(By Ray D.)
The Sueddeutsche Zeitung is currently holding a charming little competition. The newspaper is asking "loyal" readers to send in photographs with images of their workplaces. Photos judged to show the most attractive working space are displayed as the winners online.
Here is the latest installment of the Sueddeutsche's competition with the winning photo:
"Workplace: How do things look at your place?
Of Bavaria, Bush and Beethoven: We wanted to know how our readers are set up at their workplace.
We are happy about a number of things about this photo: That it was taken "especially for the SZ", also that readers abroad stay loyal to the Sueddeutsche and that it opens up totally new connections between different themes: Who would have thought, how close Bush and Beethoven could be...
In short: This snapshot is the best photo from a reader that we have received to date! (You may remember: We called upon you to send us photos from your workplace...)But this certainly cannot be all!? Send us your photo at: karriere-online@sueddeutsche.de
The most attractive workplaces are guaranteed to be published.
Caption: On my monitor resides an exhibit of postcards, photos and other things that frequently change. At the moment: Where I live, who governs the land in which I live, and a postcard that points to where I originally come from."
This is the best, most attractive workplace photo the Sueddeutsche has received thus far? What: Are the rest of the newspaper's readers all working in Vietnamese sweatshops?
I wonder why this particular workplace is really the source of such immense joy at the Sueddeutsche...Would this particular photo have been published had an attractive photo of Bush been the centerpiece and not an ugly caricature?
Don't bet your Beethoven on it...
Looks like they used the same criteria for this contest that the Nobel commission used when they granted Jimmy Carter a Peace Prize.
Posted by: Van Helsing | April 18, 2005 at 07:30 PM
What is happening to Germany? The most attractive work space in Germany belongs to a Texan. Beethoven Festival of Texas with Ludwig Van wearing a Stetson! Used to be a time where one could see a decent Beethoven Festival in Berlin or Vienna or somthing. But not anymore. It's in Texas. Yee Haw! I mean... Free Bird!
Posted by: Charles | April 18, 2005 at 09:17 PM
Der Spiegel interviewed Kofi Annan's chief of staff, Mark Malloch Brown. Amongs other musings, he says that for Germany to get a Security Council seat, Germany will have to fork over more aid money.
Sound familiar? The EU already uses Germany as its piggy bank.
"SPIEGEL: From Germany's perspective, the most important reform will be adapting the Security Council to today's political realities. Should Germany become a permanent member?...
Malloch Brown: (a bunch of blather)
SPIEGEL: What does that mean?
Malloch Brown: A reformed Security Council will not reflect military might as much as economic strength. In that case Germany, as a major economic power, will also assume a leading role and, for example, will financially increase its financial contribution to development aid to the internationally agreed-upon level of 0.7 percent of GNP. This is absolutely critical."
When will the German taxpayer tire of being soaked by transnational bureaucracies?
One day we may find out.
Excerpts and comments:
http://noonshadow.blogspot.com/2005/04/mmb-looking-for-mr-kofis-refill.html
Der Spiegel article in English:
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,351858,00.html
Posted by: Kosmopolit | April 18, 2005 at 09:36 PM
German democracy is leaning strong leftward. Why should we vote to afford them a permanent seat at the U.N.S.C.? Aren't France and Russia "friends" enough for us?
Peter P. Haase
Boca Raton, Florida
USA
Posted by: Peter P. Haase | April 18, 2005 at 11:42 PM
So...how many Americans have a Schroeder on thier monitor? Hmmm....
Posted by: Brian | April 18, 2005 at 11:51 PM
For some reason Bavarians like to see their Bundesland as the Texas of Germany, though it seems a rather strange idea to think of heartland of the counter-reformation as the big country of the big things. Maybe it's because Bavaria has its own David Koresh, Gabriele Wittek, who manages with increasing success to sell Peter Singers animal rights ideology under the guise of Christian reconstructionism.
Posted by: leo (dissident view from Berlin) | April 19, 2005 at 12:37 AM
Freistatt Bayern used to be like Texas, part of a great nation, but proudly independent. No longer. Bavaria now is indistinguishable from the rest of socialist Germany. As long as Germans don't try to nationalize their socialism, France and Poland should be safe.
Posted by: PacRim Jim | April 19, 2005 at 01:13 AM
Peter, if European leaders (Chiraq, Schroeder, etc.) demand that Europe become one union, it seems to me that the EU should have only one seat at the UN Security Council. France and the UK need to combine their seats, with Germany being part of the EU. I think that newly-opened seat should go to Japan. Japan is a democracy, the Japanese provide much of the international foreign aid, and they have an outstanding military.
This seems to me a fair and balanced solution. If an "EU-ized" Germany gets a UN Security Council seat in addition to France and the UK, then the Security Council should be enlarged to include California and Texas.
Posted by: Lou Minatti | April 19, 2005 at 02:39 AM
Lou:
Good Idea!!
Peter P. Haase
Boca Raton, Florida
USA
Posted by: Peter P. Haase | April 19, 2005 at 04:36 AM
"So...how many Americans have a Schroeder on thier monitor? Hmmm...."
Don't know Brian, apparently Americans just don't want to reciprocate a Schroeder obsession for some reason.
Posted by: SleepingInSeattle | April 19, 2005 at 09:22 AM
Niko,
'UN' is a little snippet of a word that goes in front of other words, 'UN'social, 'UN'manageable, 'UN'healthy, 'UN'necessary. You know, that kind of stuff.
Posted by: Mike H. | April 19, 2005 at 09:30 AM
PacRim Jim - The political role of Bavaria within Germany was based on the local Christian Socialist Party promoting the unity of state and party on the ground of anti-communism. In the 1960s, this unique kind of collectivism made its leader, Strauss, the driving force for a German nuclear weapon, but after the unification, the CSU found out that it is not the only regional political party in Germany.
Which brings me directly to the issue of the UNSC membership: Because the Security Council is a damage-control entity and not a board of directors, veto rights must continue to be bound to the ownership of legal nuclear arsenals. From this follows:
- For NATO indoor states such as Germany, the best protection against WMD threats is the expansion of the alliance.
- If Germany has no intention to maintain a weapons arsenal it doesn't need a permanent UNSC seat.
- Germany should not call for a precedent that would wreck the already tarnished United Nations.
- The right time for the single European permanent seat in the UNSC is when the British and French nuclear arsenals are merged into a single chain of command under an elected European government, and not a moment earlier.
Posted by: leo (dissident view from Berlin) | April 19, 2005 at 12:45 PM
Niko: I'm glad you're being serious. That is important.
PacRim Jim: Are you sure Germany is socialist? Or are you the big, flabby-cheeked loser that I think you are?
Posted by: republikaner | November 05, 2005 at 10:55 AM