in a service led by the Dean of the College of Cardinals (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger). The afternoon of the first day, the Cardinals are ushered into the Sistine Chapel for their first vote -- subsequent votes will take place twice a day, once in the morning, once in the afternoon.

The Sistine chapel has been outfitted with chairs for each of the Cardinals (each topped by a baldachim to symbolize the equality of all electors). No conclavists are not allowed in for the voting. Each Cardinal is handed a slip of paper, which is identified only by a passage from the scriptures. This passage is unique to each cardinal, and can be used to identify the pope-elect in a close election. Each cardinal is provided two ballots per voting proccess, all of which begin with the latin prhase "Eligo in Summum Pontificem" which means "I elect as Supreme Pontiff." In voting, Cardinals take great care to disguise their handwriting, to ensure privacy. To actually vote, the cardinals get up in order of precedence and ascend to the altar. After reciting an oath signifying the sincerety of their vote, the enter their ballot into a ceremonial urn (up until this conclave, a chalice has been used.) If there is no ready leader visible, it is typical for all cardinals to vote for themselves, thereby ensuring that no hasty decision is reached by accident.

This process is referred to as an election "by scrutiny." While there are two other methods possible according to Gregory X's rules (appointment by an elected council, and by divine inspiration), though John Paul II's amendments to the conclave rules have made this all but impossible. For the "scrutiny" process, three scrutatores (scruteneers) are selected by lot to recieve and count the votes. Their work will be checked by three revisores. For those cardinals who are present, but are bedridden, three infirmarii are selected to collect their ballots. A two thirds majority is necessary for the election. In cases of a very close election, the scrutineers find the pope-elects ballot by means of the excerpt of scripture to ensure that he did not vote himself before proclaiming the results. According to John Paul II's rule modifications, after two days of unsucessful voting, the Cardinals take a one day break for prayer and some major politiking. After they reconvene on the 4th day, the need for a 2/3 majority is taken away, all that is now required to become pope are 58 votes. Each vote taken will be burned in a furnace, the chimeny of which is directly visible to the outside world. If the vote is unsucssful, straw is added to produce black smoke. If it is sucessful, chemicals are added to produce a white smoke.

This process will repeat ad nauseum, so let us skip to the very end. After a sucessful round of voting, a small group of Cardinals are lead to the hall outside the Chapel, where the Dean of the College of Cardinals will ask the pope-elect if he accepts his charge. Should he accept, there is a bit of business to be taken care of again. Though in the past few hundered years, all popes have been cardinals beforehand, theoretically every Catholic male is elegible. Should the pope-elect not be an ordained priest and bishop, that is taken care of right there in the hallway. The pope must also choose a papal name, a process that is some 1500 years old. That having been done, he enters the "Room of Tears" off the Sistine Chapel to select his papal vestments from thre available sizes. Properly suited up, he is presented to the assembled Cardinals in the Chapel, where he takes his oath of office and chooses his Cardinal Camerlengo, who places a the fisherman's ring on his finger. The Senior Cardinal Deacon then leads the group the facade of St. Peter's Basilica, where he proclaims the new pope in a statement including the ever-memorable phrase "habemus papa!" --"we have a pope!" The new pope then undertakes his first blessing, signifying the sign of the cross and simply stating "Urbi et Orbi". City (Rome) and World.

In past years, the new pope would also be crowed with the papal tiara, but this practice has been discontinued since the Second Vatican Council

I hope you enjoyed my brief summation of the highly complex proceedings. Please feel free to correct me if I have made any factual errors.

Also remember, the series continues!
Tomorrow The History of Papal Elections (more in-depth than above)
Saturday Approximate Chonology of the Conclave
Sunday The Papabili

In Commemoration

2005-04-14T13:05:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, April 13, was National Day of Silence, a nation-wide youth organized movement to speak out against discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. In coordinating Day of Silence activities on our campus, I rediscovered what it means to galvanize people to a cause.

One year ago, I wrote in my journal that I felt Day of Silence was a petty exercise, conducted mainly for symbolic reasons. It was, at least that year, the kind of protest that comes with folk music and dignified marches. For whatever reason, this year had a kind of ferocity than last year lacked.

I would like to attribute that change to leadership, as well as a changed political climate. Leadership-wise, our coordinating staff pursued a much more active advertising campaign and reached out to as many people as we possibly could - through flyers and posters, as well as talking to our friends who talked to their friends. Political-climate-wise, the 2004 Presidential Elections obviously upped the ante for people who have some level of sensitivity for their fellow-men. The passage of gay marriage bans in many states and the re-election of a decidedly anti-GLBT administration, among other things, helped get people in gear to stand against injustice.

Perhaps I was wrong about Day of Silence being a petty, ceremonial exercise - or maybe I just wasn't aware of the problems that were hovering over us, and that have now manifested themselves in kind both politically and socially.

Cayden Lucas Mak
President of the Shadow Government of the United States

WTF is going on in Rome? --Part I

2005-04-13T18:10:00.000-05:00

Being faced with an event that is likely to happen only 3-4 times in our life, a lot of us (and by us I mean every homo sapiens within a busride's distance of a TV or newspaper) find ourselves captivated by the impending conclave. But what the hell is a conclave, better yet, what is a pope? What is all that crazy italian everyone is throwing around like crazy?

Here is a reader's digest answer to all your questions:

RENE’S HANDY GUIDE TO THE CONCLAVE

Glossary of Terms:

Apostolic Palace
One of the main residential/administrative buildings in the Vatican, this palace is also the site of the papal apartments, which overlook St. Peter’s square.

Cardinal
A Catholic functionary so designated by the pope. Most cardinals serve in a "pastoral" mission, i.e., as bishop or archbishop. A significant percentage (including papabile Joseph Ratzinger), however, are Vatican administrators (also known as members of the cura, or curists), holding offices such as "Prefect" or "Pro-Prefect" of offices or congregations. A Cardinal, like a Bishop, is addressed as “Your Eminence.”

Cardinal Camerlengo
The pope’s chamberlain (personal secretary and butler). During the Sede Vacante, he assumes the duty of head of state, and leads the preparations for the conclave, etc.

College of Cardinals
The congregation of cardinals that elects the future pope. It is headed by a Dean, the current one being Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. To be a member, one must be a cardinal and of the age of 79 or younger (according to the last constitution, as promulgated by John Paul II). They assemble in Rome in the days before the conclave. The size of the College is limited to 117 by the above-mentioned constitution. For the conclave, the expected size is 115, as two eligible Cardinals are ill.

Conclave
The meeting of the College of Cardinals to elect a pope. See tomorrow’s post for an in-depth description.

Cura
The Vatican Bureaucracy. Workers therein are referred to as curists.

Papabili (plural); Pababile (singular)
Italian word describing the most likely contenders for the papacy. In recent years, however, papabili have had an awful track record. None of the past 3 popes were papabile, which puts their track record at about 3:4 in this century. A popular saying goes "enter the conclave a pope and leave it a cardinal."

Pope:
The pope (Papa in italian) is the Supreme Pontiff, and head of the Roman Catholic church, as well as Bishop of Rome and holder of a few other titles. He also acts as head of state of the Apostolic See (colloquially: Holy See, Vatican). Said to be the direct descendant (spiritually not literally) of the first pope: Peter He is elected for life, and is infallible in any statement he so chooses (the only time this has ever been invoked was in the defenition of the Virgin Mary). As the head of over 1 billion Catholics, his influence is clear, though the extent of it is disputed. Recent appeals of the pope to catholic politicians on certain pro-life issues, for example have gone unheeded. On the other hand, John Paul II's anti-condom campaign has been quite sucessful (see AIDS, deaths due to). A pope is addressed as “your Holiness.”

Sede Vacante
Italian phrase meaning literally: Vacant See (referring to the Apostolic See). This is the name given to the period between the death of a pope, and the official proclamation of a new one. The current Sede Vacante began with the death of John Paul II on April 2. During the Sede Vacante the Cardinal Camerlengo is the head of state of the Vatican.

Sistine Chapel
Part of the Vatican Complex and adjacent to St. Peter’s Basilica, this chapel is the site of the Conclave. Notably, its ceilings were painted by Michelangelo.

St. Peter’s Basilica
The main “church” of the Vatican, and definitely one of the most important in the world. According to (highly disputed) legend, it is built over the grave of St. Peter, the first Pope. The grottos below the Basilica contain the graves of most popes (including John Paul II), and supposedly that of St. Peter.

St. Peter’s Square
The Square in front of the above Basilica. Stadium-sized, this is where thousands (who am I kidding, tens of thousand) awaited the news of the Pope’s death, and subsequently waited in line to see his body lying in state.

Vatican
More formally known as the Apostolic See (or Holy See), this district in Rome is a sovereign state and the seat of the Roman Catholic Church. This is the last remaining of the Papal States, which were removed from papal power by the Italian civil war. After this event, many popes melodramatically described themselves as “prisoners of the Vatican” and refused to leave its walls. Nowadays, the Vatican is the seat of the Cura, containing the Apostolic (Papal) Palace, St. Peters Basilica, St. Peter’s square, the Sistine Chapel, administrative buildings, the Vatican Archives, and many more. Definitely worth a visit if you’re in Rome.

The Series Continues:

Thursday --The Conclave

Friday --The History of Papal Elections

Saturday --Approximate Chronology of this Conclave

Sunday --This Conclave’s Papabili

Death With Dignity?

2005-04-09T13:35:00.000-05:00

America's religious leaders remembered Pope John Paul II for his grace in life and in death, some contrasting his passing on his own terms to the legal and political battle that surrounded the death of Terri Schiavo.

"He taught us how to die with dignity," Monsignor Scott Marczuk told parishioners Sunday at the Cathedral of St. Andrew in Little Rock, Ark.

News that the pope's health had worsened dramatically came Thursday just a few hours after Schiavo's death. The bitter feud over whether she would have wanted to be kept alive with a feeding tube after a devastating brain injury riveted Americans, and it sparked international debate about end-of-life issues.

Indeed, the Vatican had weighed in, siding with Schiavo's parents — who fought to keep their daughter alive and disputed doctors' opinions that she was in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, said his wife would not have wanted a feeding tube.

Marczuk, however, told parishioners: "Food and water are ordinary means of the continuing of natural life. It's deemed basic nutrition and the right of every human being."

As recently as last year, the pope had encouraged research to "enhance and prolong human life" and told physicians it was a moral duty to maintain basic nutrition to patients, who retain their human dignity no matter what their circumstances.

In Florida, where the Schiavo battle played out, the Rev. Bill Swengros said Terri's parents saw a link in the two deaths.

"They can't help but notice the parallels between the Holy Father's death and Terri's death, like bookends. The Holy Father: going through a Passion, having a feeding tube, having people knowing that he's physically disabled, wondering how Parkinson's (disease) would affect his judgment," said Swengros, a priest at the Most Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Church in Gulfport, which will host a service for Schiavo on Tuesday.

"Perhaps one of the reasons why God blessed us with Terri is the lesson she's taught us in her passing: that every life has dignity," he said.

At St. Michael Church in Worthington, Ohio, 53-year-old Nancy Benedetti agreed — and she also drew a connection between the papal and Schiavo deaths. "A lot of people say the correlation of it happening within a few days just goes to prove how the sanctity of life is very important," she said.

"The pope would have said to the judges (in the Schiavo case) 'You didn't give her life and you can't take her life,'" said 47-year-old Christopher Ziemianowicz, in New York City's Polish neighborhood of Greenpoint.
But not everyone drew a link between the deaths.

"She was connected to a tube and he decided to stay alive until God decided it was time for him to go," said Olga Medina, 70, who went to services at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels in downtown Los Angeles.
Others saw the passing of the pope and Schiavo as a biblical reminder not to fear death and to plan ahead.

Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in his denomination, told the congregation of the Church of the Redeemer in Rochester, N.H., that both he and his partner have living wills and plan to donate their organs. While Roman Catholic leaders registered consternation when he became bishop, Robinson said Saturday — before the pope's death was announced — that John Paul was exemplary in way he handled the end of his life.

"I hope people take note that he's not being rushed back to the hospital," Robinson said. "The pope knows, as all Christians should know, that death is not to be feared."

Standing in a line to get into Mass Sunday at St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York, Joan McDermott said that's part of what made the pope a great leader.

"He showed us how to live," she said, "and he showed us how to die."

Associated Press.
______

One of the major problems I have with this idea of "death with dignity" is that people can't seem to tell me what it is precisely. It seems to be this philosophical concept that someone has tried to make "dumbed down" or religious in some sense. Really, it seems to me that Schiavo was denied "death with dignity," especially due to the hullaballoo surrounding her vegetative state. It's disgraceful and unnecessary. Furthermore, being fed through a tube doesn't seem too dignified to me, although apparently there are some people out there who think that feeding someone through a tube is somehow more dignified than a natural, peaceful death.

It seems rather clear, however, that Pope John Paul II had a very good sense of what "death with dignity" means and his sublime acceptance of his coming demise was testament to that. Of course, he had good reason to be calm - he was 84 years old, plenty old by any standard, and as the Holy Father could rest assured of a place in any theoretical heaven.

Could Schiavo's parents have been secretly afraid of their daughter's death because they were unsure of what judgement awaited her in the afterlife? What was Schiavo like before her devastating accident? As the religious right raises the question of Schiavo's "right to life," I think there might be some deeper spiritual misunderstanding and turmoil at stake. As a spiritualist of some kind who does not believe in instantaneous judgement but rather rebirth for the sake of perfecting the human being, I would say it is spiritually expedious to allow Schiavo to die and renew her life as a new human. In a vegetative state, no one can achieve spiritual and intellectual perfection.

Death is something that has been feared historically, and there is no doubt that human belief systems are partially to blame. The rest of the blame lies with natural human fear of the unknown - no one has ever reliably communicated to the world of the living after their death, and it is unclear what happens when a person dies. Nevertheless, there is no reason to believe that our present mortal frame is the best - or indeed the only - path to our spiritual, intellectual or ethical perfection.

Cayden Lucas Mak
President of the Shadow Government of the United States

Poem

2005-04-03T22:00:00.000-05:00

Here is one of my favourite couplets, which I find is as applicable now as they were over 100 years ago. These lines were written by Alfred Austin to describe the mood in Britain as the Prince of Wales (later Edward VII) battled with typhoid fever. Though the dear Prince survived, and many of the people who have captured our hearts did not (Terri Schaivo and Pope John Paul II) or will not (HSH Prince Rainier), it still seems highly poigniant, as it captures the integration of media into our lives,

Across the wires the electric message came:
'He is no better; he is much the same'

Zimbabwe

2005-04-02T18:14:00.000-05:00

So, my dear readers, you've heard me predicting a rigged election in Zimbabwe, and guess what, children, it's happened! Not only did Robert Mugabe's ZANU-PF win the election (that was to be expected), they also managed to get their coveted 2/3 majority in parliament. This is crucial because it allows Mugabe to change the constitution, probably to hand over power to an heir without a real election. The opposition party has cried foull, and is considering possible recourses.

And what is my dear counterpart, the ever-vigilant Dr. Rice doing? "Although the campaign and election day itself were generally peaceful, the election process was not free and fair" is the best she can manage (Reuters). But is she actually doing anything about it? Nothing at all! Recourse to the United Nations or other international organizations? Not in this Republican administration, no sir!

So what does this tell us about the Bush administration? All the banter about the need to spread democracy which was heard so much during Gulf War II was just that --meaningless banter, a means to an end. The administration is only comitted to democracy when it serves their ends, but since Zimbabwe has no oil, why bother?

Strangely enough, the only observers which were allowed in -- a group of South Africans hand selected by Mugabe actually declared that the election "reflected the results of the people." How can President Mbeki allow his observers to declare such an untruth? Why send them to begin with when they were hand-picked by Mugabe? Many questions, few answers

I will try to continue to keep you updated on world events, such as the upcoming Conclave, as they unfold.

Your Servant,
René Hammarskjöld
Secretary of State
National Security Adviser
Shadow Government of the United States of America

In Memoriam

2005-04-02T17:08:00.000-05:00

In Memoriam
Karol Wojtyla, Pope John Paul II
18 May 1920 -- 2 April 2005
Requiescat in Pace

Wrap-Up of World Events

2005-04-01T12:03:00.000-05:00

The Pope:
Though I am quite atheist, on behalf of the Shadow Governments I extend my best wishes to the Pope as he enters what experts predict to be the last 24-48 hours of his life. We may not agree with some of his decisions, notably the Church's opposition to condom-use, but we do definately appreciate some of the other work he has done, including Vatican II and rapproachment with the east. On behalf of my government, I would however like to chastise the Roman Catholic Church for calling the Cardinals to Rome before the pontiff has even passed away --that is in seriously bad taste, kiddies.

HSH Prince Rainier
On behalf of the Shadow Government, I would like to offer my sympathies to the people of Monaco and the Grimaldi family in these hard times. We would also like to offer our support to Prince Albert, who has assumed the regency and is to succeed his father. He has proven himself to be as able a monarch as any, having represented Monaco in the General Assembly of the United Nations, and having managed to keep himself scandal-free these past 48 years. We do, however, hope he somehow comes up with an heir pronto, so as to take away any chance of Monaco reverting to France.

Election in Zimbabwe
Even though the election has been hopelessly rigged, the opposition party is managing to run a "neck to neck" race with Robert Mugabe's ZANU. For that, they deserve to be commended, I hope that the election results come out as much in favor of them as humanly possible, given the situation. To allow such a horrid injustice as the poll-rigging of Mr. Mugabe to continue rather to use international organs such as the UN to control him is just another serious shortcoming of the Bush Administration's foreign policy under my counterpart, Dr. Rice.

That's all for now, I hope to update as soon as something substantially new becomes known in any of these topics.

Your humble Servant,
René Hammarskjöld
Secretary of State
National Security Adviser
Shadow Government of the United States of America

Commentary On World Developments

2005-03-31T20:08:00.000-05:00

So, a lot has been up in the world that ought to be commented upon. I appologize right now for what promises to be an excessively long post:

Election in Zimbabwe
Everyone knows its rigged. What amazes me is that nobody is willing to do anything about it at all. South Africa, the only country that could put significant pressure on Robert Mugabe to allow inspectors and with that, a fair election, refuses to do so. This does not speak well at all for President Mbeki, sucessor of Nelson Mandela, who has already gotten into a lot of hot water for being sluggish in the fight against AIDS. Unfortunately, probably the only countries that can put significant pressure on Mugabe are those in the region, so I appeal to the African Union to put economic pressure on Zimbabwe, and urge the world not to recocnize the results of the vote.

The Pope's suffering
The Shadow Government expresses its profound hope for the Patriarch's recovery. That having been said, it is very likely that the pontiff will die sometime in the very soon future. Though I am an avowed atheist, and the Shadow Government certainly refuses to take any stance on religion, Pope John Paul II's work must be commended. Aside from such irresponsible acts as declaring the Catholic Church to be anti-condoms, the current pope has been instrumental in east/west rapproachment, and has generally done a lot for his church. What scares me personally is the possibility of what lies beyond: more and more conservatism. Insiders see a new pope from South America or Africa as very likely, which means a tightening of the conservative stance vis-a-vis sex and gender relations. I hope the College of Cardinals, which is unfortunately very likely to meet soon will consider the immense progress that has been made in the past half century when deciding how conservative to be in the future.

The Ailing of Prince Ranier
On behalf of the Shadow Government, I would like to express my sympathies to the people of Monaco, and especially the family Grimaldi and my best wishes to His Serene Highness himself in his current condition. That having been said, the Shadow Government is also very pleased with the heir-apparent, Prince Albert. The Prince is one of the few European royals who is nearly scandal-free, and has proven his ability in representing Monaco at the UN, as well as in slowly taking over the functions of state from his father. I would, however, encourage Prince Albert to come up with a legitimate heir, so there is absolutely no chance of Monaco reverting to France after his death. The possibilities are endless, thanks to a constitutional amendment that, aside from the regular fornicatory route, allows the prince to adopt a son, or even just declare a random Monagesque to be his heir. It would be a terrible shame if the Grimaldi family died out and the Principality reverted to France, so get busy, Albert!

Wolfowitz and Bolton
Good God, guys! Two of the neoest neo-conservatives in two highly important international positions, is the Bush administration hell-bent on not only pissing off everyone but also turning its views of the international organizations being ineffective into a self-fulfilling prophecy? Though some have said that the appointment of the two neo-cons signals Bush's seriousness vis-a-vis the two organiations, I beg to differ. Wolfowitz' appointment is a clear test of European solidarity, and looky here: wanting to play nice, the EU gave in without hardly so much as a peep of opposition. While I do believe in the old addage of "If you want to get rid of someone, promote him/her" I fear Wolfy could cause a lot of harm at the World Bank, by, say, diverting funds from important projects in Africa to less important pet-projects in the Middle East. As for Bolton, an anti-UNer as UN Ambassador? Good lord! I frankly have no idea how he will act in the future, but I do hope he either dies soon or emigrates.

Sea-Tremors in S.E. Asia
The Shadow Government expresses its condolences to the family members of all those killed and its best wishes for all those still fighting for survival. I commend the Bush administration for dispatching the Mercy to the region, but I hope the international efforts get around to some of the smaller islands too, as they have been largely ignored as of now.

Forthcoming Election in the UK
Game on! Go LibDems!

I hope for lots of comments!

Yours truly,
René Hammarskjöld
Secretary of State
National Security Adviser
Shadow Government of the United States of America

Posted in the false hopes of relieving doubt and frustration...

2005-03-21T18:31:00.000-05:00

I'm not generally an angry person. But although I accepted long ago that the mainstream media pays attention to stupid shit, I cannot tell you how frustrated it makes me to see our politicians desperately tagging along with the pop-culture scandal of the week. Baseball, Schiavo, the Ten Commandments... This is city-council stuff, issues that should be decided by tired commissions rooted deeply and forever in obscurity. Even as a militant feminist, I refuse to get behind the Schiavo hysteria for its significance in the abortion debate. The debate is about abortion; there are important things to be said and instead we're getting wrapped up in feeding tubes. And even as a die-hard civil libertarian I refuse to quibble over the difference between a "historical" document and a "religio-historical" document. There are kids, out there in the world, scared of being singled out by their teachers for not praying, or for praying too loud in public. I hope someone in the government remembered to look out for them, because I can't be everywhere at once, people!

This is not to say I have no opinion on these matters. I do, on all of them, and I could explain them to you if you cared. But Americans have short attention spans, newspapers have limited column inches, and we need to prioritize.

I just wish... I wish I knew there were at least a couple people in positions of power who are keeping an eye on the important stuff. Not just monitoring it, but working to keep the American people on track. It would be nice to see every speech about immorality in Hollywood matched with one about literacy, and every press conference about Martha Stewart followed by one about household debt and medical insurance. I want a big government; it's not fool-proof, of course, but I hope it's not naive of me to assume that most politicians aren't in it for the glamour. Sure, DeLay gets a few free meals, but an average politician has got to have a lot of goodwill and civic duty to put up with the bitching and moaning. So, if the political system weren't so desperately ignored, a government should be able to help shape the way people think, directing pop culture instead of reacting to it. When disease and poverty are bringing societies to ruin, I don't think it's "preaching" for politicians to remind us when we get off track, especially when the humanitarian, economic, and spiritual benefits of doing something all coincide, as they tend to do.

I like being able to depend on my government. I like knowing that there's a big government looking out for me, because sometimes I fuck up. I like trusting the people to elect a representative who can do their job, not just back one radical cause. I like that my government is flexible and can change with the times, and I like expecting my government to be proactive when important stuff isn't getting the attention it deserves. Every once in a while I like to remember I'm young and idealistic and, more often than not, full of shit. But more than that I like to be confident that even when my elected representatives are failing miserably, I have these grand expectations to hang over their heads.

I like to think I can be a pragmatist and an idealist at the same time. So it turns out maybe I am full of shit. But we need to aim for something, right? Whether or not we'll ever get there is secondary. I think.

Feel free to argue; I'm taking on all comers.

Koreans

2005-03-20T22:35:00.000-05:00

The Shadow Government officially declares Singman Rhee to be a ROKstar.

All other South Koreans shall henceforth be referred to as ROKers, as the ROK out all the time

René Hammaskjöld
Secretary of State
National Security Advisor
Shadow Government of the United States of America

The damned thing with Iran

2005-03-13T20:13:00.000-05:00

So Iran is flexing its muscle again, great. You know what that means: our counterparts in the "real" government are very liable to either
A) help the people of Iran by introducing them to the new, flat nuclear power plants, courtesy of a few bombs here or there, or
B) invade the country, or
C) Nuke the Bastards, or
D) do all of the above, in that order.

Personally, I think Russia's idea to help Iran with their peaceful atomic program while ensuring that all spent fuel rods are repatriated to Russia is a good idea. I just hope and pray it works.

Speaking of the Russians, perhaps we should be scared of the extent of their cooperation with Iran. . .

On behalf of the Shadow Government, I would also like to offer my congratulations to the House of Lords of the United Kingdom, who managed a moral victory over Mr. Blair's Prevention of Terrorism Bill, which is highly remeniscent of the USA-PATRIOT Act. Your Lordships: you did your best, I hope sincerely that Blair doesn't get reelected only to completely castrate the upper house! To echo the sentiment of the Daily Telegraph: Praise the Lords!

Ever your humble servant,

René Hammarskjöld
Secretary of State
National Security Advisor
Shadow Government of the United States of America

Political Spectrum? What Political Spectrum?

2005-03-13T20:11:00.000-05:00

Perhaps the best reason for forming a shadow government in the United States is the clear and painful lack of any true "opposition." The Democrats and the Republicans like to play up the petty differences between their stances, so I said, but really...what I wouldn't give for a real opposition coalition! So here we are.

What's interesting about forming an opposition coalition in the United States is that you get some unlikely bedfellows. Although I don't think I'm erroneous in saying so, most of the members of the shadow government are on the left side of the spectrum. I think I do a lot to balance them out, though. I've traversed the political spectrum from left to lefter and now I've found that I've ended up somewhere that some might define as the far right. This is all very interesting because for the most part I'm a cut and dry social liberal, fiscal conservative that used to define some elements of the Republican party. I don't think I really fit in there though because I don't believe in the republic as such.

As for myself, the concept of the democratic-republic is a great idea, but it seems to me (especially as time goes on) that the people, who are supposed to be those who giveth and taketh away the mandate for the statesman, don't really know what they want, or don't really know what's good for them. As it turns out, the concept of the democratic-republic as it has evolved presently is a beast of burden for the bourgeoisie, liberated from the confines of merely economic clout at the dawn of the 19th century and subsequently expanded to the much more all-encompassing world of the political.

I'm afraid that I have to side with Hannah Arendt in saying that the political liberation of the bourgeoisie resulted in the policy of imperialism that hounds us into the present. The democratic-republic allows the bourgeoisie to have this political voice, and that's one of my many problems with it. Because the democratic-republic is dominated by the bourgeoisie, it ceases to be truly representative of its constituents and thereby ineffective as such.

Cayden Lucas Mak
President of the Shadow Government of the United States

2005-03-10T18:17:00.000-05:00

Hello All!

Let me take this time to welcome you all to our site. As you can well imagine, there is a lot to bitch about in the realm of foreign relations/national security issues. I may only be one person, but I feel confident that I am up to the job. As former Secretary of State AND National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger (yeah, he's a republican, but he's a balla) stated at a Detroit Economic Club Luncheon "For about six months, I was both Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, and let me tell you: never before and never since were relations between the State Department and the White House that good!"

To encourage hate-mail, I should lay down some of this shadow-administration's fundamental beliefs:
-- Preemptive Strikes are only legal when sanctioned by the UN, purpsuant to the UN Charter.

-- Having friends in the world is good for National Security.

-- The idea of classifying states into abstract categories such as "good" and "evil" is absolute and utter bullshit, and there will be none of that here!

-- American-style democracy is not the be-all end-all when it comes to forms of government.

-- Speaking of be-all end-alls, as far as international decisions are concerned, we will accept the ICJ and UN opinions of such.

-- Lest I forget: The US should accept compulsory ICC jurisdiction.

-- Backing out of treaties in favour if crazy Star-Wars missile defence systems which piss off the entire world should be avoided.

-- The days of heavy-handed pseudo "Atomic Diplomacy" are over.

-- Though we must accept the responsibilities that come with being the world's only Superpower, we shan't be pompus about it.

I hope this generates some heated response!

Yours Sincerely,
René Hammarskjöld
Secretary of State
National Security Advisor

The Shadow Government of the United States

2005-03-10T17:31:00.000-05:00

Dear citizen:

In retaliation toward the two-party system, which we have deemed morally reprehensible, the Shadow Government of the United States was formed from a cross-section of bright young Americans (and others) who have found the current trend in American government both piss-poor and unexciting. Headed by an intellectual of ambiguous gender with totalitarian tendencies, and staffed by people from all religions, social classes, political parties, ethnicities and cup sizes, the Shadow Government of the United States is embarking on a quest to better represent the American people's sentiments, and thereby do them a great service. I think.

In closing, I sincerely hope I'll have a good lunch period, as I am rather hungry. Beyond that, enjoy the reading, and feel free to drop us a line. After all, we don't have a legislative branch, so hate mail is encouraged.

Sincerely,
Cayden Lucas Mak
President of the Shadow Government of the United States