A Timely Reminder of the Failures of Europe’s Political Leaders

Next Sunday, we will once again move the clocks forward by one hour. This was reported by Uutissuomalainen, according to which “the proposal to end clock changes is still awaiting consideration by the EU Council. Not all member states have formed their positions.”

The article also stated that “the European Commission wants to promote the abolition of the daylight saving time directive. Commissioner for Sustainable Transport and Tourism Apóstolos Tzitzikostas launched an evaluation in February to examine the EU-wide impacts of clock changes.”

The report is expected to be completed by the end of the year, the Ministry of Transport and Communications said in a press release. After that, the Commission will assess further actions.

* * *

In this respect, it is rather remarkable that this is by no means a new issue. As I myself wrote already six years ago, “perhaps an even more illustrative example of the EU’s inability to make decisions was once again highlighted last night. We still had to move the hands of the clock, even though a majority of EU citizens would like to end it and both the Commission and Parliament have already made decisions on the matter.”

And that is not all, because as much as eleven and a half years ago I could state that “studies have shown that changing the clocks is harmful overall, and therefore the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare has recommended abandoning the practice.” This has not changed over the years, as a scientific review article published last year found that “the transition to daylight saving time was associated with harmful effects ranging from reduced sleep duration and quality to increased sleepiness.”

* * *

Therefore, it is worth repeating once again the fact that this endless clock-changing farce is likely to weaken people’s faith and trust in the European Union—if it has not already made it a laughing stock. And what is worse, year after year it shows ever more clearly that this is not merely about people’s feelings but about harsh reality.

Indeed, the clock-changing farce undeniably demonstrates the shocking incompetence of our continent’s leaders, which is undoubtedly one reason why we have fallen behind the United States both economically and militarily, as the striking chart of GDP development below clearly shows.

Unfortunately, clock changes and economic problems are not the only areas in which European leaders have failed. At the same time, they have also managed to fill many member states with welfare migrants from developing countries—while the birth rate of the native population has dropped dramatically.

European politicians have also succeeded in weakening the continent’s military capability to such an extent that Russia has been able to wage its war in Ukraine for years without the EU being able to intervene. And even worse, they have encouraged the U.S. president to question the usefulness of NATO—developments that could ultimately lead to the loss of Europe’s future and the way of life of its people.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Carbon Sink Policy Lacks Cost-Effectiveness
Is the EU a Real Player in World Politics—or Just a Paper Tiger?
Changing the Clocks Reduces Trust in the European Union

English or Finnish — That’s the Question

I have been considering returning this blog to its original purpose — to publish here only English translations of the most significant entries from my Finnish-language blog, edited when necessary to take into account an international readership.

There are three reasons behind this consideration. The first is lack of time, as maintaining two blogs takes up a large part of my free time. The second is that I suspect most readers of the English-language blog are in fact Finns, who can therefore also read my Finnish posts. Thus, posting less frequently in English might allow me to write Finnish entries more often than I do now.

For this reason, I ask you — my dear readers — to indicate on the discussion forum below, in a single word, whether you prefer to read the entries in Finnish or in English. Based on your comments, I will make my final decision about the future of this blog.

Changing the Clocks Reduces Trust in the European Union

The European Union will once again switch to standard time tonight. This happens despite the fact that 84 percent of Europeans would prefer to completely abandon the foolish and costly practice of changing the clocks twice a year.

I call it costly because it has been proven to cause fatigue, impair memory, concentration, and attention. In addition, people’s reaction times slow down, increasing their likelihood of making mistakes. This raises the risk of accidents and mishaps—and these errors don't improve work quality either.

On the other hand, there is no demonstrated benefit to the clock changes themselves. To understand this, one must be able to distinguish between the act of shifting the clocks back and forth and the impact of time zones on people. Even though daylight saving time might suit people well, its benefits could be achieved simply by a permanent shift to a later time zone—meaning the abandonment of the shift back to standard time.

Despite all these well-known facts, the clocks are still being adjusted. And the reason is none other than the inability of the European Union and its member states to implement a decision that has already been made in 2019.

Therefore, I would like to ask Ursula van der Leyen and the other members of the Commission, as well as the Members of the European Parliament, how they think this inability fosters people’s trust in the Union or its effectiveness in promoting the well-being of its citizens.

And yes. I am well aware that my question is rhetorical, and that every single European knows the answer. And the real answer to my rhetoric certainly doesn’t help promote the good things for which the EU was created.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The EU Is Suffocating Under Double Bureaucracy
EU Decision-Makers Did the Bear a Disservice
During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed

Ivory trade from Greenland to Ukraine

Vikings settled on the uninhabited southwestern coast of Greenland thousand years ago. That was enabled by a technological innovation that allowed them to use wooden ships in long distance sailing. However, after just few centuries the early settlements along the southwestern coast disappeared. 

The reason for the disappearance of Norse has thereafter remained a mystery. The explanations presented include cumulative environmental damage, gradual climate change, conflicts with Inuit peoples, loss of contact and support from Europe, cultural conservatism and failure to adapt to an increasingly harsh natural environment and opening of opportunities elsewhere after the black death had left many farmsteads abandoned in Iceland and Norway as well as declining value of ivory in Europe.

The last option was based on the fact that some Vikings are known to have organised summer trips to the more northerly area, where they hunted walruses, narwhals and polar bears for their skins, hides and ivory. Besides their use in making garments and shoes, these resources also functioned as a form of currency, as well as providing the most important export commoditie.

Recently it was reported in Science that Vikings shipped walrus ivory all the way to Kyiv, the capital of today´s Ukraine. This trade route is much longer than was thought based on previous studies - up to 4 000 km. This information was worked out by DNA and chemical analyses, which linked Ukrainian walrus tusk materials to a genetic group of walruses found only in the western Atlantic Ocean. 

The trade was obviously highly profitable, and may have lead to overhunting of Greenlandic walruses, due to the consumer demand in Eastern Europe. That seems to strengthen the hypothesis that Norse settlers abandoned Greenland in the 1300s at least partly due to the ending ivory trade.

This finding is just one of the historical facts that shows how medieval people had connections over long distances. And partially highlights how incorrect we are, if we consider our time as completely unique in its global connections and trade. Instead of qualitative differences, the change is only quantitative. That is, in the speed that allows us to make contacts throughout the world. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
World oceans are filled with previously unknown viruses
Soil subsides under cities, but every cloud has a silver lining
Vikings and the technological cutting edge