Great Discussion…Allow Me a Few Responses

My recent posts have generated some great discussion. While I generally try to stay out of the discourse, I’ve enjoyed reading the comments so much that I must share a few ideas that came to me from them:

When people say that’s the last time they’ll use a Rick Steves guidebook after I spout off politically, I’m sad and I wonder why. Then I remember that I used to love Dennis Miller (and all his hilarious “rants”) until I learned of his conservative politics. While I’m sure he’s as funny as ever, I no longer find him entertaining (and therefore no longer buy his CDs). So perhaps for me, too, speaking out is bad for business.

If someone’s politics really annoy me, it’s usually because they are either flesh-and-blood relatives (my Dad) or smart and funny. Mixing funny, smart, irreverent, and conservative (Dennis Miller) confounds me (maybe like I confound some people who wish they could still like me).

I always find it interesting that I most offend some people simply by being willing to sacrifice a little business in order to share political ideas I’ve picked up in my travels. The norm in our society today is to protect your career or business by keeping your ethics and personal beliefs to yourself. I keep meeting people who support the war they know is wrong because they work for a company that builds airplanes. I meet people at NORML conventions who can’t tell their workmates that they’re at a conference working to change marijuana laws because it would threaten their chances at a promotion. I keep meeting quiet people who believe in freedom who tell me it’s courageous to speak out.

Kathy: I once literally stood on a soapbox in London’s Speakers’ Corner and gave a little lecture…it was fun and drew a huge crowd. I like how you likened a blog to Speakers’ Corner. Now that you mention it, I think you’re correct.

I’ve been visiting Speakers’ Corner for 30 years. It’s like a dozen blogs raging simultaneously. Each loudmouth has his Humberd-ian sidekick. Gentlemanly, tone-deaf, and uninvited, he chimes in rhythmically, adding to the strangely lovable, eccentric mix that keeps people heading down to Hyde Park each Sunday morning.

Some people say I should stick to travel. After 25 years of giving my “budget travel” talk all over the USA, I now give a talk called “Travel as a Political Act.” It just feels so much more worthwhile. Maybe that’s why, when my church friends were moving from my conservative suburban Lutheran church to the hip, progressive one in downtown Seattle (back in the Iran/Contra days), I chose — as a matter of principle — to stay with my neighborhood church even though I was politically the odd duck.

I find that people who are most adamant about our right to militarize the Middle East to protect our access to its oil are also generally the most evangelical about the free market. If they believe in the free market, why not just let it work? Whatever you might think of Arab states, their natural resources are captive to the wonderful (and ultimately omnipotent) laws of supply and demand. They can only charge what the market will bear. If they charge too much, it will stimulate international markets to find an alternative. With military intervention, we subvert the free market. Come on, hawks and conservatives…trust in the free market (and trust in your ability to make money without wars). I believe that the $2 trillion we’re spending on this war has, ironically, created a vast and extremely profitable industry (more so even than in past wars) that cheats the free market…and the rest of us, too. I believe the free market will humble the Arab oil barons much more effectively (and economically) than our military.

Kent: I’m the first one to admit that travel takes oil. I wish there was bold and honest leadership to put an effective carbon tax on airfares so that those of us who fly had to pay for some program to make it carbon-neutral. If it cost $500 more per ticket, I’d be thankful for the opportunity to pay the true cost of the flight. If half as many people would then travel, I’d be perfectly willing to make half as much money in my business. (In a recent interview for an airline magazine, they asked me my prediction for the hot destination in the future. I said, “Our own backyard — as that’ll be the only place we’ll be able to go if we don’t get serious about climate change.”)

The problem as I see it is that our government is “government by the people via the corporations the people own.” Therefore it is elected primarily to create and protect a business-friendly environment for those corporations to profit-maximize (which is what they are legally obligated to do in the interest of their shareholders). A fundamental difference between us and Europe is that their government is by and for the people, even if that means legislating something not good for short-term business (e.g., making people pay for the disposal costs of a car when they purchase it). While I would much rather run my business here in the USA than in Europe, in the interest of people who will follow us, the environment, and a sustainable economy, I’d trade off a little business-friendliness for European priorities and ethics.

To Kent and others who wonder: For the record, as a matter of principle, I have never paid a penny beyond the price of an economy fare to fly. If someone bumps me up to business class, I’ll happily take it, but I really wish planes only offered economy class. (Frequently as I fly, I don’t keep track of my miles, either…but that’s for another blog entry.)

Maggie: I don’t take tax breaks for my “women’s violence shelter.” Until we need it ourselves, my wife and I have used our retirement nest egg to buy an apartment building that we let the YWCA use to house 24 single moms and their kids who would otherwise be homeless. If enjoying the tax-free joy of housing people rather than earning taxable interest income is a tax break, then maybe you’re correct. But I just think it’s a smart way to put your equity to good use until you need it later. (For all the details, go to the “About Rick/Media Corner” of our website and look under “Social Activism.”)

Laura: If you’d like the text of my “Travel as a Political Act” talk, go into that same Media Corner and find the article called “Innocence Abroad.” It’s pretty close, but I’m working on writing up the talk better.

Jeff: I didn’t feel the Marine acted disrespectfully to me. I respected his confidence that he was doing the right thing. You say the tone of my comments is “growing more anti-American and hateful every week.” I don’t mean to be unpatriotic or hateful. I actually believe I am motivated by a love of my country. And if I point out that we (via our military) have killed far more innocent people than terrorists have killed innocent Americans, I inject that truth into discussions not in a hateful way, but as a patriot. Allowing our country to be dumbed down by the media…now that’s anti-American. Dumb electorate = dumb government. And that’s a mistake that we can no longer afford.

Comments

102 Replies to “Great Discussion…Allow Me a Few Responses”

  1. Rick I think this is probably one of your best blogs that I have ever read. Not only is it couragous to challenge some maintstream thinking out there but you have thoughtfully defended your position extraordinarily well. The war is a difficult topic for many of us as we are in it now but not happy about the way we got here now that we have more facts. I have friends who have lost sons to the war and it is distressing to me that this war will likely go down in history as another Vietnam or worse. I for one never bought into the war being only about oil I thought it was more for safety and humanitarian reasons but it appears I am in the minority and at some point have to rethink that issue. I believe your explanation above on oil is well laid out and VERY thought provoking. I don’t necessarily think our government is by and for corporations as opposed to businesses I believe it is the sitting president and congress in place at the time that makes it that priority. As much as we say about Bill and his antics we at least had a good economy going and I do feel that when democrates are in power we do have a more people friendly government. If I could trust someone with fixing environmental issues I’d pay more too but who do we entrust with that, look what a mess the Kyoto issue has become and you can’t trust the UN they will muck it up. So in closing I think you did an outstanding job addressing the negative comments (and glad you liked my Hyde Park comment). I would not stop using your travel guide if I did not agree with something if I did that I wouldn’t use hardly anything anyone produced. I did laugh about the Denis Miller thing because I love him also and having a slight conservative, love him more for his outspokeness along with Denis Leary. Just don’t get me started on NORML that I disagree with but will defend your right to lobby for legalization of pot. Again great job on the post and if you ever give up travel writing you have a future in rap whih I loved.

  2. Just one more thought…instead of being a diversified people we need to remain united with the EU as well as ourselves. While everyone is freting about the war being all about oil in Iraq no one is watching what Russia is doing. Serbia has just signed an energy pact to distribute Russian gas exports to Europe; in return a Russian company (the oil arm of Gazprom, the state-run gas giant) is to get a controlling share in Serbia’s national oil monopoly. Putin , accompanied by his likely successor, Dmitry Medvedev, recently signed a deal with Bulgaria to build a new pipeline across the Black Sea. Called South Stream, this will pipe Russian gas direct to Europe, bypassing transit countries such as Ukraine and Poland. In this, it matches Nord Stream, a similar bypass under the Baltic.South Stream may stymie a rival EU effort, Nabucco, which was meant to bring gas from the Caspian and Central Asia to western Europe through the Balkans. Nabucco would be the only pipeline from the region not to cross Russian territory, giving Europe the hope of more diversified gas supplies. Nabucco’s prospects already looked shaky: gas for it must come from either a trans-Caspian pipeline (which Russia has blocked) or Iran (which America dislikes). If South Stream were built, it would make Nabucco uneconomic. Russia is again becoming a superpower and a threat to both us and the EU -have you seem what they have been doing to their old Eastern Europe countries as punishment for having the audacity to become democracies. Instead of watching Iraq so closely how about goggling Russian news and see what is going on over there. Putin has been and continues to be a dangerous man and we need to be shoring up our relations with the EU to come together as a bloc to save all our economies. Did you notice who has bailed us out of the recent subprime debacle and now has a chunk of our souls-the middle east banks and asian banks.Let’s keep our eye on the correct ball that could cripple all of us .

  3. Please stay on the soap-box! Comment: “government by the people via the corporations the people own.” – I can’t decide whether the U.S. has become an oligarchy or a “corporatocracy” – likely a bit of both. I disagree that corporations are governed by their shareholders though, these day’s they are maximizing the income of their executives rather than their shareholders, who generally can’t even change the directors. And to address the other Kathy’s concern about Russia, I found this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/magazine/27world-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin very interesting. The writer thinks we’re looking at a tri-polar world with Europe, China and the U.S. balancing each other – and with the U.S. having a weaker hand at present.

  4. Hooray for you guy. When I am in the air descending into Helsinki in May in my cheap and cramped seat, I will salute you.

  5. Great post! I’m waiting now for the blog on tracking airline mileage. I applaud you for your tax position on the the YWVA apartments. True giving! I think it is wonderful you address specific concerns brought up my specific individuals. Thanks for sharing!

  6. Dear Rick, Although I disagree with almost all of your political views I will continue to enjoy this blog and participate in it. After all, who wants to be in a blog where everybody agrees. Also, my wife and I are hooked on your travel shows. They helped quite a bit during our trip to Vienna and Budapest last year(Buffet Trzesniewski everyday in Vienna). Keep on traveling and blogging.

  7. Kathy Cary-LOL—-Ok now are you in my European Union Studies class? I just posted that article you are refereing to in your post yesterday for my class to read. This weeks assignment we are talking about whether the UN is a relevant organziation and is it worth the money and I found that same article of immense interest. You think this board gets heated up you should see that one from 72 students. The information about Russia was from this weeks economist.com. — Titled Eastern Europe,America, Russia ” Pipedreams” Jan 24th 2008 | VILNIUS From The Economist print edition http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10566657. two great minds and all that-

  8. Rick – even though I don’t always agree with everything you say – you are right on with your last comment to Jeff – this was a great blog!! thanks.

  9. Maps Rick…… When will your new books with the great new maps be outÉ Keep up a great blog. We enjoy your stories, ideas and tips. Thanks.

  10. KathyM – alas not in your class, lol. Did go to a seminar on Russia this weekend – learnt that the birthrate dropped well below replacement rate after ’91. Although now inching up, that’s an awful lot of largely empty space out east, much of it much closer to Beijing than Moscow…

  11. KathyC- Back in 2005 I was on a Best of Europe Rick Steves Tour and met someone who was an assigned roomate that has since then become one of my best friends and frequent travel partners. In 2006 she and I went to Russia together and since then I have been watching Russia intently, it was such a surreal experience there. With that and after a Rick Steves Paris tour in 2006 I also became engrossed with the geopolitics of the EU after some great stimulating interactions with our tour guide who was Dutch living in Paris and her friends and I started taking classes toward an EU certificate with the hopes of when my son graduates college next year to do something on an international level. A plug for Ricks tours, not only did I meet that great person who travels with me, through the tour, but two of the guys I meet and have remained close friends with gave my son some excellent advice while he was chosing courses in college, talked to him about IT opportuntites and now are helping him find some good IT opportunities through their companies (one guy works for Cisco). The people I met on that tour are friends for life and we still keep in contact. One couples son had graduated from West Point and died in 2006 in Iraq, I felt like a member of my own family had passed, their grief was mine and maybe that was the turning point of my blindly believing everything I read about the war. My life has been richer for the people I met on the Best of Europe tour that I still feel are my extended family.

  12. KathyM – I’ll be on my fourth RS tour in April (Sicily) – agree that you meet great people. Have also been to Russia, in ’04 – train from St. P. to Ulan Ude, with stops and home stays – incredible experience. Surprised by the poor state of the infrastructure and the considerable poverty – although a few made out like bandits in the early nineties. Gorbachev is not a hero to the people I talked to. Security is also a big concern – I was in the east when Putin announced he would appoint the regional governors and was surprised to find people were OK with that because they cared more about security than electing governors.

  13. Great blog entry Rick. What I find refreshing about your blog is what I also enjoy about your travel writing. You interject your opinions and do not give us the “vanilla” that we sometimes get from other travel guides. While I may not always agree with your opinions on places to eat or stay or visit, I appreciate that you do not hold back because it may offend someone. I also appreciate that about your blog entries. And with this blog entry I especially enjoyed the line “Each loudmouth has his Humberd-ian sidekick” LOL

  14. Rick, Thanks for the quick response to my blog criticism. I probably should have said “hateful” to current US policy as opposed to implying “hateful” to the US in general, but I do get a sense from your blog that America is the source of mostly evils(ie, global warming, healthcare, weak dollar, military imperilism). When I read the description of your encouter with the Marine, it remindeds me alot of something Michael Moore would do. If I recall from an earlier post of medicine you were complimentary of his movies, and he employs the same tactics. I personally don’t like that approach from the right or the left. Trust me, as a philosophical libertarian I don’t like over extending with our military or in supporting a Nanny state, but I don’t agree that “we” are killing innocent civilians now anymore that “we” killed innocent civilians in WW2. It is the unintended result of any war in history for whoever you judge to be the “good” or “moral” side and much different than the pre-meditated act of flying into a building. The current war was sold as “security” and no matter how much that argument has shifted or was based on bad info it was supported by most at the time(as I recall a certain Senator from NY was onboard) and only in hind sight are most people saying it is a mistake. I don’t think this is some big oil company conspiracy, more likely an over reaction to feeling venreble. Much like the over reaction Gore disciples have about global warming. BTW, just wondering, why have liberals stop saying Global Warming and now always say Climate Change? Just wondering, is it so that if we have a couple cold years, an Ice Age can be predicted instead of everyone drowning? Not saying man is not influencing the environment but how is the “Cult” so sure. Scientist argue both sides. Rick, as I said before I think your intentions are good but in my opinion if the US is any kind of empire it is one that alot of the world would trade passports to be in, if not the Europeans.

  15. You know Rick, I find Dennis Miller more funny than ever before and much more entertaining. I still support him… This is going to be a tough year for travel companies that specialize in travel to Europe, good thing you have already made your fortune. Good luck with the political thing, I hope it works out for you no matter what you choose to do. BTW, do any of the commenters work for you?

  16. diCarter-LOL-I don’t work for him but my son and I traveled with him and Anne on his maiden Best of Scandinavia in 2000 when he was finetuning the tour before he changed over from it being a train tour to a bus tour. And he is what he is- what you see is what you get. He works really hard, sprinted into town while we were eatting to research some new leads, shared a sweater with my son and played chess with my son at night (he was 14 and a pain in the butt at that time) and took time to sign books for people who constantly stopped him on the street. Unless someone is going to tell me that he takes all his profits and gives it to Putin to take over the world or is investing in China his politics means little to me. His products are superior- I still have my old travel bag from 2000 and a new one both in good shape, his books are great and his tours are memories for life. I have traveled Insight, Trafalgar, Brendan and Globus and I don’t know what their CEO’s political views or values are and unless Brendan was giving money to some splinter IRA group from my tour money I really don’t care . He started from the ground and worked his company to the million dollar business it is today by sweat and sacrifice. I met his daughter Jackie in 2005 on our Best of Europe tour and she is just as nice and down to earth as Rick and Anne. Why not just give him his due for being a hard worker and good business man even if we all don’t agree with his politics, no one agrees with me all the time or even most of the time.

  17. Rick, these are your best blog posts ever. I still use the Back Door Bag I bought in ’93, but I’ll try to steer a little business your way to make up for the knuckleheads.

  18. KathyM: I have used Rick’s services in the past. I was just trying to decide if I should give him the same consideration as he has given Dennis Miller, now that we all know each other’s politics.tehe The reason most good business people don’t espouse their personal politics on the company blog is simply to avoid losing business from a large portion of their customer base. I guess if you are a celebrity like Dennis and Rick, you are what you are…fair enough. We all have to decide who we want to do business with. BTW, I am not an employee either…

  19. dicarter- That’s the beauty of our country you can do business with whom ever you want, not to sound trite but losing 100 people from buying books due to his politics is what 2,200 at 22 a book, it won’t put a dent in his budget. Let me tell you this, I have Rick’s personal email and I communicate with him fairly regularly because he is always open to what I have to say, he might not agree with me but he always acknowledges receiving my email and if he agrees with me thanks me if he doesn’t he tells me and I am not offended. I am an attorney and on the 2005 tour something came up that I felt he needed to be aware of that might present some exposure to liability- not his fault by any means just one of those legal things. I wrote him as soon as I got back he immediately addressed the issue and got me with Steve Smith who within 2 days rectified any problem for the future. I feel safe on his tours, I feel his tour guides are highly educated and always friendly and I trust his recommendations. It’s one thing not going to a car dealer if he sells you a lemon that could harm you while driving and does nothing about it, but just because your views don’t line up big deal, he keeps his tourists safe and gives good service. I don’t agree with the NORML stuff because I see what it does through the court system to addicted parents and kids in Juvenile Court but am I going to berate him for his view that in moderation it is OK, no. There was a time he had a thread years ago about legalization of pot and some people were telling each other how to sneak it in country to country, that I had an issue with and told him because that was in my opinion aiding and abetting a crime, he took those posts down and monitored the posting religiously to make sure that did not happen again. He works with his church, he helps battered women and supports feeding the homeless. He is a liberal I’m right of center, his books are great and he’s a good person that’s all I need to know.

  20. Hey Rick, some of us free-market, free-trade conservatives (or “liberals”, conversely, as we are known in Europe) were against the war simply because wars usually destroy marketplaces, infrastructure, and bilateral trade relationships, not build them.

  21. Rick, I appreciate your honesty and hope that no one stops reading your books because of your politics. I’m a fairly conservative person myself but cannot help but marvel at this world we live in and the way we seem to be destroying the world and each other. I truly believe that through travel we can understand each others opinions and views and learn to appreciate what we have, as well as what others have. Keep on doing what you are doing and hopefully we will all keep on traveling.

  22. Thank you Rick. You said “Each loudmouth has his Humberd-ian sidekick” and since you spelled my name right, I guess that was a compliment. But wow, I wish I knew what that meant. Will someone translate for me, really. As for your comments on the Iraq war, you are a Johhny-come-lately. I was against it long before it started. Had the UN followed my advice when I visited there, twice, nearly 60 years ago, we would not have had that problem in the first place. I said, “Stop all Immigration, replace it with Invitation.” Remember, I have said a “Country consists of a Border and a Culture, and if you violate either, out you go.” Well Bush has violated the ME’s borders and cultures, but the ME people who have invaded England, France, and the USA, have tried, somewhat successfully to replace a livable culture with their culture that they hated enough to leave. We have not used a tour group on our nearly 1,000 nights in Europe, 100 nights on ships, and 49 states, and dozens of other countries. But I dare not say that it is difficult to travel as successfully as my Sweetie and I have done in our RV, because someone will again accuse me of bragging. We spent nearly 6 months in France during visits over 25 years, and spent not one night in a hotel, and ate in a “regular” restaurant twice in that time. No chef anywhere in the world could surpass my Most Beautiful Sweetie as a cook, and all the ladies in Amsterdam, and on the Champs-Élysées could not match her … … aw well, enough.

  23. To Jim Humberd: What he means is that each speaker in London’s Speaker Corner has someone like you (Humberd-ian) who disagrees with them.

  24. To Jim Humberd redux: I just realize I mis-typed “disagree” – should be ‘disagree’ or better yet, chimes right in alongside the “loudmouth”. (in this case Rick’s analogy has himself as the loudmouth)

  25. Rick………Thanks for sending the location of the Innocence Abroad. Your blog makes for some really fascinating reading. Laura

  26. Jim Humberd, You have to read on “Gentlemanly, tone-deaf, and uninvited, he chimes in rhythmically,” I think that whole phrase was meant to describe your additions to this blog. He does follow it up by saying that it adds to the strangely loveable eccentric mix. This is what makes Rick’s writing so great! He is able to say a LOT with just a few words!

  27. Jim Humberd- You realize since no one really knows **exactly** what this means as it was sort of loose and cryptic, everyone is going to guess about its meaning. By the time we are done there will be an actual working definition and it may be used in conversations much the same way as the words saggin, baggin, chill pill and phat. There will be a Humberd-ian type friend, a Humberd-ian experience etc.

  28. >Trust me, as a philosophical libertarian I don’t like over extending with our military or in supporting a Nanny state, but I don’t agree that “we” are killing innocent civilians now anymore that “we” killed innocent civilians in WW2. Jeff, How dare are you to compare the current Iraq war with WW2? The current war was an act of aggression by the United States. Whether Iraq had WMD at a time when this war began is irrelevant – in any case, Iraq did not present a direct danger to the United States. And please don’t mention 9/11 and Iraq in the same paragraph – other then frightening this country, 9/11 had no relation to Iraq war. >The current war was sold as “security” and no matter how much that argument has shifted or was based on bad info it was supported by most at the time(as I recall a certain Senator from NY was onboard) and only in hind sight are most people saying it is a mistake. There were plenty of people both inside this country and outside thinking that it was a huge mistake at a time. If democrats did not have guts to stand against it, it doesn’t mean that significant opposition to this war did not exist. The fact that not only UN could not be persuaded to support it, but even core partners from NATO were against it, shows how many people and governments were correct at a time and how wrong this government was.

  29. Sergey, when you make a statement like “Whether Iraq had WMD at a time when this war began is irrelevant” I have a hard time knowing where to go with this debate. I made the mistake of assuming that Americans would a agree we have the right to defend ourselves. The extent of the threat Iraq presented is very debatable and my main reason for not wanting to be there in the first place. I have no interest in so-called “nation building”. It’s all come down to intent. My comparison to WW2 was made to illustrate there is no such thing as victimless war, not compare the necessity of the two. I’m not sure under what conditions you would support a war in any theoretical world. But if there was such a condition and you intended to win, there would be loss of innocent life. Would you consider that on par with terrorism as Rick first made reference to. I do not and this is one of the reasons I responded in the first place. I welcome any rational response. Sorry to hijack the travel blog with politics.

  30. KathyM — you and Rick are so clever regarding Humberd-ian! Jim Humberd has made ETBD history. Humberd-ian may become as popular as Ricknic. On my ETBD tours, I have encountered some Humberdians . . . intelligent, likeable, and sometimes annoying. Sergy – “The current war was an act of aggression by the United States. Whether Iraq had WMD at a time when this war began is irrelevant – in any case, Iraq did not present a direct danger to the United States. And please don’t mention 9/11 and Iraq in the same paragraph – other then frightening this country, 9/11 had no relation to Iraq war. >The current war was sold as “security” and no matter how much that argument has shifted or was based on bad info . . . ” 100% agreement!!!

  31. Rick, I’m a fan of your books/shows, and have little issue with you throwing a wee bit of politics into the mix. That being said I’m not sure if you’re being naive (unlikely)or deliberately ignoring facts to make a point (probably). With regard to “militarising the Middle East” your European friends have been doing it for generations. There is a simple reason for France and other European countries resisting the invasion of Iraq–they were about to lose one of their biggest arms markets. Whether its UK fighters to Kuwait, French tanks to Iraq, Czech Semtex to Iran, or German anti aircraft systems to the Gulf States, all of the European nations (yes including the “peaceful” ones like Denmark and Switzerland), have lined up like pigs at a trough to get their share of the arms sales to the middle east. Secondly, as far as “a government by the people, via the corporations they own/elected primarily to create a business friendly environment”, there are few industries in Europe more subsidized by taxpayers, and promoted by their governments than the arms merchants. Its a relationship that goes back centuries, and isnt likely to end soon. They were militarizing the rest of the world for profit and strategic gain, long before the US stepped onto the scene.

  32. It’s sad enough, but natural enough, I suppose, that people would be afraid to use their free speech in the name of protecting their jobs. But what is tragic is refusing to buy Rick’s guidebooks, or Dixie Chicks CDs, or what have you, because you did not agree with their statement. That is actively punishing somebody for using their free speech and it seems to me, contrary to one of the things this country is supposed to stand for.

  33. Just curious. How many of us wouold refuse to give our children a vaccine if we knew the scientist who developed it was Middle-Eastern? Democratic (or Republican)? Athiest? or even female? or had smoked pot the night before his big breakthough?

  34. Angie, I totally agree with you. People not wanting to share their views of say religion and politics or lifestyle to protect their jobs is pretty much tied into our cultural norms and mores. How many people will admit to being Wiccan, Santarian, being in “the lifestyle”, belonging to a nudist club or being a communist. Most will not because according to our mainstream cultural norms and mores these are people “on the fringe.” And admiting to smoking pot or lobbying for its legalization may raise a red flag to have you drug tested if you work for a person of a conservative or “family oriented” company because it still is a crime. But when it comes to putting out a product, unless Rick is sprinkling his book with spells and charms and witchcraft, or Microsoft is subliminally programming Windows to tell me to rob and bank and send all profits to Bill Gates I don’t think a product should be judged by someone CEO’s politics unless it somehow is going to harm the general economy-which we are doing pretty good on our own these days. I’m not really sure there is such a thing as pure freedom of speech as our forefathers set it to be used. People pretty much are guarded in their speech even if just for the fact they are afraid of getting sued in our oh so politically correct society. Originally it was set forth to protect you from being arrested if you said something against the king or authority but now freedom of speech includes burning the flag (making a statement) and dancing naked (considered a form of art and art is speech). If Bill O’Reilly can flap his mouth on his talking points why is anyone pointing fingers at Rick or anyone else that has a blog.

  35. Thanks KathyM; I guess I’m trying to point out the hypocrisy–none of us would think it was fair if we, even inadventently, said something critical about the war, the president or whatever, and paid the price in terms of a promotion or raise we otherwise deserved. We ought to be willing to apply the same generosity to other people. But it is difficult–I laughed at Rick’s Dennis Miller example because it was so dead-on.

  36. One of the great things about this country is that we have the ability to share our political views and not have to worry about government retribution. However, while Rick (in this case) has used his rights as an American to voice his opinions, it is with that same right that people can refuse to use his services in an act of disagreement. I am an extremely conservative Republican who disagrees with about 80% of what Rick Steves has posted as his political views. However, I feel his “product” is a superior one. His travel advice is the best in the business, and I highly enjoy his shows. So it comes down to the fact that I am more interested in what his company has to offer me personally for travelling than what the CEO has to say about US or world politics and religion. That is my personal choice. Other people can choose to boycott in support of their political views. That’s why we love our country….

  37. But to me that’s the point–somebody’s political or social views are, and should be, distinct from the quality of the goods/service they offer. It’s not Rick’s personal politics that change the quality of his product, but people’s perception and that’s what leads to “punishing” people for expressing their views.

  38. Rick, I wouldn’t fear loss of business from sharing your political viewpoints. There might be some people here and there that will discontinue using the Rick Steves brand but overall, in my opinion, it is worth it. To inject your honest and unbiased political views is an admirable thing to do, expecially considering you are right on about many different issues. I would recommend continuing to say what you believe. People need to hear a voice that is more experienced in a grass-roots world view.

  39. To Thomas in Vienna: I totally agree with you!! This blog has filled many enjoyable lunch hours for me since the US Writers Strike took away my favorite shows (and some of their fan blogs). Hello to Eric in Raleigh–NC represents!!

  40. WOW, Rick, Dean, Joel, Jill, KathyM and Audrey, I had to go look in the mirror to make sure who that was that got out of my bed this morning. I like the “intelligent, likeable, and sometimes annoying” part, but where did the “sometimes” come from? Jack Smith, a Columnist for the Los Angeles Times for 30 years or so, wrote about the “parlor game” where a person is to describe himself in one word. In a following column, he quoted my letter to him as saying, “For better or worse, most everybody agrees that in both its positive and its negative connotations, my word is accurate. My word? Curious!” Perhaps the problem is that there is no subject on which I do not have an opinion. Rick and I are in agreement in much that he says politically, and even more of what he says about travel. My travel mode is completely different from what he sells these days, but I seem to remember that some years ago he also traveled in a small RV. Is that not correct? ===== Now I must repeat, In addition to clothes, money, and a passport, the most important thing to take with you on vacation is a positive attitude. It’s amazing how many stupid, ignorant, inefficient, obnoxious people you meet when you are in a bad mood. That’s true even when you aren’t on vacation. ===== Well come to think of it, it is also true when you write a message on a blog.

  41. Jim-LOL -I’m not sure it was an RV-I think he drove one of those Volkswagon mini bus things from the 60’s with those stick on yellow orange and green psychodelic vinyl Flowers and Flower Power; his tours were like what 7 people – he was the one who booked the tour, drove the “bus” and was the tour guide. We still need an accurate and working definition of Humberd-ian

  42. To Andy R, that is right on. Many people seem to have a short memory when it comes to Europe. One only needs to look to the continent of Africa to see the results of a not too long ago European colonization.

  43. Jeff, I do not question the right of any country to defend itself. When the US started the last war in Afganistan, I did not object to it, neither did most of our allies. However, the core issue of the Iraq war discussion is the extent of the threat that Iraq presented at a time and this issue can not be reduced to simply being called “debatable”. It was not claimed that Iraq had intentions of attacking Americans or American soil. This government claimed that Iraq could transfer WMDs to terrorists which then could attack us. In my view, such purely hypothetical claim cannot be used to justify a war, unless some serious evidence about such intentions exists. Since such evidence was never presented, I was against this war. Many countries have WMD programs and it doesn’t mean that the US should attack them one at a time. I objected to WW2 analogy because the justification of the US WW2 involvement can not be questioned. Obviously, any war causes loss of innocent life, but the difference between a war to defend ourselves (WW2) and “a war of choice” is just too significant to make such comparisons. A question of equaling terrorism with deaths caused by a government is a difficult one for me. Without taking a position on this issue, I will say that I think such discussion is really a distraction from the main problem of justification of Iraq war and its horrendous consequences. The deaths caused by “a war of choice” cannot be justified by saying “at least we are not terrorists”. To the people who died or lost family members, it is probably not too important whether the deaths were caused by a terrorist organization or a government.

  44. I think anyone who finds it necessary to quote themselves repeatedly has an over-inflated value of themselves. Oh and you can quote me on that.

  45. I translate Humberd-ian within my perceived context of Rick’s comment as —-Contrarian. Many Contrarians are uninvited but are mostly harmless.

  46. > “When I read the description of your encouter with the Marine, it remindeds me alot of something Michael Moore would do…he employs the same tactics” What “tactics”? It was the Marine who approached Rick, no matter what you may think of Rick’s response.

  47. Humberd-ian = gainsayer (perhaps an archaic term for elderly people who contradict inconsistently . . . well maybe being elderly doesn’t have anything to do with it). :-) Cheers! Geez-the word I have to type below to verify I’m human and not a spammer is “rebellious”! :-)

  48. To: Jim Humberd(-ian) You`re officially famous now :))))) You even got Rick`s attention and some of his wit directed your way. I think you should apply to ETBD for a job, maybe `BLOG Co-ordinator and Idea Man“ Keep up the good sense of humour.

  49. Just a quick first-time comment (long-time reader). As a Canadian, it’s hard for me to understand why (I guess, Conservative?) Americans think that disagreeing with US Policy = being unpatriotic. A country’s foreign policy has nothing to do with patriotism, but everything to do with politics (and in these last 4…oops, 8 years, Bush). And abiding by Bush has nothing to do with patriotism. Am I totally off here ?

  50. Jim Humberd- you sly one you ARE famous already-I goggled you and you have a ton of stuff written about travel-interesting and well done in fact. http://www.travel-tidbits.com/ I think we all agree Humberd-ian= gainslayer, contrarian. “You are quite the Humberd-ian” I like it. The only contradiction is the wonderful lead in you wrote about your late wife very very sweet and not Humberdian at all.

  51. Shawn…Amen, Amen, Amen, Amen! Lifelong American here – I don’t get it either. I guess it is the last ditch salvage of the wronged. I had a Social Pysch class once that researched the social group of “Dooms-Dayers”. What happens when a sub-sect of people proclaim with utter confidence that the world will end Jan 1st 2001….and then it doesn’t? You would think it shakes their core right? I guess it doesn’t. It is such an afront to everything that they hold true in the world that they gain more confidence and hold on even stronger to what they believe in. They set a new date and justify why. It is a normal psychological function. So I guess in this particular situation – it is the only thing I can come up with. The Dooms-Dayers had their day in court and lost.

  52. > “One only needs to look to the continent of Africa to see the results of a not too long ago European colonization.” Europe did not colonize every inch of Africa, yet I see little difference between the parts they did and the parts they didn’t. That’s a lame excuse.

  53. Bill27, that’s **only** because I am on a 3 day countdown to leaving for a birthday week celebration to Vienna Prague and Budapest for a week to regain my sanity. So to quote a Dr. Philerism “no one can harsh my mellow” right now. As a matter of fact come to think of it my family is marking an X through each day ;)

  54. Rick, thanks for taking the time to address the comments on here. It is nice to know that you care what people say and choose to respond to that. We are just voices on a blog but it is nice to know we are heard, whether we agree or disagree. Apparently, you know some of the posters on here pretty well if you came up with Humberd-ian. :) Like kathyM, I defifinitely don’t agree with all your politicial views. However, I do appreciate the fact that I understand your side even if I disagree. That is your same philosophy for traveling in Europe. Don’t expect them to live or think like us. But get to know people and understand where they are coming from. You don’t have to agree but at least you understand and it gives you a bigger perspective when you leave. It is nice to know that you seem to apply that same thinking to posters on here. you may not agree but you will seek to understand. I have more to say on these things but need to process through all of this first. As well as a great blog entry, these are actually the most enjoyable, thought provoking, and entertaining comments of any entry Rick has had yet.

  55. KathyM, I wanted to address your comments on free speech. We have taken the original intention of free speech and twisted it into what we want it to mean today. Thanks for your historical perspective on what free speech was intended to mean for our founders. With that said, I wish people would think about the separation of church and state. Today, this means we do everything we can to keep any mention of God out of government. However, people have failed MISERABLY to understand the context of this for the founders. In England, the king was the head of the church. When forming America, the founding fathers didn’t want the government to poke its nose in the affairs of the state. Not the other way around. It’s funny how we got that backwards now and missed the original intention of the separation of church and state.

  56. Correction – When forming America, the founding fathers didn’t want the government to poke its nose in the affairs of the CHURCH.

  57. Jeremy B-if I read you correctly I agree The Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. Itforms a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to any supreme being. The U.S. government derives from people (not God). The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion. Although the Constitution does not include the phrase “Separation of Church & State,” neither does it say “Freedom of religion.” However, the Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a “wall of separation between church and State.” Madison had also written that “Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States.” There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers.Many Christian’s who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration of Independence as “proof” of a Christian America. The reason appears obvious: the Declaration mentions God. However, the Declaration of Independence does not represent any law of the United States. It came before the establishment of our lawful government (the Constitution). The Declaration announced the separation of America from Great Britain and it listed the various grievances with them.As the United States delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of the U.S. but later clarified in the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states: “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christianity.” Now its flipped we don’t want the church in our government…unlike the UK that is still intertwined.

  58. Oh my, the name Humberd appears on this page 26 times already, and I thank those who spelled it correctly. I want to be plain and make sure that you understand that while I have traveled a lot, in no way do I want to be looked at as competition for Rick. I have nothing for sale, but I do offer a lot of stories of our travel. (Thank you KathyM – Jan 29, 2008 4:35 PM) These days the trip from the bed to the bathroom, leaves me more tired than driving from the Eiffel Tower to St. Peter’s, years ago. Off the Travel subject, but in response to others —- My copy of the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, …” and on and on. The American Heritage Dictionary says — “Establishment: Something established, as an established church.” “Establishing: To set up; to bring about; to introduce.” Think about it, the Crystal Cathedral is “an establishment of religion,” the First Baptist Church is “an establishment of religion,” a Synagogue is “an establishment of religion,” and the Catholic Cathedral is “an establishment of religion.” Someone starting a new religion is “establishing a religion,” a word with a different meaning, a word not mentioned in the Constitution. But they must not make a law respecting an establishment of religion.

  59. KathyM, I was not arguing for or against the founders establishing America as a Christian nation. That wasn’t the point. Even though many of the founding fathers believed in God or supreme being, there was definitely a clear desire to separate church and state. You are actually making my point for me. You said it that the US government was derived from the people not God. EXACTLY! Look at the example of the England they came from. King was both head of church and state and it made for a bad mix. They saw how the mix of the two could be bad and intentionally kept them separate. However, it was because the King was over both that it was kept separate. It was from the perspective of the State being over the church that they wanted them to be separate. Church was for faith and the government was for the people. My point was that many people think that religion or faith is bad when it is in any part of the state. And that was not the intention at all. The government was not to be a part of the church. People now view it as church meddling into state and they should be separated. However, the original purpose was the other way around. That’s why you can have a Catholic, Muslims, or a Mormon run for President or senate or whatever office and no one objects because the government is for the people to decide. However, the state would never be allowed any part of church or religious affairs (other than reasons of tax status). And this hasn’t changed since our country was founded. The founding fathers never intended to keep anyone’s faith from affecting decisions that are made as this was for the people. But there was NO WAY the state was ever going to have say over the affairs of the church. England taught them that.

  60. My copy of the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, …” and on and on. The American Heritage Dictionary says — “Establishment: Something established, as an established church.” – Humberd. So Jim, you are basically saying congress (i.e.government) can make no law concerning the current practices of a religion. If I am correct, the King decided he would now be in charge of the church in England rather than the pope. So he goes and changes the current establishment of christian chuch in England. So that part of the constitution is there to protect these current institutions without fear of influence by the government correct?

  61. Rick, I have been an almost daily visitor to your website for several months now, but only recently came across the blog section. In response to some of the negative feedback your have received relating to come of your more “political” posts I just wanted to make a quick comment. A few readers had commented something to the effect of “stick to travel writing, people don’t buy your books and visit your website to hear your politics”. I totally diasagree. I think you are a terrific travel writer, but more importantly (to me) I think you are an eloquent, well-intentioned man who speaks his mind. I think that travel has taught you many important lessons, one of which being that maybe America doesn’t have all the answers, and makes mistakes. Knowing your political beliefs makes me think even more highly of you, makes me tell friends and family about your organization, and makes me return again and again to your website because I value your opinion. So from one Canadian reader, thank you. After seeing so much right-wing pro-war media coverage for so many years from “our neighbors to the south”, you a welcome breath of fresh air. I am, and will continue to be, (barring and unforseen huge change in your politics)a huge supporter. Liza from Canada

  62. Jim- Ok we have hit with a broadbrush on politics, the Iraq war and religion. I’m just waiting for someone to somehow bring Hillary into this and then watch the board explode. Is this what I am hearing you to say.. Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Prior to the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, and for 60 years thereafter, the courts took the position that the substantive protections of the Bill of Rights did not apply to actions by state governments. Subsequently, under the “incorporation doctrine”, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the establishment and free exercise clauses in such a manner as to restrict substantially the promotion of religion by state governments. (Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that “government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion”.) And from that The Free Exercise Clause is the accompanying clause with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights (part of the Constitution). As it states in full:“ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. ” The Warren Court adopted the “compelling interest” doctrine regarding the clause, holding that a state must show a compelling interest in restricting religion-related activities. Later court decisions retreated from this standard, permitting governmental actions that were neutral to interfere with religion, but Congress attempted to restore it by passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which the Supreme Court held was inapplicable to state action but applicable to feds.

  63. KathyM, I will not argue with you at all about how this ‘doctrine’ of separation of church and state evolved. You are definitely the expert in this. However, do you really think that the original intention when our country was founded was to eliminate a national religion? Yes and no. As you state it, no I don’t think that was their intention for religion to have no place or influence. However, a national religion as one that is established, run by, or influenced by the government was a definite no no. Again, the historical context shows you exactly what their experience was and what they were comining from. And regardless of what has been interpreted to mean today, I am certain that people didn’t look at it then as we look at it now. Yes, they wanted there to be a freedom of religion without a doubt so that people had a choice. Again, this was coming from England where the King established THE church of England was the Anglican Church as the Catholic Church no longer was the authority. In that sense, there was no freedom of religion for the people and the founding fathers wanted to make it certain that this was an option for people in our country – freedom of religion. I don’t think the motivation was to establish freedom from religion. That may have been a by product of the system that was established by a government of the people but wasn’t the intention or motivation. And there is the difference.

  64. Rick, your blog has spontaneously morphed into something bigger than you probably envisioned: A democracy project. As KathyM pointed out, almost every topic of importance to a citizen is being mentioned and discussed. What could be more important during an election year? At the risk of taking it a bit too far: Have you considered a dedicated “Speakers Corner” page? Or am I being Humberdian? (Sorry –wrong usage– but I had to squeeze it in.) Happy travels!

  65. Jeremy b- I’ll go down most of that same road with you but some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The others were Protestants except for three Roman Catholics, C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestants Constitutional Convention delegates, 28 were Episcopalian, 8 were Presbyterians, 7 were Congregationalists, 2 were Lutherans, 2 were Dutch Reformed, and 2 were Methodists. Many of the more prominent Founding Fathers were vocal about their opposition to organized religion or anti-clerical, such as Jefferson. Some of them often related their anti-organized church leanings in their speeches and correspondence, including George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson (who created the “Jefferson’s Bible”), Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, and Thomas Paine. However, a few of the more notable founders, such as Patrick Henry, were strong proponents of traditional religion. Several of the Founding Fathers considered themselves to be deists or held beliefs very similar to that of traditional Deists, including Franklin, Jefferson, Paine and Ethan Allen.Notwithstanding the spectrum of beliefs held by the Founding Fathers, most viewed religion in a favorable light. This is noted through their statements in speeches and correspondences in which they describe its role in molding “national morality” and securing the rule of law (George Washington), its check on human “wickedness” (Benjamin Franklin), and its preservation of a free government such as America (John Adams). Regardless, the division of church and state was always emphasized by the founding fathers. Although not a religion, Freemasonry was represented in John Blair, Benjamin Franklin, James Mchenry, George Washington, Abraham Baldwin, Gunning Bedford, William Blount, David Brearly, Daniel Carroll, Jonathan Dayton, Rufus King, John Langdon, George Read, Roger Sherman, James Madison, Robert Morris, William Paterson, and Charles Pinckney.

  66. Sergey, I’m not sure if your still tuned in to the blog today, but if so thanks for the response. I agree with a large part of your commentary, especially the last part “To the people who died or lost family members, it is probably not too important whether the deaths were caused by a terrorist organization or a government.” Well said, no more response needed. As far as the question of starting the war in the first place, I see it more as a strategic error and I think you see it more as a moral/ethical problem. Thus, I don’t have the same level of outrage. Of course the common citizen is not working with all the facts, but from media reports it seemed to me there was more actual proliferation risk with North Korea than Iraq. My problem with the liberal mindset, is despite the mistakes, who’s side are you on? We are there and I want the best result for America. Not trying to be mean, but coming from a conservative/libertarian mindset, liberals (or is the word progressive now, i get confused) seems to be more focused on whining and US bashing than anything else. Which I believe helps shape general international negative opinion. It doesn’t help that Bush is a poor communicator. Just being honest, maybe we can agree to disagree. On a side note, Kathy try the Langos in the Great Market Hall in Budapest. Best part of our Eastern European vacation last fall.

  67. Jeff- Yuum looked that up and it looks like my kinda food, thanks for the great tip. I’ll be interested to see what the people over there are thinking about our presidential candidates. I know we have to have someone who has a strong handle on our national agenda but boy we can use someone who has international relations as a priority. Last semester I had an instructor who spent 3 years over in the middle east and to my suprise she said the Clintons were not well thought of at all and with Brown in charge now could he bond with Obama and or Hillary or is he more in line with McCain and Romney. With a female in charge of Germany and fairly open minded who would she work best with and least not we forget the new French president Nicolas Sarkozy who being young himself seems more likely to hang better with Obama and Hillary.

  68. Well KathyM my love, I am not interested at this time in getting into all the ideas of this Supreme Court and that one. I was just talking about the way the First Amendment was originally written. I know that generation after generation interprets words differently, the advances (or is that just changes) in the methods available to communicate, and the change in our culture, leads to more and more differences in how we read and react to what was written years ago. Jeremy B, I don’t have an opinion on just what the limits are to “… respecting an establishment of religion … .“ Luckily for all of us, I am not on the Supreme Court. As for lunch in Budapest (or elsewhere), my Sweetie was the cook and responsible for the essential body nutrients, I was the driver and and my responsibility was to find the most beautiful spots to park the RV for meals. In Budapest, in 1980 while the Berlin Wall still stood, we went to the top of a hill in Pest, overlooking Budapest. There we found a large Russian Monument commemorating the “liberation” of Budapest in 1944-45. We ate lunch with the Danube River, Chain Bridge, Margaret Island, Margaret Bridge, and the Parliament Building (one of the most beautiful government buildings in Europe) just out our dining room window. The food was splendid, the view was superlative. And I am still waiting for agreement in what is meant by “Humberd-ian.” Sounds good, but we need agreement on the definition.

  69. Jim I think we decided on contrarian. I am by no means a constitutional lawyer so don’t look to me as an expert in that field. I am the much hated family lawyer. But I can tell you even in the deep South where I now live (although a native New Yorker) the only way we were able to get a copy of the Ten Commandments to be able to hang in the courthouse was to pass it off as a “historical” document and hang it with the Declaration and Constitution as of historical significance. If you get me started on the whole PC of the holidays etc I will be here for months. It is so hard to believe that in a 15 years how much things have changed in Eastern Europe and how lucky I am to be able to visit some place I never could have without much ado, twenty years ago.

  70. Aa number of different comments. KathyM, thanks for the breakdown. As you stated, many looked on religion favorably yet still insisted on the separation of church and state. With that said, I think this emphasizes my point that church influence on state is not so bad but the other way around was bad. And again, they could draw upon their own experiences in England. Jeff, I think you are correct in your statements. I am torn about the war for a couple of reasons. In hindsight, it looks like a bad idea and who knows the real motives for going and what information we did or didn’t have in doing so. Again, I understand anyone who is against the war and will not argue with them at all. However, I do get tired of people that just want to bash our country and their only comment is we should get out now or not have gone in the first place. That isn’t helpful or constructive to where we are. Everyone looks like a genius when hindsight is 20/20. And this is the part that is hard. Regardless of what you think, it is not easy to just leave. We started this and now have a responsibility. I would think even less of our nation if we didn’t take responsibility for our actions to try and fix this. As parents, people emphasize the importance of being responsible and accountable for our kids. In this case, shouldn’t we do the same? How can we go in, create chaos with the overthrow of Saddam, and then leave them in a mess and say “good luck!”? Jeff, KathyM, Jim – I LOVE Budapest. It is the one city in Eastern Europe I would love to go back to and spend more time. In our trip there in 2006, Hungary and Slovenia were my fave countries and Budapest was our fave city. Jim – I think we are following in your footsteps. My wife and I are 33 years old and I have been to 18 countries already. Between the 2 of us we have been to 22 (many of the same) and 4 continents and look forward to more traveling in the future!

  71. RICK, I need your help on what you meant by this Humberd-ian stuff. I have looked up the words Contrary, and Contrarian in the dictionary, then I re-read my last dozen posts, and can’t find the connection. But maybe that is just what confirms the use of the term. Don’t worry, you won’t hurt my feelings, nor will you bloat my ego (is that still possible?), but please explain. Since you have now made me famous, how could I complain, since you spelled my name right. The only contrarious thing I could see, is that I travel in a different mode than Rick’s tours. Someone said I was bragging when I told a little about my travel experience. I wonder what he would say if I told you I was introduced to the not-yet-called computer business in 1944, and that 45 years ago I trained NASA how to program a couple of the computers used to put the men on the moon. Well, even with all that experience, I wasn’t able to retire from a payroll until I was about 50 years old. Then my Sweetie and I traveled and traveled some more. By the way, one definition of “contrarian” has to do with the stock market, but I assure you I own no stock in ETBD.

  72. Jim– I know I looked contrarian up after I wrote it because it looked odd–it is the stock thing that is why I gave the OOPPS and contrary-ian (adding the ian like Humberd-ian)as a fix right after. Another person said gainsayer- which I looked up to mean contrary and disagrees. I can see you in Speakers Corner disagreeing openly -can’t you?

  73. KathyM Have a great holiday and birthday celebration. Enjoy the cheap beer in Prague and keep blogging from Budapest. We all need our holidays.

  74. Jackie, lame excuse for what? Which parts of Africa were not colonized by the British, French, Dutch, Germans, Italians, Portuguese,Spanish, or Belgians. Right or wrong, we need to finish the job in Iraq.

  75. KathyM said, “Jim, I can see you in Speakers Corner disagreeing openly – can’t you?” Not even for a minute Kathy, unless of course the speaker is as wrong as some people I read on the Internet, and not just on Rick’s site. And Bill, what would those parts of Africa be like today if they had not been colonized years ago? I sure do wish the British, French, Dutch, Germans, Italians, Portuguese, Spanish, or Belgians could have done it different and better, but I do believe the Africans are better off for that help. I know there are many Indians in our country who live in our culture, but just drive across Arizona and see how they live in their culture, and imagine what it would be like if we hadn’t helped. Yes I know, many were killed for no good reason, years ago. My Aunt and Uncle lived, and taught school on Indiana Reservations for 30 years, and they had great difficulty trying to help them live a better life than their parents had. And Bill, I would love to know how and what, Right or Wrong, we need to do to finish the job in Iraq.

  76. Thank you KathyM – I feel the same way. Most of us are not fortunate enough to afford to travel as we always hoped to. I don’t appreciate “having my nose rubbed in it” endlessly by someone lucky enough to have lived in a time when you could retire at 50 and have the world at a place to be perused at your leisure. This ain’t the 60s, 70s, 80s or even the 90s. Life as we know it has changed and so has our ability to explore it. My husband and I decided to to pass up a trip to Budapest and Prague because of the high cost of flights and the out of practical reach of the American dollar. It doesn’t make me less adventurous or worldly. All it means is that I’m less lucky with my timing.

  77. D- belive me when I tell you I hear what you are saying; I also have voiced my frustration about airfares to everyone I talk to. This trip I am taking is with Insight and I booked it months ago for a paultry 2500 including airfare. I needed a break from fulltime grandmother and mother as well as working person I felt my birthday week should be the time to go, not ideal time but worked into my schedule. It will only be a smathering because it is such a short visit but better than nothing. My friend and I have been looking to do Eastern Europe or some part thereof this summer but the airfare twists my stomach in a knot- $1500 plus surcharges and probably will go up again. With the economy so volatile it stops me from hitting that pay button as quickly as I had in the past.

  78. KathyM and D – Yes, airfare has gone up tremendously and it is getting to the point where people travel less and less. As an example, I live in CA and fly to Sc to see my family every year. A few years ago, I could fly RT for under $400 (it used to be cheaper than that). This past Christmas it cost me over $600, same trip, same route. I know Rick says he would gladly pay $500 more for carbon nautral flights. While Rick can afford that, many of the rest of us can’t. Many can’t afford it as it is now. Global warming is a topic for another discussion. However, this is a question of whether having a more eco friendly environment or having more educated, global minded people is important. I vote for the latter for people that can see outside of their American viewpoints and gain a better understanding of the world as a whole will lead to real change. It’s just a matter of what people think is more important. Rick doesn’t have a problem hurting his business with a more expensive flight but does more ignorant, ethnocentric Americans really help us any either?

  79. Oh my, “D” I am so sorry Rick is “rubbing your nose in it” by telling about his wonderful trips. Please don’t read my comments, because I enjoyed a lot of travel, mainly because My Beautiful Sweetie was with me. We visited both Budapest and Prague in our RV, back in the days of the Berlin Wall, so were we lucky, or just happy? Our first airfare from LAX to Frankfurt, was $285 RT, and much more as the years went by. I remember a lady who was incensed to receive a drink of water in a Styrofoam cup while on a cross-country flight on a 747. You may have heard that same story about a different lady, but I was there this time. Although a 747 spews a lot of pollutants, the environmaniacs still fly, but they don’t want to drink from a Styrofoam cup. Maybe it would be nice to have a carbon neutral flight, but I would rather have one with the beautiful, friendly, happy stewardess’, as I found on my many hundreds of flights, in years long past.

  80. Gosh, Jim – Did you really think I meant Rick when I said “rubbing our noses in it”? (I swear you bring out a “side” of me I didn’t know existed!)

  81. Thank you, Rick! I admire your courage. And I agree with your politics. Thank you for having the guts to put some of your business at risk, to help us wake up to the world and its realities. That is, or should be, what travel is all about. So your sharing of your views is really an extension of your travel guides. Sort of a ‘Guide To Global Politics’. Thanks again. Keep up the good work.

  82. I love your travel books, I’ve read most of them, and traveled with many of them. I have enjoyed reading your blog. I disagree with your political beliefs but am willing to defend to the death your right to have them, believe them and talk about them. While you haven’t changed my mind I have enjoyed reading your perspective. I appreciate your candor. I love your travel stories, shows, books and blog! Please keep traveling, recording and writing. It is a joy every time I go to your site. You are a real blessing to me and to my travel.

  83. Rick, There is nothing more patriotic and truly American that speaking out when our government is doing the wrong thing. Thanks for having the courage to not be bullied into silence by rigid, unthinking ultraconservatives. Thanks also for shaping the way my family travels. We have had so many wonderful times in Europe traveling as “temporary locals.”

  84. I’m 24 years-old and I’m a conservative. However, I still faithfully watch and listen to Rick Steves and his excellent travel experiences – including this blog and its comments. And really, I couldn’t have been any more lucid than Clay’s comments, which I agree with wholeheartedly. But let me try anyway. Rick Steves was the first travel show I ever watched. His show has deepened my love for Europe and my understanding of travel so much since I started watching him 8 years ago. I dream of traveling and even living in Europe for a while. I respect and appreciate Rick. I love his dry wit and humor, as well as his more serious commentary, though I don’t care for his political opinions. Rick Steves is like the brother/uncle/father/grandpa who loves you dearly, watching out for you, the one who taught you “how to be in the world (of Europe) and of the world (of Euope).” And yet you don’t have the same political views and world views. You love your brother/uncle/father/granpa very much, but it’s a sticking point, and not big enough (at this point) to cause you to separate ways (at least, not yet). Even if I left Rick because of his politics, I would miss him greatly and think of him often because of the deep impact he’s left on my travelogue mind. It would be like a rift between a close family member. I haven’t begun traveling Europe because it’s too expensive for a college girl. But I know when I do Rick will have prepared this travel-naive darling quite well for the wondrous European world that awaits me. Keep on commenting, all of you (including the much-disliked Jim, who I do enjoy reading) for I love reading your comments, arguments, and debates entirely too much. And Rick, it’s great you’re reading and responding to these comments. You’re a great traveler and a studious businessman – even if you and I don’t see eye-to-eye on world view. Know that you have introduced and greatly informed one more naive traveler to amazing Europe. Thanks for listening.

  85. Somebody farther up this thread (Jeff?) asked why what used to be called “global warming” is now called “climate change.” Here’s the answer: while the overall trend is toward warming, the earth has a system of interrelated weather patterns that influence one another and that are so complex that supercomputers are required to monitor them. Warming in one part of the globe can influence ocean currents and air currents elsewhere. For example, if the Greenland ice cap melts, this may disrupt the Gulf Stream, making Europe colder, even as the Arctic warms. Some places will be wetter, others drier. Also, be aware of the difference between weather (day-to-day changes) and climate (long-term trends). It’s going to be a bit below zero in Minneapolis tomorrow, but on the whole, we have many fewer such days than before, and it’s been a good twenty-five years since we had those days with *highs* of -36° or months where it never went above zero. Right now we’re in a period of bizarre, unstable weather patterns throughout the world, which is what you’d expect during a period of climate change.

  86. Rick. It’s your company (more or less) so if you want to speak your mind, speak your mind, share your thoughts, assimilate what you have observed from your life’s experiences and worldly travels and share. Anyone who won’t buy your guide books because they disagree with your political or social point of view is in dire need of psychological re-engineering. As long as you provide accurate and reliable as possible travel information and advice your mission is accomplished. I would however prefer for your social and political opinions to remain outside of the guide books; every ounce of paper adds to the travel experience. There are some guide books that are prettier than yours but they print on very thick heavy paper, and I avoid buying them and would not take them with me on a trip….I do sometimes look at them in the library, but I take yours with me. Long term: * tis better to live and let live, * do unto others as you wish they would * do to you (within reason), * as a buyer beware, * expect nothing of others and you will not be disappointed, or at most expect of others nothing more than you strive to achieve for yourself, * don’t expect everyone to share your ideas, beliefs, values or to live their lives the way you do or wished you did or wished they did. * keep an open mind; you may discover a new way of thinking or living that will make your limited time here on Earth much more rewarding and fulfilling for you and for others, but keep your guard up and protect yourself and loved ones from physical harm or mental brain washing schemes.

  87. Rick, I’ve got to take issue with you on something you said that really seems wrong to me. “A fundamental difference between us and Europe is that their government is by and for the people, even if that means legislating something not good for short-term business (e.g., making people pay for the disposal costs of a car when they purchase it). While I would much rather run my business here in the USA than in Europe, in the interest of people who will follow us, the environment, and a sustainable economy, I’d trade off a little business-friendliness for European priorities and ethics.” I can’t believe that you are this naive to think that Europe has superior business ethics to the US. Now, business and ethics are almost entirely incompatible (which is why I applaud you and other entrepreneurs who do an excellent job at both), but the exact same can be said for ethics and government. And remember, government (all government) is a monopoly on violence. In Europe (and I do business research for a living and live in Europe), their governments spend millions of taxpayer dollars subverting the free-market and propping up big business. Many German and French companies are partially state-owned, and are not allowed to fail, no matter what. This is extremely dishonest and destructive for the average citizens of these countries. The problem is the senior managers and their government cronies get to publicly tout their superior “ethics” while the negative effects are spread small amounts across millions of people (making the negative effects impossible to see). That is business reality in Europe. Dishonesty and arrogance, certainly not superior ethics.

  88. Evans said that in Europe they, – – (e.g., making people pay for the disposal costs of a car when they purchase it) ==== Well I was ahead of Europe. Nearly 75 years ago, in third grade, I said, “If you cut a tree, plant a tree, if you dig a hole fill a hole, when you buy a car deposit $25 to get rid of it when it becomes junk.” I remember the grade and comment so well because the car salesman’s son was going to beat me up because cars were already too expensive at $650 each. When I went for a walk in the “woods” in our part of the country, there were rusted remains of old cars all over the place. If I had collected all those parts of Model T Fords, and more, I could be a rich man by now.

  89. I’d like to say that Rick Steves’ comments above go right to the heart of the matter! Too many Americans have been dumbed down by the Media and special interests in this country and as a result, are unable to objectively consider both sides of an issue, or in this case, how America, as a political power, is viewed outside of its borders. Having visited numerous points in Europe, the Med, Mexico, and the Caribbean in the last year, many times I found that conversation would flow freely only after I made the remark that “not all Americans are cowboys or think that we should play the world’s policeman!” I was so amazed by the results, that after the first few times, it almost became a tag line. As a Vietnam Era volunteer (when my draft number was safely in the 120’s!), I have served my country, was honorably discharged, and am sick and tired of hearing others question someone else’s patriotism and love of this country because of a disagreement over the actions or lack thereof of our government. Listen less to talk radio and see the world more to appreciate where we, as a nation, have gone wrong in the last twenty years! When numerous reputable opinion polls taken overseas indicate that the US is presently perceived as the greatest threat to world peace, nothing else needs to be said. We need to change our course. Semper Fi!

  90. Bravo! Articulate, self-aware, and thoughtful response to rather obnoxious comments. It’s wonderful that you’ve thought about these issues in such a fashion.

  91. Earlier Rick pointed out that some keep their politics quiet because of their job. I hope that that wasn’t a criticism. Many of these people may badly need that job to get their families out of debt, educate their kids, etc. It’s a lot easier to be outspoken when you run the company and are financially independent. The price paid then may only be the loss of a little business. It is so common as to be a cliche of the person who was very careful in expressing his/her views on the way up but felt very free doing so when the price paid was insignificant. I’ve been on both sides of that fence. Also, one other point: there is a difference in being outspoken (sometimes an attractive trait) and being inconsiderate. Part of being considerate is knowing when the platform that once has been given is an appropriate or inappropriate place from which to be outspoken. Notice that London’s Poet’s Corner has a particular location in a park and not in Westminster Abbey nor in the lobby nor one of London’s marvelous theaters. In one location, being outspoken is expected and welcome and not so in others. Now if, on the other hand, you’re talking about civil disobedience, that’s another subject. Also, one of the things that I’ve noticed is that the same political view expressed when once has achieved great success is looked upon as wisdom, whereas previously it was not as well thought of. Notice some of the extreme views of many celebrities (either conservative or liberal). Sadly, the world is full of sycophants. Often approval or lip service is given to the success not the thought. Therefore, in my opinion, it falls upon the speaker to use his/her judgment as to what is considerate and what is self indulgent.

  92. Hi Rick, Just a quick comment, or my 2 cents’ worth: “When people say that’s the last time they’ll use a Rick Steves guidebook after I spout off politically, I’m sad and I wonder why.” I’ve just finished reading your journal today, and I am surprised by the ‘new’ political tone, something I don’t recall reading in earlier books or on your website. For my part, I’m sorry you feel the need to interject your political views in a travel forum…you might believe travel is a political act, and I may disagree. We can certainly ‘agree to disagree’, but the reason I have read your travel books in the past is because I want your TRAVEL information, not your POLITICAL viewpoint. I certainly believe you have a right to your opinion…it’s just that this seems just, well, a different kind of travel blog when your political beliefs are part of the whole. Just having my say :) Thanks for listening!

Comments are closed.