ingilizce.ceviriii

8/6/2019 ingilizce.ceviriii.

1/5

WISCONSIN POWER PLAY

Wisconsin G Oyunu

Last week, in the face of protest demonstrations against Wisconsin`s new union-busting governor, Scott Walker demonstrations that continued through theweekend, with huge crowds on Saturday Representative Paul Ryan made anunintentionally apt comparison: It`s like Cairo has moved to Madison.

Geen hafta, Wisconsinin yeni sendika kart valisi Scott Walkera kar protestogsterileri srasnda haftasonu boyunca devam eden, cumartesi gn bykkalabalklara ulaan gsteriler Temsilci Paul Ryan istemeden uygun birkarlatrma yapt: Sanki Kahire Madisona tanm.

It wasn`t the smartest thing for Mr. Ryan to say, since he probably didn`t mean tocompare Mr. Walker, a fellow Republican, to Hosni Mubarak. Or maybe he did afterall, quite a few prominent conservatives, including Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh andRich Santorum, denounced the uprising in Egypt and insist that President Obamashould have helped the Mubarek regime suppress it.

Bu Mr. Ryan iin ok akllca bir laf deildi nk muhtemelen o Mr. Walker, yaniCumhuriyeti dostunu, Hsn Mbarekle karlatrmak istememitir. Ya da belkiistemitir, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh ve Rich Santorum gibi bir ok nlmuhafazakar, Msrdaki ayaklanmalara kar km ve Bakan Obamann Mbarekrejimine ayaklanmalar karsnda destek vermesinde srar etmilerdi.

In any case, however, Mr. Ryan was more right than he knew. For what`s happeningin Wisconsin isn`t about the state budget, despite Mr. Walker`s pretense that he`s

just trying to be fiscally responsible. It is, instead, about power. What Mr. Walkerand his backers are trying to do is to make Wisconsin and eventually, America less of a functioning democracy and more of a third world style oligarchy. Andthat`s why anyone who believes that we need some counterweight to the politicalpower of big money should be on the demonstrators` side.

Fakat, her neyse, Mr. Ryan farkettiinden daha haklyd. nk Wisconsinde olaneyalet btesiyle ilgili deildi, Mr. Walkern mali olarak sorumlu olmaya altniddia etmesine ramen. Aksine bu gle ilgiliydi. Mr. Walker ve onun destekilerininyapmak istedii Wisconsini ve nihayet Amerikay- ilemeyen bir demokrasi venc-dnya stili bir oligariye dntrmek istiyor. Ve bu yzden byk parasahiplerinin siyasi gcn dengelemeye almamz gerektiini dnen herkesprotestocularn tarafnda yer almaldr.


2/5

Some background: Wisconsin is indeed facing a budget crunch, although itsdifficulties are less severe than those facing many other states. Revenue has fallenin the face of a weak economy, while stimulus funds, which helped close the gap in2009 and 2010, have faded away.

Biraz arka plan: Wisconsin gerekten bir bte krizi yayor, bir ok eyaletinkarlat zorluklardan daha az zorluu olmasna ramen. Zayf bir ekonomiyznden gelirler dt, bir yandan da 2009 ve 2010 da fark kapatan uyarc fonlarazald.

In this situation, it makes sense to call for shared sacrifice, including that they are,in fact, willing to make such concessions.

Bu durumda ortak bir fedakarlk yapmak mantkl, eer gerekten taviz vermekistiyorlarsa.

But Mr. Walker isn`t interested in making a deal. Partly that`s because he doesn`t

want to share the sacrifice: even as he proclaims that Wisconsin faces a terriblefiscal crisis, he has been pushing though tax cuts that make the deficit worse.Mainly, however, he has made it clear that rather than bargaining with workers, hewants to end workers` ability to bargain.

Fakat Mr. Walkern derdi anlama yapmak deil. Bunun bir sebebi fedakarlpaylamak istememesi: Wisconsinin mthi bir mali kriz yaadn sylese de,vergi kesintilerini artrarak a daha kt hale getirdi. Bununla birlikte, akasyledi ki, iilerle anlama yapmaktan ok, iilerin anlama yapma yetisiniazaltmak istiyordu.

The bill that has inspired the demonstrations would strip away collective bargainingrights for many of the state`s workers namely, those who tend to be Republican leaning are exempted from the ban: it`s as if Mr. Walker were flaunting thepolitical nature of his actions.

Gsterilere neden olan tasar eyalet iilerinin bir ounun toplu szleme haklarnelinden alacakt akas Cumhuriyeti eilimleri olanlar yasaktan muaftlar: sankiMr. Walker hareketlerinin siyasi doasn gzler nne seriyordu.

Why bust the unions? As I said, it has nothing to do with helping Wisconsin deal withits current fiscal crisis. Nor is it likely to help the state`s budget prospects even in

the long run: contrary to what you may have heard, public-sector works inWisconsin and elsewhere are paid somewhat less than private-sector workers withcomparable qualifications, so there`s not much room for further pay squeezes.

Sendikalar neden kapatlr ki? Sylediim gibi, bunun Wisconsinin u anki finansalkrizle ba etmesine yardm etmekle alakas yok. Eyalet btesinin umutlarna uzunvadede yardmc olmas da zor: duyduunuzun aksine, Wisconsinde ve dier


3/5

yerlerde devlet sektr alanlar ayn zellkteki zel sektr alanlarndan dahaaz maa alyor, yani daha fazla maa kesintisine yer yok.

So it`s not about the budget: it`s about the power.

Yani bu bteyle ilgili deil, gle ilgili.

In principle, every American citizen has an equal say in our political process. Inpractice, of course, some of us are more equal than others. Billionaires can fieldarmies of lobbyists; they can finance think thanks that put the desired spin on policyissues; they can funnel cash to politicians with sympathetic views (as the Kochbrothers did in the case of Mr. Walker). On paper, we`re a one-person-one-votenation; in reality,we`re more than a bit of an oligarchy, in which a handful ofwealthy people dominate.

Prensipte, her amerikan vatanda siyasi srete eit sz hakkna sahip. Pratikte,elbette, bazlarmz dierlerinden daha eit. Milyarderler lobici ordular kurabilir;

politika meselelerinde istenen yere varmak iin dnce kurulularna paraverebilirler, kendi grlerini savunan politikaclara para yardm yapabilir (Kochkardelerin Mr. Walkera yapt gibi). Kat zerinde, herkesin bir oy hakk olduubir milletiz; gerekte, birka zenginin domine ettii bir oligari gibiyiz.

Given this reality, it`s important to have institutions that can act as counterweightsto the power of big money. And unions are among the most important of theseinstitutions.

Bu gerek karsnda, byk para sahiplerinin gcn dengeleyecek kurumlarasahip olmak nemlidir. Ve sendikalar bu kurumlarn en nemlileri arasndadr.

You don`t have to love unions, you don`t have to believe that their policy positionsare always right, to recognize that they`re among the few influential players in ourpolitical system representing the interests of middle and working classAmericans, as opposed to the wealthy. Indeed, if America has become moreoligarchic and less democratic over the last 30 years which it has that`s to animportant extent due to the decline of private sector unions.

Sendikalar sevmek zorunda deilsiniz, politika kararlarnn her zaman doruolduuna inanmayabilirsiniz, fakat u bir gerek ki sendikalar, siyasi sistemimizdeorta ve alan snfn karlarn zenginlere kar temsil eden bir ka nemli

aktrden biridir. Hatta, eer Amerika son 30 ylda daha oligarik ve daha azdemokratik olduysa, ki oldu, bunun nemli bir sebebi zel-sektr sendikalarnnde gemesidir.

And now Mr. Walker and his backers are trying to rid of public sector unions, too.

Ve imdi Mr. Walker ve destekileri devlet-sektr sendikalarndan da kurtulmakistiyorlar.


4/5

There`s a bitter irony here. The fiscal crisis in Wisconsin, as in other states, waslargely caused by the increasing power of America`s oligarchy. After all, it wassuper wealthy players, not the general public, who pushed for financial deregulationand thereby set the stage for the economic crisis of 2008-9, a crisis whoseaftermath is the main reason for the current budget crunch. And now the political

right is trying to exploit that very crisis, using it to remove one of the few remainingchecks on oligarchic influence.

Burda ac bir ironi var. Wisconsindeki mali kriz, dier eyaletlerde de olduu gibi,byk lde Amerikan oligarisinin artan gc yznden oldu. Sonuta, finansaldzenlemesizlie neden olan ve bylece imdiki bte krizinin ana sebebi olan2008-2009 krizinin sahnesini hazrlayan genel kamuoyu deil sper zenginaktrlerdi. imdi siyasi sa, oligarik etkinin kart olarak kalan son bir eyi ortadankaldrmak iin bu krizin kendisini smrmeye alyor.

So will the attack on unions succeed? I don`t know. But anyone who cares about

retaining government of the people by the people should hope that it doesn`t.

Sonuta sendikalara kar olan saldr baarl olacak m? Bilemem. Fakat insanlarnkendini ynetmesini savunan herkes baarl olmamasnn ummak zorunda.

THE CONSCIENSE OF A LIBERAL

Bir Liberalin Vicdan

A few follow-up points to my earlier note:

nceki notuma birka ekleme:

1 If you don`t like looking at defense as a share of the overall federal budget, youcan use share of GDP instead, as above. It`s still much lower than it was in the 50sand 60s.

Eer btn federal btede savunmann payna bakmay sevmiyorsanz, Gayri SafiMilli Hasladaki payna bakn, yukarda grld gibi. 50lerde ve 60lardaolduundan ok daha az.

2 These numbers do include the wars, and a bunch of other things that don`tappear in the headline Pentagon budget. They seem to correspond pretty closely toFred Kaplan`s estimates of overall military spending, so I dont think much is missedhere.

Bu rakamlarn ou savalar ve Pentagon btesinin bal altnda grnmeyen birok dier eyi iermez. Bunlar daha ok Fred Kaplann toplam askeri harcamatahminlerine baya uyuyor, yani burda ok bir eksik yok.


5/5

3 I`m baffled by commenters who read my earlier note as an endorsement ofcurrent levels of defense spending. As I said, the defense budget is full of waste,we`ve been fighting wars that we shouldn`t, and we`re defending against threatsthat no longer exist. That defense buildup after 9/11 was outrageous: we wereattacked by a handful of terrorist wielding box cutters (or something like that

I`m aware that`s not certain), and we responded by (a) buying a lot of heavy thanks(b) invading a country that had nothing to do with the attack.

Baz yorumcularn daha nceki notumun imdiki savunma harcamas seviyelerinisavunduu dnmelerine atm. Dediim gibi, savunma btesi israfla dolu,yapmamamz gereken savalar yapyoruz ve artk var olmayan tehditlere karkendimizi savunuyoruz. 11 Eyll sonras savunma art aryd: bir ka maket batayan terrist tarafndan saldrya uradk (ya da yle bir ey, biliyorum ki kesindeil) ve bir sr ar tank alarak ve saldryla alakas olmayan bir lkeye saldrarakkarlk verdik.

4 Despite all that, it remains true that defense spending isn`t at the heart of thebudget issue. The current Obama budget calls for calls for defense spending of3.4% of GDP by 2016; you can make the case that the number should be closer to2%. But that`s not enough to avoid hard choices about health care and revenue.

Btn bunlara ramen, uras doru ki savunma harcamalar bte meselesininkalbi deil. imdiki Obama btesi 2016 itibariyle Gayri Safi Milli Haslann %3,4kadar savunma harcamas ieriyor, diyebilirsiniz ki bu rakam %2ye yakn olmal.Fakat bu salk hizmeti ve gelir konularnda zor kararlardan kanmaya yetmez.

If you can`t see how it`s possible both to believe that we waste a lot of money on

the military, and believe that ending that waste would make only a modestcontribution to our fiscal problem, I can`t help you.

Eer hem askeriyeye bir sr para israf ettiimize inanp hem de bu israf bitirmeninmali problemimize sadece kk bir katkda bulunacana inanmann mmknolduunu grmyorsanz, zaten size yardmc olamam.

Documents

ingilizce.ceviriii