Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

House Passes Sweeping $739 Billion Climate, Healthcare and Tax Bill – Democracy Now!

President Biden is set to sign a sweeping $739 billion bill to address the climate crisis, reduce drug costs and establish a 15% minimum tax for large corporations. On Friday, the House passed the Inflation Reduction Act on a party-line vote of 220 to 207. No Republicans supported the legislation. The White House released a video of Biden praising the bill.

President Joe Biden: The American people are going to see lower prescription drug prices, lower healthcare costs and lower energy costs. And big corporations are finally going to start to pay their fair share. Those that are paying $0 in federal income tax will now have to pay a minimum tax. And America is going to take the most aggressive action weve ever taken in confronting the climate crisis and strengthening the energy security of America, and the world, quite frankly.

Despite Bidens high praise, many climate groups criticize the package for including major handouts to the fossil fuel industry, which were added to win the support of conservative Democratic West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, who is the largest recipient of fossil fuel industry donations in Congress. The Center for Biological Diversity described the bill as a climate suicide pact.

More here:
House Passes Sweeping $739 Billion Climate, Healthcare and Tax Bill - Democracy Now!

Another Lula da Silva Presidency Would Be a Disaster for Brazilian Democracy and the Press – The Epoch Times

Commentary

Luiz Incio Lula da Silva, the far-left candidate in Brazils presidential elections this year, has resumed his attack on freedom of expression by demanding the social control of the media.

Social control of the media can be defined as a euphemism to subordinate the free flow of information to the undercover interference from government.

Commonly known as Lula, the former president vowed that if elected in the next presidential elections, his government would definitely implement this state-sponsored censorship of social media.

We will have to regulate social networks, regulate the internet, set a parameter, said Lula in a Nov. 19, 2021, interview in Brussels, Belgium.

In this interview, Lula falsely accused the current incumbent of being a president who tells lies a day through social networks.

According to him, the proliferation of alleged fake news is motivated by the rise and election of far-right politicians like President Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil and former U.S. president Donald Trump.

However, this statement reveals more about Lula himself than his political adversaries. He is a former union leader who served as the 35th president of Brazil from 2003 to 2010.Over that period, he attempted to consolidate dictatorial powers by means of a number of external bodies of social control over the press, television and movies.

Fortunately, however, the constant scandals that shook his notoriously corrupt administration had at least the beneficial effect of demoralising a government bent on establishing a long-lasting dictatorial regime.

On July 23, 2003, during the Lula administration, Brazil supported the request from Fidel Castros Cuba to suspend the consultative status of the Reporters Without Borders (RWB) within the U.N. Human Rights Commissions.

Lula supported the suspension of RWB because this organisation dared to criticise the election of Muhammar Gaddafis Libya as the chair of the U.N. Human Rights Commission (pdf). In joining with Libya and other countries with an appalling human-rights record (China, Cuba, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia), Lulas Brazil voted for the suspension of one of the few NGOs representing freedom of the press to have consultative status within this branch of the U.N. Economic and Social Council.

On May 11, 2004, the Lula administration arbitrarily revoked the visa of New York Times correspondent Larry Rohter, who was outside Brazil at the time, after he wrote an article about Lulas notorious drinking habits.

The action was entirely illegal because the law in Brazil explicitly prohibits the expulsion of foreigners married to a Brazilian or having a Brazilian child. Rohter not only lived in Brazil, but he was married to a Brazilian woman and had two Brazilian children.

The incident caused an uproar, and even journalists who questioned Rohters article criticized the government for its intolerance, said a report of the Committee to Protect Journalists.

And yet, only a few days after the illegal decision to expel that journalist, Lula said: Its not for a president to reply to an idiocy such as this. It doesnt deserve any reply. It deserves action. I think he should be much more worried than I am.

He further stated: This journalist will no longer stay in this country. This will serve as an example to others. If I didnt take this measure, any other journalist from any other country could do the same without any fear of punishment.

In August 2004, the Lula administration introduced a bill that aimed to abolish freedom of the press via the creation of the Federal Council of Journalism (CFJ). This agency would have acquired extraordinary powers to guide, discipline, and monitor all journalists working in Brazil. They would have to register with that entity to have the right to work as a journalist. The then president would have the power to freely nominate the board members of this federal regulatory agency to a four-year term.

On that occasion, Alberto Dines, professor of journalism at the University of Campinas, explained that the CFJ bill would undermine the indispensable separation between government and press.

According to the Brazilian Press Association, that bill was a threat to the constitutionally established principle of freedom of expression.

Fortunately, the Cmara dos Deputados (House of Representatives) decided to vote down that proposal in 2005.

However, in 2009, there was a second attempt by the Lula administration to establish government control over the media through a National Conference on Communications charged with drafting a regulatory framework that would impose social control of the press and its content.

Many media organisations refused to participate and several of the countrys leading newspapers heavily criticised the initiative.

According to the then president of the National Magazine Editors, Roberto Muylaert, his organisation would not participate in this process because the idea of social control of the media is incompatible with freedom of expression and a free press.

The proposal to create a social council to audit press content implies modifications to the Constitution which guarantees free initiative and freedom of expression, he said.

Indeed, the Brazilian Constitution is patently clear in Article 5 that all forms of censorship or hindrance being placed on the freedom of the press are prohibited.

The Brazilian Constitution goes even further and provides in Article 220 a formal protection for freedom of expression for intellectual, artistic, scientific, and media activities. The provision states that every manifestation of thought, expression, and information shall never be subjected to any form of governmental restriction for political, ideological, or artistic reasons.

I hope that the winner of the next presidential elections in Brazil will be respectful of basic human rights and the Brazilian Constitution. Accordingly, the candidature of Lula da Silva represents a serious threat to the future of democracy and the rule of law in Brazil. In fact, if Lula were elected for another presidential term, it could spell absolute disaster for the Brazilian democracy.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Follow

Augusto Zimmermann is professor and head of law at Sheridan Institute of Higher Education in Perth. He is also president of the Western Australian (WA) Legal Theory Association, editor-in-chief of The Western Australian Jurist, and served as a member of WA's law reform commission from 2012 to 2017. Zimmermann has authored numerous books, including "Direito Constitucional Brasileiro," "Western Legal Theory," and "Christian Foundations of the Common Law."

Read this article:
Another Lula da Silva Presidency Would Be a Disaster for Brazilian Democracy and the Press - The Epoch Times

LETTER: Vote to defend democracy | Letters to the Editor – Ashland Daily Press

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Link:
LETTER: Vote to defend democracy | Letters to the Editor - Ashland Daily Press

Democracy and Education | Higher Ed Gamma – Inside Higher Ed

The Great School Wars that the educational historian and educational policy analyst Diane Ravitch wrote about in 1974 have returned with a vengeance.

Older battlesover tracking, community control, public funding for religious schools, multicultural education and even busingonce thought laid to rest, have resurfaced, while a host of new flashpoints, over critical race theory, school choice, charter schools, publicly funded tuition vouchers, equity, standardized testing, teacher accountability, transgender students rights and sex education, have exploded.

Even a glance at the news headlines reveals the depth and intensity of the deep cultural divides surrounding K-12 education. Here are a few examples:

San Francisco has become a touchstone in this educational Kulturkampf, whether the issue involves the names of public schools, the display of an allegedly racially insensitive mural by a 1930s Communist, the use of the word chief as part of administrative titles, or the districts math curriculum, which professors from Berkeley, Harvard, Stanford and UCLA claim will leave students, especially those from lower-income backgrounds, less prepared for postsecondary STEM education.

I recently spoke with a reporter who had been asked by her editor to write about the relationship between education and democracy. This is, of course, a fraught, extraordinarily complicated topic.

Theres the Dewey-esque notion of education as the bedrock of democracy: as the instrument for producing informed, reflective, independently minded citizens, rather than passive, compliant drones.

John Deweys civic-minded vision has, of course, inspired generations of educators, who aspire to transform their classrooms into models of democracy in action, cultivating students who can think critically, question established beliefs, undertake independent, in-depth research and engage in various forms of active learning.

Then theres how education actually functions in todays democracy:

As I spoke with the reporter, I thought quite a bit about what it means for the educational system itself to be democratic.

I think its fair to say that the history of primary and secondary education in the United States is, in fact, a series of ongoing controversies over education and democracy. Although the areas of contention have shifted over time, whats at stake is nothing less than these questions:

Those of us who teach at colleges should not assume that we are largely invulnerable to the kinds of cultural conflicts raging across the K-12 landscape. Nor should those who teach in California or New York be sanguine that the kinds of controversies raging in Texas and Florida over tenure or guns on campus have nothing to do with their states.

Faculty even in the bluest of blue states need to recognize that institutional autonomy is ebbing and that their legislatures are becoming much more intrusive in matters of admissions, curricular requirements, credit transfer, remedial education and institutional spending priorities.

Also, one-shot infusions of funds into public colleges and universities should not blind faculty to a host of worrisome long-term trends, for example in demographics and student preparation and interests, that will inevitably disrupt higher education.

Democracy is not simply a matter of free elections and voting rights. Its about empowerment. Its about conflicting interest groups and lobbies, each asserting their own values and priorities.

Today, more and more campus stakeholders believe that they should have a greater voice in institutional functioning. The most striking examples can be found in growth of graduate student unions and the emergence of the first undergraduate unions, It has come as a shock to many faculty members to discover that in campus decision making, theirs is only one voice among many, and not necessarily the loudest or more influential.

Democracy is messy and doesnt necessarily produce the optimal outcomes. Academic politics is especially acrimonious, not because (in words usually attributed to Henry Kissinger) the stakes are so low, but because the battles are never simply contests over power or struggles for dominance or assertions of self-interest. These contests are ultimately about values, vision, mission and institutional priorities with a larger goal of consensus building.

At their best, colleges and universities and their departments function according to a distinctive form of shared governance, which combines the best of two distinctive conceptions of democracy: deliberative democracy and participatory democracy. In consequence, the political process and representation within that process are as important as the resulting decisions.

If campus politics isnt ultimately about mission and a broad sense of the collective good, then the academy really is nothing more than yet another corporate entity in todays callous, unfeeling bureaucratic society.

Steven Mintz is professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin.

View original post here:
Democracy and Education | Higher Ed Gamma - Inside Higher Ed

The meaning of democracy hits close to home for this Morris Plains essay winner – Morristown Green

Aryaa Vyas has won the 2022 Paul Bangiola Good Citizen Award, a $250 prize granted annually by the Morris Plains Democratic Committee for an essay by a Borough School 8th grader extolling some aspect of good citizenship.

This years question: What does freedom in a democracy mean to you?

Here is Vyas essay.

Freedom. Liberty. Choice. These words are strongly associated with the United States. They are the foundation on which our founding fathers developed the nation. But what do they truly mean?

To me, freedom in a democracy means a variety of things, from being able to make a difference in the government and how it governs, to having equality for all, regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender, or any other characteristic.

It means having those unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It also means that the government is held accountable for its actions, that no one is above the law, and that no one person or group of people can have ultimate power over the people.

One example of freedom in a democracy is being able to facilitate an idea if it has enough support. One should be able to think, I can change this, and no one can hinder me. Bills can be proposed to change or add government regulations or organizations actions, or anything in between. People can generate enough support for or against a policy, and achieve their goal through peaceful protest or by voting for candidates who hold a particular belief.

Our senators and representatives work for the people, and so they must do what they can to uphold the interests of their citizens. People have a choice to have a say in their government and how they are being governed. They can speak their opinions on the government and make their voice heard, because, like President Kennedy said, Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeedand no republic can survive

The freedom of having a say in the government holds a special place in my heart, as it was something my mother was never able to experience. She grew up in the East African country of Kenya, a democracy only by name.

It only ever had one political party until very recently, and people feared speaking out against those in power. When they did speak, they faced dire consequences. My mothers neighbor was one person who did such. He made his views on the president and the Kenyan government public. When he gained support from others, he was murdered at his home.

Elections also were very aggressiveriots and protests broke out. Cars were burnt so people could not vote for the opposing parties. Roadblocks were put in place. For those reasons, many families, including my mothers, did not ever vote. This means that the government is not held responsible for its actions, essentially gaining ultimate power once its sworn into office.

The regulations officials create are not always in the interests of the citizens, but instead, for themselves, their cronies, and sycophants.

Having freedom in a democracy also means having equality for all, and havingno persecution of specific groups of people. Our Declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Yet throughout the course of American history, we know this never always held true. For instance, in the early 1900s, segregation and the Jim Crow Laws were developed. Or during World War II, thousands of Japanese Americans were incarcerated in internment camps.

And for the majority of our young countrys life, women were not allowed to do the same things as men, like voting, owning property, or getting specific jobs. Even now, there is still an imbalance between women and mens rights.

Though the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence were written by men who owned slaves, hypocritical to what those documents proclaim, these laws of the land make it possible for those facing injustice to fight to improve their lives and create justness in society.

As we progress, we aim to slowly lessen the discrimination in the United States and achieve the vision of our founding fathers.

Furthermore, freedom in a democracy means that no one is above the law. Those in office, whether federal, state, or local, have the same rights and limitations as a common citizen. Just as a citizen can be tried in court, so can a member of the government.

For instance, in 1972, President Nixon was compelled by the Supreme Court to provide recordings of conversations, and he faced impeachment by Congress due to his role in the Watergate scandal.

Countless senators and representatives under nearly every presidency have also been brought before courts for a variety of charges, from tax evasion to bribery. Most recently in 2019 and 2021, President Trump faced impeachment twice for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and incitement of the Jan. 6 insurrection, respectively.

I believe that freedom in a democracy involves exercising the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution, providing input to the government, and being treated fairly, regardless of someones characteristics or personality.

It means being able to be yourself, saying what you want, voicing your concerns or anything else, which makes the United States as close to a pure democracy as possible.

Other countries, like Canada and the United Kingdom, allow free speech. But there are restrictions, like not being allowed to speak hatefully against a person or group of people, which the United States allows. The White House Correspondents Dinner is one representation of the above.

Trevor Noah, a South African comedian, said at the 2022 dinner, In America, you have the right to seek the truth and speak the truth even if it makes people in power uncomfortable, even if it makes your viewers or your readers uncomfortableI stood here tonight and I made fun of the president of the United States, and Im going to be fine.

Aryaa Vyas, 14, lives in Morristown with her parents and older brother. She has also lived in England and New Mexico. Aryaa loves to travel, swim, run and read. She also loves animals, especially whales and dolphins. She enjoys walking around Morristown and visiting the Morristown & Morris Township Library, and volunteers at The Seeing Eye Inc., an organization that trains puppies to become guide dogs for the visually impaired. Aryaa is a rising freshman at Morristown High School, where she has joined the Marching Colonials as a flute player.

Read the original:
The meaning of democracy hits close to home for this Morris Plains essay winner - Morristown Green