Mediaboss Marketing

As long as America fails to safeguard democracy, authoritarians will continue to undermine western liberalism and grow their influence.

Dr. Chamila Liyanage is a Policy and Practitioner Fellow at the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right (CARR) and a Researcher/Content Developer at Radical-R: Radicalisation Research, UK. She holds a Ph.D. in International Relations from the School of Advanced Study, University of London.

What makes Western liberal democracy weak? This question must have been considered by its geopolitical adversaries: the authoritarian regimes in their effort to unlock Pandoras box: the weapons that can play havoc on the national and global security preparations of the West. Both the strength and weakness of Western democracy lie in its core value: freedom. Threats against values are contested at socio-cultural and political levels, not on traditional battlefields. The metaphorical battlefields are all around us now, targeting socio-cultural and political awareness, and their weapons are highly unusual.

We get fixated on the radical right, not considering the bigger picture, interconnected phenomena, and the underlying dynamics, which work to raise the radical right. The rise of the radical right is inevitably a result of broader system-wide dynamics at national, regional, and global levels. Endurance of the radical right, its encroachment to the mainstream, and its ability to challenge democracy through considerable electoral marginsnone of these would have been possible without robust underlying dynamics, keeping the edge of the radical right.

Acknowledging the incendiary role of the radical right, this article analyzes the interconnected phenomena that enable the radical right to ascend in a context of rapid geopolitical changes. How are the Wests grassroots politics being manipulated to incubate radical right narratives, ensuring the edge of authoritarian ideals against the core values of Western liberal democracy?

Moments like these require unrelenting truthtelling. We take pride in being reader-funded. If you like our work, support our journalism.

A wider scholarly debate is currently taking place on the decline of democracy. The concept also points at an existential crisis in Western liberal democracy, beleaguered at home with the rise of populism, extreme right, and extreme left. However, can we consider the crisis of democracy devoid of contemporary geopolitics?

History teaches us that geopolitical rivalries tend to keep a firm hold on conflicts to maintain their global influence. For example, the Cold War created conflicts worldwide from the Malayan emergency (1948) to Indo-China War (1946). The uprising in East Germany (1953), the Cuban revolution (1953), and the Afghan war (1978) were shaped by the proxy wars of the Cold War. At the end of the Cold War, these conflicts lost their magnetic north, giving way to archaic ethnic and religious rivalries.

While the liberal world was battling religious fanatics in the post-9/11 world, another geopolitical rivalry was brewing as rising China and resurgent Russia advanced their authoritarian partnerships worldwide. The battle lines are drawn already between authoritarianism and the Western liberal democracy. The West received a rude awakening when Russia invaded Crimea, was militarily involved in Syria, and deployed a fully-fledged hybrid war against the West. Examples are the Russian disinformation operations during the 2019 European elections, Russias attempts to forge ties with the European radical right, and the interference in the 2016 US election.

The populist wave in the West, anti-establishment sentiments, weaponized conspiracy theories, the barrage of fake news and disinformationnone of these could have been possible without a geopolitical rivalry between authoritarianism and Western liberal democracy. Like it or not, the crisis in the West and the world is now under a tight gridlock of geopolitical rivalry. The autocratic regimes so far have the upper hand in their onslaught against Western liberal democracy. How does authoritarianism create conditions for the rise of illiberalism in the West? The next section examines evidence on how Western democracies are being beleaguered within.

When hybrid warfare targets the core values of liberal democracy, the indicators can be misguiding; they may not indicate any war in the literal sense. Three key factors shape the authoritarian onslaught. First, it is an ideological battle aimed at overthrowing the pre-eminence of liberal democracy. Second, it exclusively targets the core values of Western liberal democracy. Third, it takes place at socio-cultural and political levels of society, creating conditions detrimental to Western liberal democracy. Authoritarian hybrid warfare and its culture wars create socio-political tension in Western societies. How exactly does this happen, and what is the evidence for such phenomena at work?

It is essential to understand the real-world authoritarianism rising as a geopolitical adversary to answer this question. Russia, China, and their allies vie for geopolitical influence rooted in authoritarian values. Categorized as a Consolidated Authoritarian Regime, Russia receives a Democracy percentage of 7 out of 100 in the Nations in Transit 2021 report. In 2021, Freedom House ranked China among the worst countries in terms of political rights and civil liberties. China and Russia forge partnerships, connecting with similar authoritarian instincts of the countries around the world. However, freedom and democracy indicators alone do not show the threat of authoritarianism since it is impossible to measure something which is not democratic by using the democracy indicators. This is where many aspects of the current authoritarian challenge slip out of the radar.

Authoritarianism exclusively targets freedom in a cultural battle, aiming to turn Western freedom in its head. The value of freedom erodes with racial tension and fear of the other, induced into social consciousness. This creates the high wind that glides the radical right and other violent illiberal movements. How do they do it? As the Mueller Investigation and the US Senate Intelligence Select Committee September 2019 report already revealed, authoritarian regimes such as Russia target equality, stirring up racial tension and dividing Western societies. Then it is the most crucial aspect of criminality. Authoritarianism weaponizes organized crime and lawlessness against the rule of law to unsettle democracies. Criminality underneath authoritarianism is a maze, which makes any researcher feel lost in its sheer magnitude.

Why organized crime has anything to do with the rise of authoritarianism? Authoritarianism is criminal, shaping the parameters of its battles. A decade ago, researchers found evidence to synthesize the crime-terror nexus, which explains a critical aspect of modern conflicts. Crime-Terror nexus is being transformed in the context of current geopolitical rivalry. It is not possible to analyze the crime-terror nexus now without phenomena such as authoritarianism, Mafia State, transnational organized crime, and illicit global economy.

The state backers of these phenomena naturally select organized crime such as human smuggling as a weapon against the West. Freedom and democracy indicators alone do not show how the world is plunging into authoritarianism. The Global Crime Index is also necessary to understand the bigger picture of the authoritarian onslaught.

With her remarkable contribution to understanding transnational organized crime (TOC) as a form of new authoritarianism, Louise Shelley concluded in 1999: transnational organized crime is not currently as dangerous as that of traditional authoritarian states. What is happening now? As per the evidence, transnational organized crime is being weaponized against the West. In this context, Turkeys strongman leader threatened to flood Europe with migrants, creating a migrant crisis in the frontiers of Greece in March 2020. Things became much clearer when the strongman leader of Belarus aided human smugglers, organizing arduous journeys of human misery, which boiled over in the frontiers of Poland in July 2021.

As BBC revealed in November 2021, the Taliban regime already works with human smugglers, organizing illegal human cargo out of Afghanistan. In her acclaimed study, Greenhill analyzed how unusual weapons work. Evidence shows that autocrats have no remorse for resorting to organized crime such as human smuggling, endangering peoples lives for their advantage.

Global Crime Index takes the lid off organized criminality, rapidly becoming a weapon against the post-World War II rules-based world order and the rule of law in the West. Alarmingly, Global Crime Index 2021 highlights the state involvement in criminality, insisting that state officials and clientelist networks [] are now the most dominant brokers of organised crime. In 2021 Index, 57 countries are identified with high criminality. The rising global organized crime shows the dysfunction of law and order, thriving criminal markets, and criminal networks across the world.

Both Authoritarianism and crime drive people away. Together, these two can trigger mass human displacement across borders: the best example is Afghanistan under the Taliban. This happens in a context where not only authoritarianism and crime but many factors of global instability come to converge, creating mass population displacements. Evidence points to the fact that a moment will arise with the pandemic, hyperinflation, energy crisis, and climate change, more countries will plunge into instability, creating a human surge at the borders of the developed nations. This will happen irrespective of the deteriorating situation in the West as it faces the same set of global insecurities. However, the case elsewhere can always be direr.

In a time of global instability, authoritarianism finds it in the right place at the right time. It only has to organize movements to stir racial tension and aid organized criminality to unsettle the West. Who will benefit from this? The illiberal elements in the West. This choice of weapon seems to work well. It destabilizes the West. At the same time, it creates the conditions for the radical right and other illiberal elements to rise. As authoritarianism is settling into the beleaguered hinterlands of Western liberal democracy, do we have any hope?

Authoritarianism backs lawlessness against the rule of law, fear against freedom, racial tension against equality, and criminality against justice. Western liberal democracy and the post-World War II rules-based world order only have two options, which indicate how critical this existential challenge they just started to comprehend. First, the West must understand the mechanisms of the authoritarian onslaught coming from its geopolitical adversaries: it is not war as we know it. Second, they must fight against authoritarian contagion, which rapidly infects the core values of Western liberal democracy. When the values of freedom, equality, and justice are undermined, authoritarianism wins naturally, creating an existential crisis in Western liberal democracy.

This article is brought to you by the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right (CARR). Through their research, CARR intends to lead discussions on the development of radical right extremism around the world. Rantt has been partnered with CARR for 3 years. Weve published over 150 articles from CARRs network of PhDs, historians, professors, and experts analyzing extremism and combating disinformation.

Read this article:
Authoritarians Are Winning Their War On Western Democracy - Rantt Media

(Rick Bowmer | AP photo)The Utah State Capitol is shown during the Utah Legislature's virtual special session Thursday, April 16, 2020, in Salt Lake City.

By The Salt Lake Tribune Editorial Board

| Jan. 16, 2022, 3:04 p.m.

Members of the Utah Legislature, who are to begin their 2022 regular session Tuesday, may well assemble nagged by the feeling that they are, in the words of possum-philosopher Pogo, confronted with insurmountable opportunities.

Some of those will be opportunities to meddle, pose and posture on culture-war wedge issues that shouldnt concern them or anyone else. There are other matters, such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, on which state officials have long since reached their level of incompetence and should leave to others.

There are, however, issues that cannot and should not be dodged, avoided or kicked down the road. And some in the legislative body have shown glimmers of understanding what they are and what needs to be done about them.

The most obvious matter before the state is so because it is literally visible from space. Though not quite as clearly as it once was.

House Speaker Brad Wilson is leading a growing awareness that the Great Salt Lake is in trouble and needs our help. Losing the shrinking body of brine, which has lent its name to the states largest city, county, baseball team and news organization, would be more than awkward. And it would affect more than the lakes native species and extractive industries.

Exposing the lake bed to the westerly winds would stir up generations of waste, including toxic metals and decayed brine shrimp, that would blow across the Wasatch Front and beyond, into the skies and the lungs of a community that already has more than its share of bad air days including, a couple of times last summer, the worst in the world.

The situation also demonstrates how everything in our natural and human environments are intertwined. Shrinkage of the lake is clearly tied to the states wasteful uses of its limited supply of water, bad habits that should not be made worse by building dams on the Bear River or anything else that would further reduce the flow of water.

The dusty lake is not the only threat to our air quality. Everything from the growing number of autos to construction standards that are not fully up-to-date, along with the states irrational devotion to the fossil fuel industry, conspires to threaten the very quality of life that has attracted so many to come or stay here.

It is well past time for studies. It is time for action. Water conservation rather than development. Active air quality monitoring and regulations. Most of all, a simple recognition that, not only are fossil fuels on their way out, but also that Utah just happens to be perfectly situated to be a global leader in sustainable energy technologies including wind, solar and geothermal, a boon to not only our lungs but also our bank accounts.

The Legislature has proven that it has no competence in dealing with the pandemic, absurdly declaring an end date and giving itself the power to stop people who really know what they are doing from doing it. But lawmakers can be about the business of cleaning up the mess, most importantly by helping the part of our culture that was already in the most need.

Our system of public education traditional and charter, colleges but particularly K-12 has been hard hit by coronavirus. Even when whole schools havent had to close as a precaution, individual classrooms and students have been denied their full, and irreplaceable, opportunity to receive the education that is necessary to their healthy academic and emotional growth.

A state that is as flush as ours is with state and federal revenue should make strengthening the schools its top priority, doing many of the things that should have been done anyway. Smaller class sizes. Modern classrooms with better ventilation. Nurses, counselors and other professional support personnel in every building.

That good fiscal situation has, of course, tempted many in Utahs political class to reflexively call for a cut to the states already regressive income tax rate. But thats the wrong tool for the job. Such tax cuts make some sense when an economy is sluggish, but Utahs is booming and its growing pains as noted above include water shortages, bad air and slammed schools, solutions to each of which will cost money.

If lawmakers really insist on labeling themselves as tax-cutters, more appropriate channels include a removal of the sales tax on groceries and adding an earned income tax credit for low-income working families. Both would put money into the hands of those most in need of it.

To concentrate on the important stuff, legislative leaders should make it clear that they have no time for fiddling around with wedge issues that create more heat than light. No symbolic or hurtful message bills or resolutions attacking critical race theory, censoring library books, attacking transgender Utahns, attempting to seize federal lands or narrowing the opportunity to vote.

We urge the Legislature to take advantage of the states historically strong financial position and make investments of lasting value for the people of Utah.

The Utah Legislature is not always known for its responsiveness to the people, and too much of the real decision-making takes place behind closed doors. But it has created a robust online presence that anyone with internet access can use to follow bills, listen in on committee hearings, watch debates and votes on the Senate and House floors, figure out who is representing you and send them your thoughts.

The first door for all of that is le.utah.gov.

These lawmakers work for you. Keep an eye on them. And tell them what you think.

See the original post:
Lawmakers should focus on environment, education and taxes and leave divisive culture wars issues alone. - Salt Lake Tribune

The German theologian Paul Tillich (18861965) is renowned today for his powerful synthesis of Christian theology and existentialism. He released an acclaimed series of short books written during the 1950s, including the evocative titlesThe Courage to BeandDynamics of Faith. These texts laid out Tillichs dynamic theology with a rare combination of economy and mystery, memorably describing faith as a state of being ultimately concerned and declaring that courage can show us what Being truly is. Later, he authored an epic three-volumeSystematic Theology, which dove deep into the murk of existentialist philosophy, famously arguing that God constitutes the ultimate ground of Being implied in humanitys search for self-transcendence.

While Tillich has become a veritable giant within contemporary theology, many are not familiar with his lifelong commitment to socialism, in both theory and practice. Tillich was active in Germanys religious socialism movement and became deeply conversant with Marxist theory and politics. Notably, he authored a lesser-known book,The Socialist Decision, in which argued for the necessity of socialism in the twentieth century and which he deemed his best work.

Socialism was no mere academic matter for Tillich. He served as a chaplain during World War I, an experience that brought him face-to-face with the catastrophes of capitalism and militarism, as well as the political anemia of the Christian churches. He returned home to his native Germany, which was quickly turned upside down by the 1918 November Revolution. Kaiser Wilhelm IIs empire gave way to the cultural roller-coaster of the Weimar Republic, and Tillich and his second wife, Hannah Werner-Gottschow, embraced its social liberalism and experimentalism. They lived in an open marriage and frequented the avant-garde venues and social circles of the time.

Soon after the wars conclusion, Tillich began to participate in working groups and intellectual circles with other religious socialists. In an early pamphlet coauthored in 1919, he urged representatives of Christianity and the church who stand on socialist soil to enter into the socialist movement in order to pave the way for a future union of Christianity and the socialist social order.

Then, in 1932 came his book The Socialist Decision, written as the Nazis transitioned from a threatening political movement to a lethal political dictatorship. Tillichs politics had already made him a liability for the Nazi Party, and the book was immediately censored. He was allegedly offered a prestigious academic position on the condition that he repudiate the book and its criticisms of the new regime. Tillich laughed and was swiftly exiled to the United States, where he and Hannah lived out the remainder of their days.

Though nearly all initial copies ofThe Socialist Decisionwere destroyed by the Nazis and the fires of war, a few remained in circulation among Tillichs confidantes. Nearly forty years later, it was translated into English.The Socialist Decision is an underappreciated and highly unique contribution to the tradition of religious socialism. In addition to its theological insight, it exhibits great imagination and political sensitivity in dealing with the perils and contradictions of Tillichs time. As waves of right-wing populism and illiberal movements crash against the institutions of democracy in the twenty-first century, The Socialist Decisiondeserves to be revisited and applied to our political moment.

One of the main targets of Tillichs book is political romanticism, which he defines as a nostalgic attachment to a myth of origin [that] envisions the beginnings of humankind in elemental, superhuman figures of various kinds. This myth of the origin is one of the great roots of political thought and is the basis for all conservative and romantic thought in politics. Tillich discerned three basic origin myths that animate romantic politics: soil, blood, and social group.

These myths of origin help to sanction the present in two primary ways. First, they idealize a paternalistic past in order to hold consciousness fast, not allowing it to escape from their dominion. Second, they resist the demands of justice by freezing historical time into a recurring cycle of rise and fall. As Tillich writes, The origin embodies the law of cyclical motion: whatever proceeds from it must return to it. Wherever the origin is in control, nothing new can happen.

Myths of origin take on a special role in the wake of capitalism and liberalism, forming a bulwark against modern ideas of individualism, egalitarianism, and the rational improvement of society. Such myths imagine a transhistorical founding of the people or state one beyond questions of legitimacy and justice that establishes strict hierarchies and naturalizes the existence of social classes. This mythical order depends on an elite few with elevated status and powers of rule over the underclasses; when the dominated classes attempt to deviate from this order, inevitable chaos and ruin follows.

Though Tillich was concerned mainly with the rise of Nazism, his analysis is highly applicable to twenty-first century conservatism. Origin myths are highly adaptable to different political and social circumstances, and are easily wielded by both religious and secular interests. For instance, many conservative Christians interpret human history through a pseudo-Augustinian lens of endless decline and fall. In effect, nothing new can happen: it is our fate to endlessly repeat the Edenic fall from grace, as virtuous religious societies emerge, fall into sinful permissiveness and decadence, and collapse in ruin.

Tillichs metaphors of soil and social group, which emphasize a primal rootedness and connection, are clearly deployed by nationalists to instill a sense of organic belonging and imagined community. The culturally and racially homogenous nation is contrasted with a decrepit one, polluted by unrestrained multiculturalism and the presence of foreign aliens those who are not native to the soil and become parasites on national culture and institutions.

The most insidious myth of origin, according to Tillich, is the animal form of origin or origin of blood. This myth embraces violent hierarchy and racial superiority, imagining a clash with other animal powers in a process of selection through struggle and breeding. Rather than describing the long fall in terms of grace and sin, or vibrant national culture and decadent decay, it invokes the starkly racial crises of genetic pollution and demographic decline. Today, the Right increasingly relies on these tropes: right-wing figures like Charles Murray and Andrew Sullivan have re-popularized notions of race science, while Tucker Carlson breathlessly warns 5 million viewers about the impending great replacement of white voters.

Despite the varied and sometimes contradictory uses of these myths by the contemporary right, they all serve to rationalize a nostalgic attachment to a gloriously idealized past. Because the bogeymen of liberalism, democracy, and/or social justice have severed society from its primordial origin, the present can be recast as merely a hollow shell. The modern revolt against political and social hierarchies have handed illegitimate power to the unworthy, the immoral, and the outsider a power they cannot capably exercise. And so, paradoxically, the conservative must fightto bring the past into the present. As Corey Robin memorablynotes, Conservatism is about power besieged and power protected. It is an activist doctrine for an activist time.

This point is very important, as liberals and leftists often mistakenly assume that conservatism is primarily about the defense of the past. But in moments like Tillichs, when liberal institutions are vulnerable and social movements threaten to upset the status quo, the reactionary response must be equally activist. In pivotal political moments, the conservative cannot be a crotchety defender of the status quo, since it has become clear that cannot halt the underclasses forward movement. Instead, conservatives must continually develop creative new forms of power to halt the decay of modernity and democracy often by more effectively wielding the technological power and innovation that exploded in the modern era.

This paradoxical need to establish new forms of power by appealing to a romantic past easily leads to intense competition between conservative factions both in Tillichs time and ours. Tillich captures this conflict by distinguishing between conservative and revolutionary romanticism. Conservative romanticism defend[s] the spiritual and social residues of the bond of origin against the autonomous system, and whenever possible [seeks] to restore past forms. This kind of romanticism has animated much of modern conservatism, which usually tries to restore traditional forms of elite society by rolling back reforms, defending free markets, and neutralizing radical movements. In an American context, the fusionist project of combining traditionalist conservatism withlaissez-faireeconomics is emblematic of this tendency.

But when liberalism threatens to be dragged to the left or traditional conservative elites falter, a more radical, revolutionary romanticism of the far right can emerge. Revolutionary romanticism tries to gain a basis for new ties to the origin by a devastating attack on the rational system. It brooks few compromises with political institutions and attacks traditional elites for their inability to order and purify the national community. Where revolutionary romanticism gains ground, it launches its devastating attack against representative democracy, first by strategically collaborating with traditional elites and then violently crushing them and all political opposition. This is precisely what happened in 1930s Germany, when the youthful Nazis entered into an alliance with traditional conservative nationalists only to brush them aside once theyd served their purpose.

Tillichs discussion of German liberalism and capitalism both of which opened the door to Nazi reaction is especially insightful for understanding our contemporary moment. Tillich was well aware that capitalism and liberalism arose as intertwined forces. Wielded by the capitalist class, liberalism was instrumental in severing society from traditional religious and communal bonds and introduced the world to the horrors of colonialism, imperialism, and slavery.

But the fact that liberalism and capitalism developed together did not lead Tillich to a dismissive critique of liberalism. Unlike some contemporary Christian theologians whose anti-capitalism involves categorically rejecting liberal modernity or rehabilitating preliberal political ideas, Tillich insisted on the necessity of liberalism for the socialist project. He praised liberalisms individualism, rationalism, and moral egalitarianism as indispensable for authentic democracy and socialism. As he put it, Liberalism and democracy in fact belong very closely together. Each is at work within the other; and in spite of the sharpest tensions that may arise between them, they can never be separated.

However, Tillich was highly critical of the bourgeois capture of liberalism, which granted liberty and self-determination to the capitalist class, and denied it to the masses. It was because the capitalist class had failed to actualize the democratic demands of its own principle that liberal political radicalism in the eighteenth and nineteenth century quickly gave way to abstract idealism. Tillich knew that liberalism could not be rolled back this would be yet another romantic reaction. Instead, to truly realize the liberal promise, liberalism would have to be severed from the capitalist system that results in total human objectification because of economic objectification.

In our time, liberalism and capitalism have also come under intense scrutiny from both the Right and the Left. One notable criticism comes from a growing number of right-wing, largely Catholic intellectuals who have called for an end to liberalism. This cadre of postliberals contends that political liberalism has given rise to a tyranny of secularism, individual autonomy, and transgressive identities. Because they believe that liberalism is inherently hostile toward traditional Christianity, postliberals have coalesced around a strong state (often aligning themselves with far-right politicians), fighting culture wars against elites and wokeism and rehabilitating a hegemonic cultural Christianity.

Unlike fusionist conservatives, postliberals regularly criticize free markets for their role in maintaining liberalism. However, it is notcapitalism itself that unsettles them, but the pervasive market relations that threaten the traditional forms of social, sexual, and religious life they wish to maintain. Inevitably, their softball criticisms of consumerism, markets, and Wall Street take a back seat to more pressing anxieties for instance, who gets to use which bathroom, and the scandal of drag queen library hours. The free market is bad not because it subjects us to social and political unfreedom, but because it grants us too muchfreedom from our naturally given roles.

Though written nearly 100 years ago, Tillich presciently grasped how these social conservative revolts against market tyranny play a role in the reproduction of capitalism:

The apocalyptic pronouncements of doom which the intellectual groups of political romanticism direct at industrial society do not hinder the bearers of capitalistic power from using the new, supposedly anticapitalistic forms of social reconstruction to secure their own class dominance.

Tillich also anticipated thepolitical vision entailed in postliberalism: a combination of authoritarian capitalism and nationalism. Stark market inequalities will be maintained alongside a state that advances illiberal social policies and suppresses progressive movements all in the name of preserving a unitary national identity. As Tillich put it, The bourgeoisie, with the help of the idea of the nation, succeeds in overcoming its political opponents at home, in enlisting in its service the pre-bourgeois forces that are still bound to the origin.

By contrast, Tillich offers a far more progressive account of Christianity that contains sharper anti-capitalist resources for the Left. Unlike todays postliberals, who want suppress liberalism and the marginalized subjects who have laid claim to liberalisms promises Tillich knew that Christians must protect and radicalizethe liberal legacy by deciding for socialism. He described this as the primary internal conflict of socialism rooted in the internal conflict of the proletariat situation. For Tillich, the true realization of universal equality and freedom could only be attained in a courageous decision for a liberal, democratic socialism.

This would require a decisive break from myths of origin, and their pessimistic politics of grandiosity and dominance, as well as a commitment to a more human future beyond capitalism. As Tillich put it the breaking of the myth of origin by the unconditional demand is the roots of liberal, democratic, and socialist thought in politics. How this could be achieved in theory, let alone in practice, is the immense task that fell to socialists then and now.

One complicating issue for German socialism in the early twentieth century was its understanding of Marxism. Tillich adopted a nuanced, balanced approach to Karl Marx in The Socialist Decision, neither praising him as a biblical seer nor dismissing him for his materialism or economism, as Christian theologians often do. Tillich found a great deal of moral value in the young Marxs critique of capitalist alienation, and extolled Marxs mature theory of historical materialism. But he was staunchly critical of dogmatic Marxists in Germany, who claimed to have discovered in Capital a lithomantic crystal that foretold an inevitable socialist future.

Tillich noted that belief an inexorable socialist victory became a lethal hallucinogen to many movements, as they vested their hopes in calculating the moment of crisis and revolution. As these confident hopes failed to materialize, a morbid sense of disappointment set in.

The belief that history moved irresistibly toward socialism contributed to a tendency among German Marxists becoming detached from a materialist praxis bent on changing the world. Instead of waging a relentless struggle to obtain power and enact socialist reforms, too many radicals gave into theorizing ever more elaborate predictive models of how capitalism would collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. In a grim turn, heated Marxist debates about forming a united front with reformist social democrats against fascism resulted in a Nazi waltz to victory. Marxist theory had dictated that fascism was little more capitalisms dying gasp; instead, the Nazis marched social democrats and communists into the concentration camps.

There is another contemporary lesson to be drawn from Tillichs analysis of German Marxism. Since the vulgar Marxist belief in the inevitability of revolution sputtered and then died, the contemporary left has fractured, and now spends a great deal of time mincing minute differences between social democrats, radicals, left-liberals, communists, Marxists often in a needlessly puritanical fashion.

While conservatives happily seize on this (disproportionately online) phenomenon as proof of leftist intolerance, I hold a different view. AsBen BurgisandNatalie Wynnof Contrapoints have pointed out, much of this behavior is rooted inmelancholia. Deflated by a sense of political impotence in the face of neoliberal, leftists increasingly turn to aesthetics, performance, and the cultivation of personal political brands.

Purity of spirit and staking out the most radical positions easily takes the place of the day-to-day work of engaging the masses and winning reforms that benefit working people. Small political achievements are deemed a distraction from revolutionary politics (both before and after theyre won). Fellow leftists who insist on more nuanced understandings of theory and practice are immediately told of the utter immutability of the systems of power and oppression we oppose. This dialectic of puritanical posturing and fatalistic resignation is one of the greatest obstacles to restoring hope among the Left that we have it in our power to begin the world again. We should heed Tillichs corrective to leftist melancholia, which invoked prophetic hope: Socialism lifts up the symbol of expectation against the myth of origin and against the belief in harmony.

Tillich insisted on making a decision for socialism, and developing the courage to work toward achieving it. As the forces of conservative and revolutionary romanticism bear down on the twenty-first century, Christians and socialists cannot assume that the arc of history will bend toward emancipation without costly struggle and reactionary backlash. But this is no reason to retreat to a vulgar revolutionary optimism or melancholic puritanism. As Tillich observed, the superiority of the socialist principle is rooted in a propheticism that makes an unconditional demand on the present, rooted in a promised future. Tillich concluded in The Socialist Decision, Only through expectation is human existence raised to the level of true humanity.

No one expressed this truly revolutionary expectation better than Tillichs greatest pupil, Martin Luther King Jr, who deserves to be the final word on this point:

Tillich insisted on making a decision for socialism, and developing the courage work toward achieving it. As the forces of conservative and revolutionary romanticism bear down on the 21st century, Christians and socialists cannot assume that the arc of history will bend toward emancipation without costly struggle and reactionary backlash. But this is no reason to retreat to a vulgar revolutionary optimism or melancholic puritanism. As Tillich observed, the superiority of the socialist principle is rooted in a propheticism that makes an unconditional demand on the present, rooted in a promised future. Tillich concluded inThe Socialist Decision, Only through expectation is human existence raised to the level of true humanity.

No one expressed this truly revolutionary expectation better than Tillichs greatest pupil Martin Luther King, Jr., who deserves to be the final word on this point:

The question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvarys hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.

Go here to read the rest:
The Socialist Politics and Theology of Paul Tillich - Jacobin magazine

Typically a new year brings optimism, but so far, Americans are experiencing widespread malaise. Covids unpredictable nature continues to pummel whatever hopeful outlook people attempt to muster. As we trudge onward into a politically significant year, it is wise for candidates and political parties to keep in mind how this outlook can create unpredictable behavior at the ballot boxes.

One common assumption that doesnt hold true this year is that education is not a major election issue. While the economy will certainly be on the minds of voters, whats happening in the schoolroom is going to be the issue that is flying under the radar for many political candidates.

In November of last year, the Virginia Governors race was certainly a wake up call for Democrats. Exit polls showed that a rising number of college educated suburban voters cast their ballot for the Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin, despite proclamations in 2020 that Democrats had secured this demographic. A poll by Monmouth showed that 41% of all voters felt education was the most important issue in the Governors race. This is especially surprising since the economy and inflation only scored 4 points higher.

Election results soon confirmed what the polls predicted. In Virginia, heavily suburban counties that went for Biden turned to Youngkin over Democrat Terry McAuliffe, largely because of education issues. McAuliffe may have seen the writing on the wall, but he responded inadequately, equating parental concern over education as personal culture wars. Obviously, this response did not resonate.

Like Virginia, Nevada is a swing state with Democrats dependent upon groups of suburban voters and nonpartisans to carry the day, especially in the more moderate Washoe County. This year, the suburban vote is not a shoo-in for Democrats. In the wake of the Virginia defeat, Democrats in Nevada should heed the warning signs and resist simplifying Republican education campaign issues as cultural calls to action that only appeal to racists or, simply as misinformation about the teaching of Critical Race Theory. Many voters will be impacted by education issues that have very little to do with CRT. Centrist think tank Third Way emphasized this point in a recent memo about the Virginia election. While the teaching of CRT itself wasnt a primary issue for most voters, it tapped into a general frustration with inconsistent school closure policies and concerns over learning loss.

Traditionally, the Democratic Party is an avid supporter of public education. But their messaging has proved insufficient in the last two years. Education issues extend far beyond funding. Since 2020, Nevada has received over $1.07 billion dollars in additional federal assistance for school Covid relief. And yet, districts still struggle with staff shortages that significantly impact the day-to-day instruction of students. Repeating the mantra that schools need more funding is an overly simplistic message that fails to address the problems parents, teachers, and students are facing today.

In late 2020, a UNR survey of parents found that only 47% were satisfied with their school districts pandemic response.

Conversely, in March of 2021, the US Secretary of Education predicted that, by the fall, school will look more like what it was before Covid.

Fast forward to January 9th, 2022, there are 5,409 schools in the US that have returned to distance learning. Some because of the rapidly spreading Omicron variant. But many other districts simply dont have enough staff to weather even small increases in the number calling in sick. Still reeling from earlier periodic closures due to wildfire smoke, students in Washoe County School District now contend with centralized bus stop locations due to driver shortages. Students in Clark County Schools District have reported waiting up to seventy-five minutes for buses. While Governor Sisolak urges schools to stay open, schools nevertheless may be forced to close due to lack of substitute teachers. With continuing instability, parents are becoming more frustrated.

The Omicron variant, as well as current labor shortages have further stressed a system that has already been struggling for years under a lack of sufficient funding and dwindling qualified applicants. And Nevadans notice.

In 2021, Education Week ranked Nevada schools as last in the nation in regards to educational opportunities and performance. NAEP, the national gold standard for academic assessment, shows test scores for Nevada students continue to lag behind most other states. Despite Nevada schools receiving a necessary injection of federal funding and a 22% jump in student-specific spending from the Nevada Legislature, education leaders say the money is a drop in the bucket due to years of public neglect.

Granted, most parents may not be aware of all these details, but they are aware of large class sizes. In 2020, according to the National Education Association, Nevada had some of the highest class sizes in the country.

And its not only K-12 parents and students struggling. During the 2020-21 school year, the national number of high school graduates enrolling in college was down by 21.7% compared with last year. Low income and minority students were hit hardest. While the Nevada State Board of Health attempted to ensure that campuses would no longer close by mandating Covid vaccinations for students, the Nevada Legislative Commission blocked their move, making viral spread once again a concern. Unfortunately, like K-12 schools, colleges may again face disruptions to learning due to the pandemic.

Last fall, Nevada students, teachers, and parents were promised a better year with an influx of funding and newly approved vaccinations, but they are still largely dealing with large class sizes and potential further disruptions caused by Covid. If schools go back to distance learning, despite a general agreement of the need to take Covid seriously, parents will burn out. And whoever is in power will, fairly or unfairly, take the blame. Despite the fact most school decisions are made by districts, incumbents will face the brunt of voter discontent.

Republicans are two steps ahead already. They are banging the parent discontent drum, and despite their use of trigger phrases such as CRT and cancel culture, its not the words that are drawing voters, its the overall weariness with education.

If Democrats want to win this election, they need to talk about whats happening with students and parents in our schools. They need to acknowledge the frustrations parents are experiencing. While most parents say they like their childs school and they understand the need for Covid precautions, they are still worn out. All it takes is one more round of distance learning to push them over the edge. So who is waiting at the bottom to catch them?

As of 01/12/2022, Clark County School District announced that due to staffing shortages, they will be extending the Martin Luther King holiday break another two days.

As of 01/12/2022, Washoe County School District announced they will minimize the 10-day exclusion period due to COVID to 5 days for staff and students.

Shelley Buchanan is the Sierra Nevada Allys education reporter. She is a forty-year resident of Northern Nevada. After working as an English teacher, school librarian, and school technology specialist, she now writes about education, technology, and social justice issues. Support her work here.

Founded in 2020, the Sierra Nevada Ally is a self-reliant publication that offers unique, differentiated reporting on the environment, conservation, education, and public policy, and gives voice to writers, visual artists, and performers.We rely on the generosity of our readers and aligned partners.

Go here to read the rest:
Education Will Be A Central Issue for Nevada Voters This Year - The Sierra Nevada Ally

Both of these bills have been born from the phony Critical Race Theory outcry. Republicans admit that theyre harping on race in schools because they see it as a winning issue among suburban moms who can help them take back the U.S. House and Senate in 2022.

But the naked ambition for political gain hides a more sinister truth the deliberate attempt to thwart an honest examination of this countrys past and the impact it carries today, despite what the bills proponents say.

HB 322 sponsor Don Jones, (R-Freeport) has 27-co-sponsors, including Plummer, but no lawmakers of color. There are four lawmakers, including Plummer, who come from fairly diverse districts, meaning their populations mirror or exceed state averages for people of color. The remainder represents districts that are, when averaged out, overwhelmingly white 88%.

Of course, white lawmakers can introduce legislation thats fair to everyone (see: 1964 Civil Rights Act and many more). But this situation does call into question the purpose behind the focus on race-based politics and highlights why no people of color have not signed on.

Democratic Rep. Catherine Ingram, a member of the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus, neatly summed up whats at stake, from the perspective of the sponsors and co-sponsors:

This is a way that we will control what happens in society, and were going to get rid of this nonsense about you thinking that Black people have been mistreated, or Hispanics have been mistreated, or even poor coal miners in (West) Virginia were mistreated. Were not going to tell that part of history because it makes people uncomfortable when there is an oppressor and someone whos being oppressed.

I give Rep. Sarah Fowler Arthur all the credit in the world for doing what so many of her colleagues wont stepping forward, even if her comments should be taken with a grain of salt. In an interview with WHBC radio, posted on Facebook on July 22, 2021, she justified HB 327 by saying students shouldnt have to adhere to a Marxist ideology to get a passing grade. She then linked CRT (which isnt taught K-12) to Marxism, bundling two of the rights favorite boogeymen. So really, its her ideology that drives her, not whats best for students.

But at least she speaks, which we cant say (yet) for Plummer. Heres what I want to ask him:

It could be he has really good answers that Im not thinking about. My guess is hes not answering Don Jones didnt either, by the way because they cant defend the indefensible.

Those of us who see these bills for what they are need to stop playing into the culture wars narrative and be far more aggressive in our description.

This is race-baiting and a shameless political effort designed to pit one group of people against another. So call it what it is. How does anybody in elected office justify that?

Maybe, one day, Phil Plummer will tell us his side.

Ray Marcano is a long-time journalist whose column appears on these pages each Sunday. He can be reached at raymarcanoddn@gmail.com.

Read the original post:
MARCANO: State representatives cant defend the indefensible - Dayton Daily News