Mediaboss Marketing

America is experiencing declining trust in democratic institutions and an erosion of the democratic norms essential to maintaining them. The U.S. military, which historically has enjoyed the status of being the most trusted national institution, has seen its trust levels decline in recent years. Some attribute this to the perceived politicization of the armed forces. Others question whether the militarys professional ethos has been compromised to the point where it has become a political actor that increasingly strays from its nonpartisan ethic. Still others point to the over-representation of veterans in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol and conclude that the U.S. military may not be relied upon to uphold the rule of law. The status of the American military profession is declining and likely contributing to the armed-forces recruiting shortfalls. One piece of restoring public trust is to examine how we educate servicemembers in the professional norms related to military service in a democracy, starting with their oath to uphold the constitution.

Last fall, James Joyner and Butch Bracknell argued that this oath is central to maintaining healthy civil-military relations, but it is not enough. This doesnt do the oath justice. The oath remains an underutilized tool that, if properly leveraged, could strengthen the democratic ethos essential to preserving the republic. Where the military profession falls short is in its lack of emphasis on educating its members on the meaning of their oaths. We believe that further education can prepare servicemembers to tackle some of the difficult challenges that Joyner and Bracknell lay out in their article.

At the Air Force Academy, we have worked to incorporate oath education into crafting a renewed professional ethos that would keep servicemembers focused on the norms of behavior in a military accountable to elected civilian leaders. Through these efforts, we believe that the militarys current warrior ethos can be complemented with an equally important democracy ethos. The Air Force Academys Oath Project is a cadet-led initiative to improve understanding of the Oath of Office among military students at academies and professional development institutions. This program provides education focused on civil-military norms and the importance of upholding the values inherent in an apolitical military. We encourage military leadership to embrace expansion of the program at other institutions and encourage Congress to support these efforts through increased funding of civil-military education programs.

Creating a Foundational Education

Americas founders gave their citizens a tool to stay focused on preserving the democratic nature of their new republic. When writing the rulebook to govern the nation, the founders set the expectation that those in government and military service to the nation had a special trust to uphold the democratic institutions they had just established in the Constitution. Article 2 of the Constitution requires the president to take an oath of office, and Article 6 requires members of Congress, the federal judiciary, and officers of state legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government to take oaths. With regard to the military, oaths were required at the time of enlistment in the Continental Army. The first act of Congress in 1789 specified the text to be used, which is almost unchanged to this day. The founders were the products of a culture where taking oaths to the monarch was common. What wasnt common was taking an oath to uphold a document instead of swearing allegiance to a particular individual even if that individual had been duly elected under the Constitution.

But for the oath to work, the men and women who uphold it also need to understand it. Two years ago, the few cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy enrolled in a political science civil-military relations elective questioned the adequacy of what they learned about the oath in their pre-commissioning education. Even though they were within months of becoming commissioned as 2nd lieutenants in the U.S. Air Force, at the beginning of the course they could not articulate what it meant to support and defend the Constitution beyond understanding that military members must obey the lawful orders promulgated by the military and civilian authorities with command responsibility for them. These cadets expressed the need for more education to be integrated into the totality of the cadet experience to help them comprehend the professional norms required to support the constitutional principles inherent in their military oaths. Cadets solicited the help of distinguished professor Marybeth Ulrich, the instructor of their civil-military relations course visiting from the U.S. Army War College, to start a student-led program dedicated to furthering cadets understanding of the Oath of Office. This was the birth of the Academy Oath Project.

The experience of these original 13 cadets in their upper-level civil-military relations course informed their ideas for what should be included in a more comprehensive oath education effort available to all cadets, regardless of academic major. They took stock of what education was occurring and identified gaps. They found that the political science department at the Air Force Academy devotes five lessons to constitutional foundations and civilian control of the military in its Introduction to American Government and National Security course, which is a core class that all cadets take in their sophomore year. The course begins with an introduction to the framing of the Constitution and the oath through readings from George Washingtons Newburgh Address. This helps establish the constitutional origins of civilian control of the military and provides background to draw upon when analyzing contemporary political events where the roles of military members and civilian leaders is a stake. The class then continues with Samuel Huntington (excerpts from The Soldier and State), Don Snider (Dissent, Resignation, and Moral Agency), and David Barno and Nora Bensahel (The Increasingly Dangerous Politicization of the U.S. Military) among a host of other readings. Cadets must write a paper that analyzes a case study to glean lessons learned pertaining to civil-military relations.

The learning objectives for these lessons center on the importance of civilian control of the armed forces for a democracy, what it means to be member of the military profession, and the need for a nonpartisan armed forces. These lessons help the cadets understand that military officers are trusted in large part because of the non-politicized nature of the service. A strong background in civil-military relations helps officers understand why military leadership is subordinate to civilian leadership when faced with following orders and making decisions in morally complex situations. Cadets must write a paper that applies the civil-military principles learned in the course to a current civil-military relations issue such as the role of military advice in the withdrawal from Afghanistan, retired flag officers partisan behavior, and norms surrounding the seven-year waiting period for retired generals to serve as secretary of defense.

Going Further

However, a few lessons in one course are not enough to lay the foundation needed to develop the professional ethos needed to uphold their oath at difficult decision points in their career when civil-military relations norms will be challenged. A civil-military relations education that integrates themes across the political science, history, law, and leadership core curriculum is needed. Such curriculum reform, when supported and resourced, will take years to achieve. In the meantime, the Academy Oath Project Club provides hands-on experiences for cadets to learn more about the professional norms surrounding military service in a democracy by preparing programs for other cadets and faculty that explain various principles.

For example, the original Academy Oath Project cadets assessed their military training and noted a glaring gap in the lack of any education on the oath of office in basic cadet training. As one of the graduating seniors involved in founding the club noted, We took the oath of office on our first day at [the U.S. Air Force], but no one explained it to us. Almost four years from the time he first took the oath, he was lobbying with his fellow cadets from Academy Oath Project to include oath education in basic cadet training. After designing the training under the direction of Professor Ulrich, the cadets enabled their fellow cadets in the direct chain of command of the basic cadets to lead the sessions. The lesson explains the history of the Oath, its link to the preservation of American democratic institutions, its central role in American military professionalism, and the expectation that as members of the profession they will maintain their commitment to the Constitution for life. Cadets meet biweekly through the club to improve programs and plan future projects. In a recent panel, cadets assessed their basic cadet training oath education program and petitioned to move the session to the beginning of the summer training so that the training cadre could discuss the themes introduced throughout basic training. Academy Oath Project cadets are currently developing a workshop to educate upperclassmen responsible for training first year cadets on civil-military relations norms. The clubs faculty and cadets are also in the beginning stages of writing an oath education handbook that could serve as a foundational text for programs and courses seeking to foster a deeper commitment to democratic norms.

In addition, the Academy Oath Project cadets have focused on creating experiential learning opportunities concerning civil-military relations in a democracy. These include planning the Academys Constitution Day program; updating the cadet handbook Contrails to include segments and knowledge questions on the oath, Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence; and making a video focused on the Oath of Office to support the athletic departments National Collegiate Athletic Association civic-education requirement before election day. The hope is that cadets will take these lessons learned with them when the leave the academy and assume leadership roles within the Air Force. The Academy Oath Project Club is providing outreach education through active support of military reenlistments, promotions, and retirements by offering a few words on the importance of the oath during these ceremonies to remind service members that the focal point of military service is ones obligation to the Constitution.

The club has also reached out to the other academies and some Reserve Officers Training Corps units to share their products and ideas. Earlier this year, Professor Ulrich and several cadets from the club traveled to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point to speak to all 1,000 seniors on the Oath of Office and the norms of military service in a democracy. They learned about West Points curriculum and visited the lesson on the oath in the core capstone Officership course taught out of the Simon Center for the Professional Military Ethic. The Army War Colleges Civil-Military Relations Center is facilitating the cooperation between West Point and the Air Force Academy as part of its mission to promote civil-military relations education throughout the professional military education system.

While many oath-takers, civilian and military alike, understand the dos and donts of appropriate civil-military relations and norms of service, many do not understand the why. Members of the Academy Oath Project, through their participation in the program, are increasing their understanding of the meaning and significance of the oath as well as the responsibilities placed upon those who take an oath to uphold the Constitution. They are learning the nuances of civilian control by developing their own lessons, with faculty help, to explain the constitutional foundations of their professional obligations to obey civilians, while also fulfilling their professional responsibility to provide military expertise to inform political leaders decision-making. They researched the principle of nonpartisanship and developed a video that was shown to cadets near election day in which they explained to their peers why partisan behavior undermined support for the military profession. The goal of all these efforts it to provide a strong foundational education in civil-military relations so that if military members find themselves in politically charged situations, they will have the intellectual tools to critically assess the situation without partaking in partisan activities.

Crucial Clarity

Joyner and Bracknell argue that expecting military members to discern whether actions by a president or Congress are constitutional is beyond the scope of even the most educated of officers. We counter that a robust civil-military curriculum that extends from enlisting/commissioning through advanced military education would provide military members with the tools to critically think about the constitutionality of orders and requirements.

As Joyner and Bracknell assert, there is a great amount of ambiguity surrounding the lawfulness of following civilian orders of questionable constitutionality. Education and training will lend some clarity and inform the professional judgment essential to help military members think through their actions in politically fraught situations. Consider a handful of examples. Joyner and Bracknell discuss the tendency for military leaders to engage in political behavior to advance their services agendas before Congress. The Academy Oath Projects lessons stress the importance of limiting military engagement with political actors to the provision of expert military advice. Cadets learn that public advocacy for preferred policies may limit the decision space of political leaders, effectively undermining civilian control. Joyner and Bracknell argue that senior uniformed leaders are political actors involved in the struggle over who gets what, when, and how. Oath Project lessons distinguish between the providing input on political matters such as resource allocation, which is within the purview of sound military advice, and providing partisan input aligned with particular ideologies. Joyner and Bracknell point out that creating military policy is a complex process involving all three branches of government. In the face of uncertainty, they note that military leaders sometimes strike out on their own, creating policy. Oath Project training cautions against this, emphasizing the importance of adhering to policy created by democratically elected officials who represent the will of the people.

The vaulted status of the American military profession stems from the publics recognition of servicemembers professional expertise and years of education. A deeper understanding of the national purpose and the commitment to preserve the democratic character of the nation through their oath contributes to military effectiveness and will give U.S. military members an edge in future conflicts waged against autocracies. The Joint Staffs Officer Professional Military Education Policy, a tool that guides the curriculum of military education institutions, should more deliberately foster the development of a democracy ethos by requiring the teaching of democratic civil-military relations norms at every level. In their article, Joyner and Bracknell call upon Congress to enact stronger laws safeguarding civil-military relations. We suggest that the military profession also has the responsibility to provide a comprehensive civil-military relations education to prepare its members for military service in a democracy. Congress, in its oversight role, can require the services to report on how they are achieving this end. Congress could also prioritize funding of these programs and support initiatives such as Academy Oath Project that provide active learning experiences for service members to internalize democratic norms.

Through the Academy Oath Project, cadets learn that as members of the military profession, they are obligated to follow norms that are part of a professional ethos. This ethos includes the bedrock principles of non-partisanship and civilian control of the military. Cadets learn that when they took the oath for the first time, through every promotion and reenlistment, and even after their retirement or separation, they are members of the military profession with responsibilities to uphold those professional norms. Kudos to the 13 cadets from the Air Force Academy classes of 2021 and 2022, now 1st and 2nd lieutenants in the U.S. Air Force for demanding that more be done to prepare them to assume their constitutional responsibilities. Their successors are continuing to make strides to build an oath culture at Air Force Academy and beyond. More support is now needed to institutionalize this effort.

Dr. Marybeth Ulrich is professor of government at the U.S. Army War College, a Scowcroft National Security Senior Fellow at the U.S. Air Force Academy, a Senior Fellow at the Modern War Institute, and the faculty adviser for the Academy Oath Project.

Dr. Lynne Chandler Garcia is an associate professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy and a member of the faculty advisory board for the Academy Oath Project.

Cadet Sydney Fitch is a senior at the U.S. Air Force Academy and the cadet-in-charge of the Academy Oath Project.

The views represented in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the U.S. Air Force or the Department of the Defense.

Image: Ken Scar

See the original post:
Renewing Democracy Through Oath Education at the Air Force Academy - War On The Rocks

World War by Chad L. Williams.Photo Credit: MacMillan Press

Chad L. Williams was astonished when he encountered an 800-page unfinished and unpublished manuscript by W.E.B. Du Bois while working in the archives at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst on his dissertation research during the early 2000s. Although he tackled other projects after coming across the unpublished manuscript, he came back to it because he was inspired to tell the story of this unknown bookwhy Du Bois decided to write it, what it was about, and why [Du Bois] ultimately failed to complete it. Williams shared, I wanted to understand the significance of World War I in Du Boiss life and work, while also exploring the meaning of World War I for Black people and the struggle for freedom and democracy in the 20th century more broadly.

W.E.B. Du Bois, an African American scholar, sociologist, historian, and activist, is familiar to many Americans in part due to David Levering Lewiss two Pulitzer Prize winning biographies W.E.B. Du Bois, 1868-1919: Biography of a Race and W.E.B. Du Bois: The Fight for Equality and the American Century, 1919-1963. Given the nations familiarity and the significant number of books written about the venerable intellectual, I asked Williams what we can learn from his book and analysis. He shared, Du Boiss unfinished and unpublished manuscript on the Black experience in World War Iwhich is titled The Black Man and the Wounded Worldwould have been one of the sociologists most significant works. According to Williams, Du Bois devoted more than twenty years researching, writing and trying to complete the book. He added, For the first time, with my book The Wounded World: W.E.B. Du Bois and World War I, we learn about Du Boiss forgotten project and gain a new appreciation for how World War I shaped Du Boiss life, work and political evolution.

In his classic 1903 book The Souls of Black Folk, Du Bois described the painful tensionthe double consciousnessof being Black and being American that Black people still grapple with today. One of the most powerful themes in Williams book is how Du Bois initially envisioned World War I as an opportunity to reconcile that tensionand his subsequent disillusionment.

Chad Williams, author of The Wounded World.

Photo Credit: MacMillian Press

As Williams discusses in The Wounded World, African Americans, and especially soldiers, faced a heart-wrenching question during World War I: how do you support your country, volunteer to fight and die for your country, while still not being treated as an equal citizen and often times not even as an equal human being? According to Williams, Its a question that Du Bois tried to find an answer to in 1918 and throughout his life. And its a question we are still trying to find an answer to in 2023.

At the very same time that African American soldiers were fighting for their country during World War I, Black citizens were being lynched in the United States. And during the summer of 1919, shortly after World War I a dire period in our history referred to as Red Summer White supremacists lynched 83 African Americans with 11 of those individuals having served in the military. Attacks on African Americans took place across 26 cities that summer, and membership in the Ku Klux Klan increased rapidly.

In writing this important book, Williams continues the struggle that Du Bois found himself in answering the question: What does it mean as a Black person to live in a world wounded by war, white supremacy and the failure of democracy?

I am the Samuel DeWitt Proctor Endowed Chair in Education and a Distinguished Professor in the Graduate School of Education at Rutgers University. Ive written or edited 29 books, including Making Black Scientists (Harvard University Press, 2019 with Thai Nguyen), Educating a Diverse Nation (Harvard University Press, 2015 with Clif Conrad) andEnvisioning Black Colleges (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007). My newest book is Doing the Right Thing: How Colleges and Universities Can Undo Systemic Racism in Faculty Hiring (Princeton University Press, 2022).

View post:
War, White Supremacy And The Failure Of Democracy - Forbes

These are darkening days for global democracy. Notions that all the worlds people would engage in egalitarian self-governance seem like grains of sand slipping through our fingers.

Russia stabs at Ukraine with its full force while suppressing dissent among its own people. Chinas government entrenches autocracy as its population and economy both stagnate. Mexico clamps down on its judicial system. Israel restricts free speech and looks to weaken its highest court. India and Brazil, both huge democracies, now pulsate with extreme nationalism, teetering near the brink of something not quite democratic.

And the same may be said of us.

In the United States this year, a member of Congress spoke openly of dividing the country by creed. Its no longer news. Former Vice President Mike Pence, targeted for assassination in the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection, said that his former boss should be held to account for the riots.

Former President Donald Trumps response? It was Pences fault, apparently for resisting Trumps unconstitutional coup attempt and refusing to acquiesce to the mob. This, too, was just another routine political story covered like a press release about warehouse regulations. Old news by now.

Half our states have rushed to ban concepts and identities in the name of ideological supremacy. One of our largest states, Florida, enacted de facto book bans and sought to bar meaningful discussion of historical racism in schools.

Many Americans still believe this is the way. I live in the woods of northern Minnesota. My drive to work passes many homes where pro-Trump signs and flags have been displayed nonstop for more than six years, many of them full of profanities. My kids, and all the kids, see them on the school bus every day. This is an entrenched ethos, not a passing fancy. The culture wraps around this new reality the way a tree consumes an ax-head stuck into its side. The sick tree bends to swallow the contaminant.

Pro-Trump forces have lost more elections than theyve won, but theyre not letting up. I could admire their resolve, were I not aware of history.

Its hard to square that democracy is under threat when its still possible to cast a ballot at our local polling place. I voted last November at my township hall. The poll workers and I joked and laughed. I know my vote counted. Some of my candidates won and some lost, but thats how it goes. Why would I be worried about democracy?

Of course the United States has never been a true Athenian Democracy, where all citizens vote on all laws. It is indeed a republic formed on the basis of a constitution. But the founders, even ones that were objectively racist and aristocratic by modern standards, understood that democratic ideals were the backbone of this republic. Leaders serve with the consent of the governed, or not at all. The rule of law equal justice for everyone was the goal, even when unrealized.

The Trump administrations chaotic term in office demonstrated that attacking American democracy is really about excluding undesirables from power. The powerful decide who qualifies and whether its class, creed or color that will separate us. Look at Tennessee, where a Republican majority expelled two Black state legislators for relatively minor rule violations during a gun violence protest.

But this isnt merely driven by contemporary identity politics. The purpose of this charade is to resurrect an even older system: serfdom.

Lets look to the early 20th Century when global democracy was expanding. Across the world, people voted in their own leaders for the first time.

And, in all the countries of the world, one impulse is driving the people on from victory to victory, stated a Nov. 10, 1911 Duluth Herald editorial entitled Democracy, the World Conqueror.

That impulse is economic need. It is no mere sentimental desire to control government that is making history in these days, but the grim necessity that there shall be an end to conditions under which Special Privilege, in one form or another, reaps the richest fruits of humble toil. The day in which a few reap what the many sow, and in which the many toil that a few may riot in corrupting luxuries, is nearing its sunset.

If worrying about American democracy seems too academic, consider the pocketbook implications of that democracy.

Autocracies, be they left- or right-winged, are built to direct limited resources to the wealthy and powerful. Systems with democratic traditions determine fairer means of dividing the labor and spoils of society. Local culture and political tradition may vary, but the idea that prosperity should touch the many instead of the few is a bedrock principle.

The fantasy version of a country falling into autocracy suggests an arriving army and sudden change. Reality is messier, but the goal is simple: power. A force seeks unchecked economic, cultural and political power.

For instance, the Russian system is effectively an oligarchy led by an autocrat. Vladimir Putin rules with an iron fist, but must carefully manage the wealthy oligarchs who supply his political power. Sure, these characters fall out of buildings time to time, but Putin risks the same if he loses their confidence. Meantime, everyone else in Russia is cut out of both the discussion and the affluence.

In this kind of system, it takes energy to resist and genuine risk to speak up. Resignation and silence become a sad form of self-care. But this only applies to those with economic comfort to fall back on.

Lets look at the real outcomes of the Trump Administration, and what we could expect if he returns to power. Yes, name-calling and pot-stirring would occupy the masses, but the more lasting effects lie under the surface.

Trumps signature achievements included a tax bill delivering historic windfalls for wealthy Americans and a Supreme Court that enshrines corporate power with even more velocity than conservative social policies. A partisan judiciary allows permanent one-party control of half the states in the nation, states where above all else taxes stay low for those with the most.

History has proven that the shared prosperity of the masses makes for the most human progress. Shared prosperity will not come from autocracy, oligarchy, or anarchy. Weve learned that the dictatorships that rise from communism dont work either. These are temptations, not solutions.

Democracys value to the people isnt just a vote, its a stake in the ever-changing human power dynamic.

We rarely concern ourselves with dangers were told about, only ones that we see ourselves. In politics, this is doubly true. At our worst, the only real danger we see is that we might lose power. Thats when humanity scrapes bottom. When times get hard we might feel tempted to neglect democracy, not realizing that its the only thing preserving our seat at the table.

Continued here:
Democracy checks power; that's why it's in danger - Minnesota Reformer

Like many states of the Global South, Nigerias task of political inclusion is complicated by its founding not as an expression of its residents desires, but as a profitmaking machine for an invading European empire. Since independence in 1960, Nigerian governments have struggled to build public trust that the state would share power and its benefits among all citizens, across the countrys hundreds of ethnic, religious and language communities. Nigerias early decades of openly authoritarian and military rule, including endemic corruption, often sowed mistrust instead a mistrust that for many has only been deepened by the February presidential election.

When Nigeria shifted to elected civilian rule in 1999, the two dominant parties papered over the lack of political inclusion with an informal agreement: They would rotate their presidential nominees between north and south, and balance their tickets, Muslim and Christian. So Nigerias presidency would rotate between the countrys biggest geographic and religious constituencies. Yet real power has remained with men whom Nigerians have called the kingmakers or the class of 1966 a gerontocracy of former army officers who led Nigerias first coup dtat and subsequent military governments, and those mens protegs, military and civilian.

Nigerians needs were never well served by concentrations of power and wealth in a rivalrous, corrupt oligarchy. After 24 years of such top-down civilian rule, the gap between governments performance and the needs of a swelling, younger population has only widened. Half of Nigerias 220 million people are now under 18, and recent surveys find as many as 73 percent of Nigerians saying that their constrained futures in Nigeria make them ready to seek those futures abroad. Young Nigerians face widened extremism; organized crime, including kidnappings; and unemployment that hovers above 30 percent overall and over 40 percent among youth. Conservatively estimated, deaths from Nigerias conflicts and political violence now approach 100,000 over the past 12 years. Emigration of young Nigerians to the United Kingdom alone trebled from 2019 to 2021.

Nigerians approached the February and March elections with high hopes of creating change. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) added nearly 10 million people, most younger than 35, to Nigerias voter rolls. It issued new biometric voter identification cards and created a computerized network that promised immediate collation of the vote results from nearly 177,000 polling places nationwide. But on election day, large parts of these systems broke down. From 94 million registered voters, only 24.9 million votes were recorded a record low percentage. The irregularities now feed arguments over INECs declaration that former Lagos state governor, Bola Ahmed Tinubu won the race (with a reported 37 percent of votes). His rivals, Atiku Abubakar (29 percent) and Peter Obi (25 percent), petitioned courts for the election to be rerun on the grounds of irregularities.

Separate teams of African, European and U.S. election observers cited varied causes for the low vote count: polling places that opened late (or not at all); attacks on election sites, notably in areas of support for opposition parties; general insecurity; fuel shortages; and a paralyzing scarcity of cash before and on election day (caused by authorities transition to new banknotes) that prevented many Nigerians from spending time and transportation money to vote. Elections last month for 28 state governorships saw fewer of the technical problems but increased violence and vote-buying, according to news accounts and the Nigeria-based, nonprofit Center for Democracy and Development.

Still, even these troubled elections simmered with Nigerians democratic energies. The candidacy of former governor Peter Obi was in part a youth insurgency against the domination of the two main parties. No third candidate in the six elections since military rule had won more than 7.5 percent of votes, but Obis vow of reforms to improve governance and accountability drew 25 percent. Energized young voters in Lagos state, an ethnic Yoruba stronghold and home of Tinubu, swung the majority of votes there to Obi, an ethnic Igbo a striking repudiation of old appeals to communal identity as the basis for Nigerian politics. The pattern of results in both national and state elections showed voters readiness to oppose incumbents and suggest that voters decisions are linked to the performance of individuals rather than parties and to a growing emphasis on competence and personality of candidates over old party loyalties, the Center for Democracy and Development noted in a recent analysis. The results should provide momentum for further challenges to the long-dominant two parties, it said.

Nigerians have repeatedly shown in other ways their readiness to work for better democracy and governance. Thousands of young Nigerians organized the grassroots #EndSARS movement against police brutality beginning in 2017 and have broadened their activism into other movements for change, including the recent election campaign. A telling result of the February and March votes is that the broad public disappointment with their conduct did not ignite violence. Rather, candidates and political parties are seeking justice in the courts an affirmation of their commitment to nonviolence and to using the institutions of a democracy as the way to consolidate it.

Barring a contrary ruling by the Supreme Court, which Nigerian analysts and history suggest is unlikely, Tinubu will be inaugurated president in a few weeks. Before and after that point, Nigerians and allies of democracy can take several steps to help Nigeria lay solid foundations for the democratic renewal that is vital to meet the countrys needs. President Muhammadu Buhari took some steps in the past year by ensuring the full funding of the INEC election authority and the professional conduct of military and security personnel. By executive order, he created a Presidential Transition Council to facilitate his handover of power to his successor. Further steps to meet Nigerians democratic aspirations include these:

Chris Kwaja is USIPs interim country manager in Nigeria and a senior lecturer at the Center for Peace and Security Studies, Modibbo Adama University in Yola.

See more here:
After Nigeria's Elections: Nurturing the Seeds of Better Democracy - United States Institute of Peace

Buckingham Countys elections director and her entire staff had had enough.

Enough of the lies about voting fraud. Enough of the accusations of wrongdoing and treason by county residents. Enough of the demented denialism stemming from the 2020 presidential election, in which too many people believed the bogus conspiracy claims of Donald Trump. The serial prevaricators falsehoods numbered in the tens of thousands while in office.

Lindsey Taylor felt she just couldnt take it anymore and recently quit the job shed held since 2019, NBC News reported. Two part-time staffers also quit, following a deputy registrar who had departed in February.

Mind you, all of this occurred in a conservative county where Trump won in 2020 with 56% of the vote. (He lost by 10 percentage points in Virginia to Joe Biden). In 2022, Republican incumbent Rep. Bob Good who also rejected the 2020 presidential results won Buckingham County by nearly 30 percentage points.

Some conspiracy.

Registrars all across the country report threats in letters, emails, voicemails and phone calls. Some find their personal addresses and information posted on-line, John McGlennon, a longtime government professor at the College of William & Mary, told me. Job security, attorney fees and the prospect of legal charges without any evidence of wrongdoing simply make the job of registrar (or employee of the registrar or election day worker) too hard.

The absurdities emanating from Buckingham County, in which a professional administrator felt hounded from her job by the Republican-majority electoral board and local Republicans, are more proof of the threats to democracy nationwide that have expanded significantly since the 2020 election.

Will we obey the rule of law, or capitulate to the unhinged braying of the mob? Do we look for facts, or do we accept baseless claims that only support our side?

Its easy to identify events around the county where the will of the people has been overruled, customs and norms have been abolished for political gain, or a majority party has choked off legitimate debate.

U.S. Senate Republicans denied then-President Barack Obama a chance to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court in early 2016, yet they rushed to confirm a new justice when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died six weeks before the 2020 election.

Several GOP-led states last month exited the Electronic Registration Information Center, which experts considered a reliable way for states to share voter registration data. NPR cited a sustained misinformation campaign from the far-right that contributed to the pullout.

Thus, politicians who have unduly worried about voter fraud have, in effect, discarded one resource to help prevent it. (Virginia remains a member of ERIC.)

In 2020, Floridas Republican-controlled Legislature basically rejected a citizens ballot initiative granting voting rights to possibly more than 900,000 former felons. Some 65% of Floridians had approved the 2018 ballot measure.

The attacks on election officials are particularly troubling. They could usher in a tainted system where party hacks not neutral administrators oversee voting. Thats noteworthy here in Virginia, where elections occur every year.

Efforts by election deniers to intimidate election workers and interfere with free and fair elections are not only illegal, they are a serious threat to our democracy, Michelle Kanter Cohen, policy director and senior counsel at the nonpartisan Fair Elections Center, said through a spokesperson.

A 2022 poll by the Brennan Center noted one in six election officials have experienced threats because of their job, and 77% say that they feel these threats have increased in recent years. More than one in four are concerned about being assaulted on the job, the poll said.

Dianna Moorman, director of elections in James City County, relayed a disturbing incident in her office during early voting in October. She said a man, who didnt live in the county, spurred a dispute over First Amendment rights and what words or signage he could display at a voting precinct.

The man later aired a YouTube video of the incident that, Moorman said, was edited misleadingly. Shes gotten up to 29 intimidating or threatening phone calls since January. They have provided my home address and doxxed my entire family, she told me Wednesday.

Moorman has been an election official for 18 years in the county and the chief of her office since 2016. After the October incident and the YouTube posting, shes had to increase security at her home and at the general registrars office.

Its not what Moorman expected the position would entail.

We are sworn to uphold the constitution of Virginia, she noted. Our job is to ensure fair, safe and transparent elections, all while being apolitical.

Let me be clear: One party, the GOP, is more guilty of hurling wild accusations with no support and of suggesting misdeeds not backed by proof.

The goal: Muck up the legitimacy of elections, frighten voting officials who are trying to be fair and cast doubt on the other sides victories.. Similar resignations some explained, some not have occurred in Montana, Arizona and Texas over the past year.

McGlennon, the William & Mary professor, started at the Williamsburg university in 1974, the same year Richard Nixon resigned during the Watergate scandal. The professor said the political climate in the country has hardened over the past half century.

We should all be worried.

The level of polarization is so high, and the tendency to not view your political adversaries as legitimate citizens with a point of view, and instead as mortal enemies, is strong, McGlennon said.

Indeed. Democracy isnt at a precipice yet, but its moving ever closer.

Buckingham County is one example of that ominous slide.

See more here:
Voting officials resignation, amid outlandish accusations, an ... - Virginia Mercury