Mediaboss Marketing

Mark Kenny takes a look at the federal budget and pre-election politics with political scientists Marija Taflaga and Jill Sheppard and economist Leonora Risse on this episode of Democracy Sausage.

Are the measures in the federal budget the right ones for Australias economic recovery? With factional battles holding up Liberal Party preselections in New South Wales, will Scott Morrison call the election this week or will he be forced to wait? And what have the accusations levelled by Senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells at the prime minister and others meant for the governments ability to sell its budget? Dr Leonora Risse, Senior Lecturer in Economics at RMIT University, and Dr Jill Sheppard and Dr Marija Taflaga from ANU School of Politics and International Relations join Professor Mark Kenny to discuss this pre-election budget on this episode of Democracy Sausage. Listen here:https://bit.ly/3JOKpOx

Leonora Risse is a Senior Lecturer in Economics at RMIT University. She specialises in gender equality in the workforce and isaResearch Fellow with the Womens Leadership Institute Australia.

Jill Sheppardis a researcher and Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Relations at The Australian National University. Her research focuses on why people participate in politics, what opinions they hold and why, and how both are shaped by political institutions and systems.

Marija Taflagais the Director of ANU Centre for the Study of Australian Politics and a Lecturer at ANU School of Politics and International Relations.

Mark Kennyis a Professor at ANU Australian Studies Institute. He came to the university after a high-profile journalistic career including six years as chief political correspondent and national affairs editor for The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, and The Canberra Times.

Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny is available onAcast,Apple Podcasts,Spotify,Google Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Wed love to hear your feedback for this podcast series! Send in your questions, comments, or suggestions for future episodes topodcast@policyforum.net. You can also Tweet us@APPSPolicyForumor join us on theFacebook group.

This podcast is produced in partnership withThe Australian National University.

Go here to read the rest:
Democracy Sausage: Factional fights and budget booby traps - Policy Forum

WASHINGTON (Project Syndicate) The solidarity on display at the recentNATO,U.S.-EU, andG-7summits has revealed a rejuvenated West. While Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to wage war on Ukraine, the Atlantic democracies are responding with impressiveand somewhat unexpectedunity as they arm Ukraine, reinforce NATOs eastern flank, and sanction the Russian economy.

Instead of turning away migrants, European Union member states are opening their doors to millions of Ukrainian refugees. The U.S. Congress seems to have rediscovered the bipartisan comity that has long been missing in Washington.

Prolonged economic insecurity and yawning inequality have depopulated the political center.

The political theoristFrancis Fukuyamaevenforeseesa new birth of freedom that will get us out of our funk about the declining state of global democracy, adding hopefully that the spirit of 1989 will live on, thanks to a bunch of brave Ukrainians.

Not so fast. The political ills plaguing the Atlantic democracies may be out of the headlines, but they have not gone away. While Russias invasion is certainly a wake-up call for the West, the prospect of a new cold war will not by itself cure the United States and Europe of illiberalism and political dysfunction.

In fact, the war in Ukraine will likely have economic spillover effects that foster political blowback. Accordingly, both America and Europe need to keep focusing on getting their own houses in order even while ensuring that the tragedy in Ukraine receives the resources and attention it deserves.

In Cold War America, the political discipline engendered by the Soviet threat did help mute partisan conflict over foreign policy. Similarly, the prospect today of a new era of militarized rivalry with Russia isreviving bipartisan centrismon matters of statecraft.

Although the neo-isolationist wing of the Republican Party in Congress may be relatively quiet for now, it enjoys strong support among the party base and is likely to reassert itself as Western-led sanctions against Russia hurt U.S. consumers.

The left wing of the Democratic Party is no longer clamoring for cuts to the defense budget and a fast and deep pullback from fossil fuels. Both the hawkish and the neo-isolationist wings of the Republican Party have toned down their criticism of President Joe Biden and generally rallied behind his response to the Russian invasion.

But this return to bipartisanship is likely to be short-lived.

The bipartisanship of the Cold War era rested not just on the Soviet threat, but also on the ideological centrism sustained by widely shared prosperity within America. Yet prolonged economic insecurity and yawning inequality have since depopulated the political center, and ideological moderation has given way to bitter polarization.

This erosion of the political center explains the rapid evaporation of the surge in bipartisanship that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. And it explains why, just before the war in Ukraine captured the countrys attention, public intellectuals in the U. S weredebatingthe prospects for civil war. According to a poll conducted late last year,64% of Americansfear that U. S democracy is in crisis and at risk of failing.

Thehighest U.S. inflation rate in 40 yearsis currently heightening the risk of a return to the illiberal politics of grievance. The rising cost of energy and food is one of the main reasons why Bidensapproval ratingshave remained low despite his strong handling of the war in Ukraine.

As the November midterm elections near, scant Republican support for Biden will translate into renewed partisan rivalry. And although the neo-isolationist wing of the Republican Party in Congress may be relatively quiet for now, it enjoys strong support among the party base and is likely to reassert itself as Western-led sanctions against Russia hurt U.S. consumers.

Given the potential for illiberal populism to make a comeback in the U.S., the Biden administration urgently needs to continue advancing its domestic agenda. Investing in infrastructure, education, technology, health care, and other domestic programs offers the best way to alleviate the electorates discontent andrevivethe countrys ailing political center. Thebudgetthat Biden proposed this week is a step in the right direction.

Europe, too, should keep a close eye on its home front as it focuses on its response to Ukraine war. While Europes political center has remained stronger than Americas, and the EU has shown impressive unity in the face of Russian aggression, strains to European cohesion lurk just beneath the surface.

Europes magnanimous welcome to Ukrainian refugees may triggerdomestic backlashesas costs mount and the prospect of permanent resettlement looms. Weaning the EU off Russian fossil fuels will require considerable investment and could lead to even higher energy prices, potentially hampering Europes economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

And while Poland and Hungary are now front line states that deserve allied support, both are still ruled by illiberal governments that threaten core European values; they should not be let off the hook.

Europeans, like Americans, need to continue working hard on domestic renewal. Economic restructuring and investment, reform of immigration policy and border control, and more pooling of sovereignty on foreign and defense policy can all help consolidate the EUs solidarity and democratic legitimacy.

Putins brutal attack on Ukraine has helped revive the West. But the homegrown threats to liberal democracy that were front and center before the war still require urgent attention, even amid the strenuous effort to defeat Russias attempt to subjugate its neighbor.

It would be tragically ironic if the West succeeds in turning Putins gamble in Ukraine into a resounding defeat, only to see liberal democracies then succumb to the enemy within.

This commentary was published with permission of Project Syndicate Western Unity Starts at Home

Charles A. Kupchan, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, is professor of international affairs at Georgetown University and the author ofIsolationism: A History of Americas Efforts to Shield Itself from the World(Oxford University Press, 2020).

Europe has a moral obligation to boycott Russian energy

George Soros: Make no mistake, Putin and Xi are putting the world at risk of complete destruction

Putins war in Ukraine underscores the necessity of supporting democracies everywhere

See the article here:
Putins brutal attack on Ukraine has helped revive the West, but the homegrown threats to liberal democracy fester under a veneer of solidarity -...

Sir, I would welcome news of restricting motor vehicles in Dublin city centre and airport if the Government agreed to meet the public halfway and fast-track public transport infrastructure such as the metro and new Luas lines, but that wont happen. My 15km commute to work takes over two hours by public transport and involves multiple buses each way, so the car is my only choice. If the Government were serious about taking cars off the road, they might look at the fact Dublin has the worst public transport of any capital city in Europe. And Im not even mentioning people who live outside Dublin, where the issue isnt the quality of public transport, it is that it doesnt exist. Yours, etc,

STEPHEN OREILLY,

Malahide,

Co Dublin.

A chara, Yesterday morning I took part in the D12 bike bus. About 50 children cycled to Riverview Educate Together National School, as they do nearly every week. The kids love it, and its a healthy, active way to start their day, it takes cars off the road and reduces pollution.

Everyone benefits.

To get to school safely, these children needed an escort of parents, supporters, and garda. There are no protected cycle lanes on their way to school. No provision has been made for their safety.

When were our councils and politicians given a mandate to prioritise cars over the health and happiness of our children? Is mise,

RAY CUNNINGHAM,

Walkinstown,

Dublin 12.

Sir, As a mature citizen far from the first flush of youth, I fear that should I take charge of a two-wheeled vehicle steered by handlebars and propelled by pedals, my safety and that of all whom I might encounter would be at risk.

Surely our emergency departments are under enough pressure. Yours, etc,

CATHERINE

OCONNOR,

Rathgar,

Dublin 6.

Sir, Letter writers seem to think that Dublin City Councils Owen Keegan is trying to turn the city into a Flann OBrien novel with bicycles as the sole mode of transport.

Flann OBriens favourite fictional savant, de Selby, offers an alternative to the bicycle or car because a journey is simply a series of infinitely brief static experiences, you can replicate one by viewing picture postcards of the route and making the appropriate adjustments to your lighting. You then just step out of your room having arrived at your destination. Yours, etc,

TOM POWER,

Cabra,

Dublin 7.

Sir, While not a resident of Dublin, whenever I visit our capital city I am always dismayed by the proliferation of Dublin City and private buses clogging up the city centre emitting noise and fumes, idling in congested traffic and obscuring many of the wonderful facades. I have travelled much in my lifetime and lived in foreign cities; elsewhere public transport systems have been efficient, quiet, reliable and far less obtrusive, be they underground or overground.

While the debate about cycle lanes and decreasing motor traffic continues, I believe that our focus should be on providing citizens with a far cleaner and reliable public transport system which will reduce the reliance on cars. Yours, etc,

MARTIN KRASA,

Cork.

Go here to read the rest:
Local democracy and restricting cars - Dublin - The Irish Times

The Vanderbilt Project on Unity and American Democracy has announced the formation of a 26-member advisory board spanning multiple backgrounds and fieldsfrom former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and biographer Walter Isaacson to Grammy-winning artists Faith Hill and Tim McGrawthat is committed to the projects mission to elevate facts and evidence-based reasoning in American political discourse.

American democracy rests on the foundational idea that people come together from all walks of life and diverse perspectives to work for the common good of our country, Vanderbilt University Chancellor Daniel Diermeier said. The advisory board being announced today embodies this ideal and will be instrumental in helping the Vanderbilt Project on Unity and American Democracy achieve its goal of fostering a shared understanding and productive dialogue to help our nation heal its frayed bonds.

Todays American democracy is struggling amid the nations deep polarization and eroding trust in foundational institutions. The Vanderbilt Project on Unity and American Democracy was founded just over one year ago in direct response to that dynamic, with the goals of exploring how higher education and other leading institutions can play a productive, active and meaningful role in healing our deepest divides and bridging our widest differences.

The country remains at an inflection point, with many questioning the continued durability of the American experiment, said Jon Meacham, one of the projects three co-chairs and the Carolyn T. and Robert M. Rogers Chair in American Presidency at Vanderbilt. This exceptional group will help the project push back against the falsehoods and conspiracy theories passing for political rhetoric and reintroduce facts and evidence in the national debate.

Members of the advisory board join the project from across the political spectrum, diverse backgrounds and a wide range of expertise. From politics and law, to journalism, higher education, religion and music, each member of the advisory board brings unique perspective and valuable insight into solving the countrys most pressing challenges. Music and film also hold a special power to unite people from all different political stripes and geographies, especially in our current fragile moment as a nation. The advisory board will help the project reach audiences far and wide with its core messagethat fact and evidence must serve as the basis for our national dialogue, and we must commit to a shared future as country.

We have a trust gap in this country, said Samar Ali, Vanderbilt research professor and project co-chair. By lending their voice to the project, this group can help restore trust in the democratic system by talking with, rather than simply talking to, Americans of all backgrounds.

As the project continues to develop original research, programming and content throughout the coming year, the advisory board will amplify key findings and raise important topics of discussion at home and abroad. By lowering the temperature and drawing on a broad selection of experiences, advisory board members will speak from positions of authority and trust, helping the project reach new audiences and develop deeper understanding for a more peaceful and united nation.

Divisiveness and rancor never built a bridge or educated a child, said Bill Haslam, former two-term governor of Tennessee and project co-chair. This impressive collection of national leaders understands the importance of approaching the difficult challenges facing our country with humility and civility.

The advisory board comprises the following members:

The Vanderbilt Project on Unity and American Democracy aims to elevate facts, research and historical evidence to reinvigorate our national discourse, the public and our leaders in the possibilities and promises of democracy. Through this crucial work, the project shines a light on what binds Americans together, allowing it to illuminate the path toward that more perfect union. Visit vu.edu/unity to stay informed on news, events and research from the Vanderbilt Project on Unity and American Democracy.

Excerpt from:
Famed writers, musicians and politicians among new advisory board for Vanderbilt Project on Unity and Ameri... - Vanderbilt University News

Imagine a city with a weak government and no police force. Gangs would take over and battle each other until they carved up the place for themselves if they didnt destroy it first.

This is our global village, now more than ever.

Roaming its streets are various gangs, some called Groups, their membership largely self-appointed on the basis of size, strength, wealth and weapons. We have theGroup of 7(G-7) and theGroup of 20(G-20), agroup of three superpowers(G-3) and another of thefive permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, not to forgetNATO.

The G-7 and G-20 have the wealth, the G-3 has the power and the five permanent members of the Security Council have the authority at least to veto the efforts of all the others. These five members of the Security Council, which include all G-3 countries, have a history of colonizing other countries. They have the five largest arsenals of nuclear weapons in the world (accounting for97 percent of the total); and with Germany, they are the largest exporters of armaments (81percent of the worlds total).

This is an Insecurity Council.

We hardly needed this latest crisis to appreciate that, as go the three superpowers, so goes the world. That includes the future of you, me and everyone we care about: Our survival is only as good as the mental health of three world leaders who clash with each other like kids in a schoolyard. Sooner or later, this madness will assure our mutual assured destruction.

How to get out of this mess? Certainly not with the groups we have: They exacerbate it, if not directly, then by inflaming their rivalries with powers that do so indirectly. It is obvious, yet imperative, that we must change course immediately. Interestingly, COVID carries a message in this regard. Sufficiently alarmed, we were prepared to do theunthinkable.Who would have thought that governments would act within weeks to lock down their populations and close much of their economies? COVID made the unimaginable imperative.

Here, then, is anotherhard to imaginepossibility. It begins with democracy. We are not about to get planetary elections mercifully. But we may be able to grow legitimate global government from the roots of domestic democracy, much as cities and nations have done to be able to remove leadership that is corrupt or malicious.

Each year, The Economist publishes a Global Democracy Index, compiled from measures of electoral process and pluralism, the functioning of government, political participation, democratic political culture and civil liberties. The score for each country ranks it as a full democracy, flawed democracy, hybrid regime, or autocratic regime. In the full democracies of the 2021 index are21 countries, many of them small, includingUruguay and Costa Rica. The first with apopulation of more than 20 million is Taiwan (at number eight), and the largest is Japan (at number 17). This means that none of the worlds10 most populous countriesis ranked as a full democracy, including the most prominent liberal democracy. So ranked only oneof the G-3, one of the five permanent Security Council members,four members of the G-7 and six members of the G-20.

If the G7 and G20 have created themselves, whats to stop theDemocracy 21 (D-21)from creating an Assembly of Democracies? Compared with the established groups, its membership(using the Global Democracy Index as a guide)would be more legitimate,its reach more global and its concern for the collective interest more credible. Many of its members are among themost progressive countries in the world,having managed to sustain a healthy balance across sectors of society, unlike the three superpowers that tilt toward public sector communism, private sector capitalism, or plural sector populism.

Should democracy weaken in these countries, the procedure for removing it would be as objective as that for including it: a factual assessment of its performance as a democracy. Indeed, this adaptability could be an assemblys greatest strength. With widespread recognition, some political parties might campaign on a promise to get their country inducted (with the Global Democracy Index holding them to account). Democracy could become fashionable again!

Is it outrageous to believe that a D-21, comprising a bunch of pipsqueak countries (as a Harvard colleague once called Canada after I criticized the U.S.), can provide a different voice in the world, and so begin to reverse this madness? The situation we tolerate is outrageous. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is outrageous. A global grouping of full democracies is not. Even and especially now.

The established powers will hardly step aside. But, for starters, an Assembly of Democracies could be a conspicuous alternative to them all. It might even serve as a kind of peace council in-waiting. Should a nuclear confrontation become imminent, it may be the only place to turn for resolution beyond confrontation. Moreover, by getting their collective act together, these countries could challenge the superpowers as well as the divide-and-rule maneuvering of economic globalization, which now faces no countervailing power. (We recently celebrated a global agreement for a minimum tax rate of 15 percent on corporations. Is it truly considered a minimum or maximum?) Eventually, an expanded Assembly of Democracies might metamorphose into a Council of Democracies for serious global government. Imagine that.

When we recognize the obvious as outrageous, we can recognize the outrageous as obvious.

Henry Mintzberg is Cleghorn Professor of Management Studies at McGill University in Canada and the author of several books about management. He is also the author of "Rebalancing Society: Radical Renewal Beyond Left, Right and Center" and (rebalancingsociety.orginfo).

See the original post:
Our groups of global superpowers need a balancing force for democracy | TheHill - The Hill