Mediaboss Marketing

I think Donald Trump kind of sees the world in the same way as President Erdogan, taking a tough line, kicking up some dust, being the rebel in the region, Defterios says. And this could strain relations with Greece, and within NATO itself.

In an interview with Kathimerini held before a final verdict was given on the US presidential race, CNN journalist John Defterios stressed incumbent Donald Trumps determination to challenge the result in court, disregarding the perils of such a move.

Defterios explained Trumps enduring popularity among the American electorate, underscoring the fact that his supporters demonstrate dedication that is cult-like.

In the same interview, he predicted that instability in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean will continue.

Why do you think Trump is still so popular? Thats one question thats on everybodys mind today.

Its a question I get all the time, in terms of people saying, Where does this support come from? We have to recognize that the US is extremely polarized. If you look at the map from the center of the country, from the Midwest, and then move down to the right and an arch down to the southeast, this is the Trump base. I think this is a backlash against globalization over the last 25 years and the transition from the GATT treaty to the World Trade Organization.

The developed economies with the US included here didnt prepare their citizenry for the competition thats coming from China and the developing world. So the Trump base has been communicated with this idea of Make America Great Again. The real translation is, Lets protect the American worker again and throw up barriers and raise a lot of heat with China, which has not benefited the US economybut it makes this base feel better.

Now this is a complex issue, but the bottom line is this is the group that was widely addicted during the opioid crisis in the Midwest, in the south of rural America (they're) very passionate, almost a cult-like following to Donald Trump. So these are the red states. They have this perception that he delivers right across the board on the economy. I think its more of a sales pitch than the reality of what we have today. But their loyalty is because he puts this at the top of the agenda, communicating with these people, and the economy, before the Covid-19 shock. How do you explain the fact that while he has mishandled the Covid crisis, this seems to have had no impact on a large part of the population? As an American its a tough thing to explain, but it comes down to free liberties. They have couched this debate, about wearing a mask for example, with the removal of a right to freedom, to even the right to bear arms. Nobody wants anybody to mess around with their ammunition and arms control and gun control. They think this is taking something away.

And again, the president has said, I dont want to lock down the economy and I want these people to be able to work again, so its been framed not as a health issue and America has the highest death rate per population, and also the highest infection rate per population but more Youre encroaching on my freedoms, I dont like big government, I dont like high taxes, I dont want anybody to tell me what I should do with my guns.

And hes framed that into the debate when it comes to the health crisis as well. Now, I think we have another crisis in the United States, partially because the elites and leadership over the last generation have not ever communicated with this base. It started with Fox News and seeing that Main Street America was ignored. And they lit a torch going back 20 years ago with the development of Fox and you have to give credit to Donald Trump for latching on to the movement if you will, speaking their language, even though hes a billionaire by trade, was born with a silver spoon. They identify because of the language hes using about the hardworking lower class of America.

We also have an education crisis with this working class because they cant compete in the world arena because they dont have the right training or education. So theyre suffering due to the transition of globalization, but its couched now under the Trump mantra as making America great again. Lets protect the American uneducated worker by throwing up trade barriers, cutting taxes for companies to grow, and then driving up the employment rate. Hes not been a fiscal conservative in the real traditional sense with Republicans, but his base doesnt care. Thats reality.

At this point, it seems that this election is going to be dragged out probably in the courts. How do you view this? Is it really dangerous for the standing of the US worldwide? Some people are even talking about some sort of civil strife within the country. How do you see all that?

We saw the electoral vote count led by Joe Biden, so this is why Donald Trump immediately put out a press statement saying that this is a shame or a fraud against the American people again communicating with his base. Almost an alarm, to say You stand ready, as he did with the Proud Boys. They have armed militias. So I dont want to overplay it to you, but there is a real threat.

If it does not go in the direction that Donald Trump is looking for after he does exercise all the might of the court system, even taking it to the Supreme Court, he has a huge advantage today. It could lead to civil unrest. Every vote counts. There is a threat against democracy if, for some reason, the courts decide that the counting after election day does not count. But it doesnt make any sense at all because we shifted because of Covid-19 90 million voters going in for a mainland ballot. The Trump administration through the different governors stopped the vote counting before the election so they couldnt get those votes counted because theyre heavily Democratic, so it was a very calculating move. And then, after saying that if you count after the polls closed on November 3 they dont count, it doesnt make any sense whatsoever.

But hes really threatening the core of democracy and the voting system. He doesnt like structure, he doesnt like the international architecture, but... he spends most of his time trying to break the structures. So again, he serves as the rebel supporting white working-class America, and they love the bellicose language that he uses.

I gather from what youre saying that even if Trump is defeated, Trumpism will be around for a while, right?

I dont think so. In fact if Trump is defeated here, I think this would be a flash in the pan, and the Republican Party can reset to the center again. Theres a danger here if Trump wins, and Ill just put out a different proposal here. If Trump wins, that means the Democratic Party would lunge to the left, because the criticism of Joe Biden is that he was playing the centrist card, trying to win the Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio. If indeed Trump stays in office, expect the AOCs and the Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warrens to move the party to the left, which I think strategically would be a mistake. Weve learned the lesson though: The victories are won in the middle. And you hear a lot of Republican veterans say its time for a Republican reset. I tell you, the next two weeks is going to be very, very uncertain, which I think is going to wake up the financial markets by the way at the same time put in doubt the structure and leadership of the United States.

What do you mean by that?

People are suggesting that China and Russia were agitating the system and interfering on social media platforms in support of Joe Biden. I think to the contrary here. I think the two if you take the Chinese and Russian model if they can agitate the system, it provides instability for the US model of democracy. So whether its Donald Trump or Joe Biden right now, it allows the Chinese and the Russians, for example, to take a step back. And I understand they did intervene but, if thats the case and this is the premise that people are using that allows their models to look strong for the future, that democracy is waning, that liberalism is on the wane right now. If you take a look at the UK system with Brexit, one would say the same: They marched to Brexit. Theyre trying to negotiate an exit. The Tory party didnt have a good response to Covid-19. It looks like democracy in many states around the world those in the G7 are afraid right now, and this is a real challenge to the largest economy, what was the global leader in the world if you look at the model, if it goes through this exercise, a challenging of the vote by a renegade Donald Trump.

How do you think this election is going to impact the Middle East, the Eastern Mediterranean, and more specifically Greece and Turkey? As you know, we have a big problem with Turkey around here. Trump seems to have a very close, special relationship with Erdogan. How do you see things developing in that respect?

OK, lets cover the kind of the wider Middle East its almost monopolar, if you will. Here in the Gulf states where Im sitting in Abu Dhabi, six Gulf states look at Iran with the exception of Oman, which tries to remain neutral and they say that is the number one issue for them and thats why Donald Trump has supported them very transactionally on defense sales of US equipment to the Gulf states. So that was a transactional move. Joe Biden said that he would come back and re-engage with the Iranians, probably not to the level that President Obama was doing ahead of the dismantling of that agreement by Donald Trump. So thats the key issue here. Would Joe Biden re-engage with Iran? That would change the mix. The Abraham accords will make it more difficult for Joe Biden or any other US leader to put a wedge between the Gulf states and Israel in the future because they actually see the future against Iran, the same. So I would expect a much more moderate package from Joe Biden. If Trump stays in I would expect more pressure, and potentially a number of sources worry about a surprise attack against Iran. A future of Trump in office I think raises insecurity in the region as well.

When it comes to the Eastern Mediterranean, Ive had sources in the intelligence community from Eastern Europe say it is the most dangerous spot in the world right now, which raised eyebrows for me two years ago, and its played out exactly as this person was suggesting because theres gas assets at stake here. I think Donald Trump kind of sees the world in the same way as President [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan, taking a tough line, kicking up some dust, being the rebel in the region. And this could strain relations with Greece, and within NATO itself. So thats the real danger. But I think in favor of Greece when it comes to the Eastern Mediterranean this is a strong alliance. The way I see it, Israel, Egypt, Cyprus, Greece, backing from France, Chancellor [Angela] Merkel backing the Greek position, ready to serve as a mediator if this thing needs to come to a close, it works. I think if Joe Biden came in, I think hed be actually much more engaged in the Eastern Mediterranean, and he would try to find a solution. I think Donald Trump would never challenge Erdogan, or Vladimir Putin for that matter. I think this could drag into a very dangerous direction.

More:
CNN's Defterios: Trump 'is threatening the core of democracy', Alexis Papachelas | Kathimerini - http://www.ekathimerini.com

There is still a possibility that this election could end up in an Electoral College tie of 269 to 269. If that happens, the next president would be determined by the new House of Representatives, with each state casting one vote.

Thus, California, where nearly one in eight Americans live, with 53 members in the House, would have the same power as Wyoming, a state with a lone representative in the House and a declining population.

The obvious flaw here that the person who gets the most votes does not necessarily win could be neutralized by the National Popular Vote Compact, in which all of a participating states electoral votes are pledged to the winner of the national popular vote.

On Tuesday, Colorado voters approved joining the compact, which now has 15 states plus the District of Columbia, representing 196 electoral votes. More states are needed to push it past the 270-vote margin where it could go into effect. But for now, its the best vehicle for bringing the American system closer to one that reflects the will of the people.

Ah, the will of people. Who knows what the hell that is. Yes, its karmic justice that three of the states pivotal in electing Mr. Trump Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan now look like three that will fire him. And for that slim majority, and the rest of us, may mourning in America soon turn to morning in America.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Timothy Egan (@nytegan) is a contributing opinion writer who covers the environment, the American West and politics. He is a winner of the National Book Award and author, most recently, of A Pilgrimage to Eternity.

Read more here:
American Democracy Survives Its Brush With Death - The New York Times

Practically every aspect of US foreign policy in the last few decades, whether good or bad, has been dominated by two ideals: The establishment of America's liberal order and the promotion of its democratic values.

The United Statesjustified its wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and its involvement in Libya by claiming that it is the arbiter of democratic values, which it has a duty to promote and protect across the world.

Those very same democratic values are now at stake in the US. President Donald Trump's refusal to state categorically that he will concede defeat should he lose, raises a worrying prospect for the future of liberal democracy.

Read more:Opinion: Trump's appalling disregard for democracy in US election

DW's Mimi Mefo Takambou

Surely, thinking and acting in that category is meant to be the preserve of countries in Africa or parts of the world where the US has for decades claimed to be working relentlessly to "teach" what it perceivesto be democratic.

You will recall Trump's very unflattering remarks about a number of African countries and their values. Talk about double standards. I recall for instance that In 2018, following the post-election violence in Zimbabwe, the then-US State Department spokeswoman, Heather Nauert, was keen to point out that the elections "presented the country with ahistoric chance to move beyond the political and economic crises of the past and toward profound democratic change."

Questions of possible fraud and post-election violence aside, the US appears to be following another trend seen in "lesser" democracies. Whatever the outcome of the election, this will be the first time that someone over 75 will be occupying the White House. Should Biden win, he will be over 80 years old when he completes his first tenure. Many African leaders have clung on to power at an age when they should be retiring as heads of state.

The US might easily go intofree fall, should things turn out the way Trump is predicting and should he refuse to concede defeat on the grounds of fraud. Should he, however, emerge as the winner, the question would still remain whether he won because of the fraud he has constantly peddled.

The fundamental principles of liberal democracies are therefore severely challenged by the way the US election and the aftermath have been conducted, irrespective of how it turns out. As Africans around the world observe the drama unfolding before their eyes they will be at pains to understand what constitutes a real democracy.

As is the case for many of my fellow Africans, the nature of this election has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

See the original post here:
Opinion: US election tears at the seams of liberal democracy - DW (English)

The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set newsroom policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.

Ian M. Mette is associate professor of educational leadership at the University of Maine. This column reflects his views and expertise and he does not speak on behalf of the university.

In Maine we like to think of ourselves as independent thinkers. Many of us were raised by parents and teachers who taught us the value of examining issues separate of political affiliation. We also have many examples of politicians who were independent thinkers, including Margaret Chase Smith, Edmund Muskie, William Cohen, George Mitchell, and Olympia Snowe, just to name a few. These politicians embraced Maine values by leading with a conscience for Maine people, working across party lines, and developing policy that ensures the betterment of all people. These are the role models who allowed me to develop my own political identity as an independent thinker, one who thinks critically about issues and belongs to no political party.

In Maine, our independent nature is both historical and cultural. We emerged from being a territory of another state, proud to be independent and to celebrate Maine heritage as our own. Growing up in Maine helps you develop a sense of pride, about the rugged land you come from, our traditions we celebrate throughout the seasons and the ability to think for ourselves.

Having spent my youth here, lived in multiple other states, and later returned, I can tell you we have some of the most nuanced politics in the U.S. And that is something that should be celebrated. Gay marriage, open carry gun laws, legalized marijuana and ranked-choice voting highlight just a few of these nuances, and the ability for citizens in our state to debate these often opposing and conflicting legal rights is critical to strong democracy.

Our PK-12 schools should be fostering Maines egalitarian heritage, but sadly there seems to be an attack on their ability to serve as engines for democratic principles and structures. Two major issues contribute to this. The first part to this issue is the slow but steady erosion of schools being able to serve as the bedrock to our democracy. For the better part of the last two decades students have been subjected to federal and state education policies that increasingly overvalue standardized test scores and have all but eliminated the ability to debate openly and honestly about issues of social justice, human rights, the value of peer-reviewed science.

A second but equally concerning aspect of this issue concerns the philosophical differences we have based on our own racial and cultural backgrounds, something that is clearly under attack in our current politics and within our society at large. I have recently read opinion pieces by Mainers, some by fairly influential contributors, who believe that science does not belong in politics and that race and privilege should not be addressed in Maine schools.

Sadly, these positions wrongly identify us as uneducated, simple, and backwards. As Mainers, we know these labels are unfair and inaccurate, but ultimately will negatively influence how future generations of Mainers will view themselves, many of whom continue to choose to leave the state and never return home. So what can we do?

Broadly speaking, we need to support schools to reimagine what they can be, not what they currently have become, starting with a recommitment to democratically share governance with all stakeholders in a community. Schools should be modeling how to debate ideas and democratically decide how to problem solve issues in a community. We are at a critical time in our society, one that will be judged by future generations about how we chose to address structural inequalities, historic racism, and economic segregation. While these might be uncomfortable subjects, discussing and acting on them should be a non-negotiable.

Finally, we need to show our children that independent thinking is at the heart of democratic principles. We have a rich history in Maine of being independent thinkers, and we need to stand up to the divisive rhetoric that is eroding our democracy. Acknowledging that science, specifically peer-reviewed science about climate change and COVID-19, belongs at the center of our decisions about our democracy and our future is central to these debates. If we want to remain independent thinkers, lets look to our history including Smith, Muskie, Cohen, Mitchell, or Snowe for examples of how people have led with conscience and compassion. The future of our state depends on it.

See the article here:
The importance of democracy in our society and our schools - Bangor Daily News

As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and complete narcissistic moron. H. L. Mencken, The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920

Democracy across the West is not very well. It cant be described as just resting. Any stress-test of a democracy could justifiably use the election of leaders of the calibre of Johnson and Trump as a criterion of failure. In America, Donald Trump has actively worked to undermine and dismantle the democratic fabric of his country. He boasts of his law breaking and tax avoidance, brags of his achievements in the field of sexual assault, lies, spreads conspiracy theories, gives his backing to miracle cures that are in fact lethal, attempts to interfere with the process of voting and to exclude his opponents votes from the count, elicits the help of states hostile to the interests of his own country and deliberately issues statements intended to incite proud armed militias. In this he is assisted by wealthy, illiberal power-grabbing backers and powerful sections of the media, owned by the rich to serve the rich.

Ditto for the UK. Here, as across the pond, the extremists of the right have gained power by realising that in order to win, all they have to do is break democratic norms and standards. By trampling these they are freed from the inconvenient shackles of truth-telling and from commitments to promote the well-being and prosperity of the people.

In this, they hold democratic values, and the electorate itself, in contempt. Nowhere was the contempt for the electorate illustrated more obscenely than when Dominic Cummings tried to excuse his lockdown trip to Barnard Castle. And why wouldnt he be confident that, in the Britain of today, hed get away with it? After all, he, along with Johnson, Gove and others, was instrumental in shaping that Britain via a Brexit formed out of lies, misleading statements, dog-whistle, xenophobic falsehoods and empty, meaningless promises.

Between them they engineered the shutting down of parliament and made clear their willingness to break international law, while those who gave legal opinion on the question of prorogation were condemned as traitors, saboteurs and enemies of the people. As in America, our leaders lead usinescapably to the conclusion that there is something seriously wrong with the democracy that put them there.

It is often said that our democracy should more accurately be termed an elective dictatorship. We get to elect our dictators every few years and thats about it. Hardly healthy. But the reality is far worse. These dictators often get elected on a minority vote and enact policies which have no majority support. Brexit, for example.

So why is our democracy so unfit for purpose? Why is it that we can elect leaders who are little more than self-serving schemers, whose contempt for the electorate renders them incapable of giving straight, honest answers to even the most straightforward, reasonable questions? Its not as if any of these qualities have been smuggled in under our noses. They are paraded before our eyes every single day. Nobody voting for Johnson or Trump could be blind to the fact that they are serial liars. And yet they voted all the same. Why?

***

Mencken was on to something when suggesting that the leaders we get, the leaders we deserve, closely represent something dark in the inner soul of the people. Theres no easy way to put this the problem with democracy is the voters. The voters simply arent good enough to support a healthy democracy. Theyre not up to the job. Now I know some will think: a snowflake-remainer-lefty-loser will always blame th e voters just as a bad workman always blames his tools. But these tools are shot.

Consider this: a poll in 2005 found that 21 per cent of Americans believe in witches and 9 per cent that spirits can take control of a person. In 1999, 18 per cent believed the sun revolves around the earth so much for the science and in 2000, 31 per cent believed in ghosts, and increase of 20 percentage points since 1978.

By 2019, the year before Trumps re-election attempt, significant numbers believed in the illuminati, Big-foot and a flat earth. Ghost-belief had risen to 45 per cent, as had the belief in demons. Belief in vampires stood at a fangtastic 13 per cent.

Britain has nothing to be proud of. While 33 per cent of us believe in ghosts and 18 per cent in demonic possession, a whopping 52 per cent of us believe that you can magically make a false claim true simply by writing it on the side of a bus.

In elective dictatorships where small margins have huge consequences wed better get used to the fact that (possibly small) groups with stupid ideas and a lack of relevant knowledge and skills can have a disproportionate effect on the lives of the rest of us.

A I have argued previously in TheArticle, Leave voters in the EU referendum did not know what they were voting for. It is also pretty clear that too many British voters showed themselves to be gullible swallowers of laughably simplistic solutions and explanations. They came to believe in manufactured problems and they fell for the tricks of ad hominem persuasion and the cult of personality. In short, too many voters failed to make a sensible political choice in their own interests and which also respected the interests of others. For too many, the distance between giving an up-yours the establishment through casual, self-indulgent voting and losing their livelihoods has been very short. It is a tragedy.

The deceivers know their public well, hence their contempt, which is manifested in an openness about their own lying. They dont even try to cover it up anymore. In this they feed off general, public cynicism about politicians and their motives, a cynicism which our current crop of leaders has worked hard to nurture.

***

What is to be done? The central virtue of democracy proves to be its greatest weakness. Because all votes count the same, democracy offers no incentive for self-improvement. It enshrines intellectual complacency and ignorance. One answer to this is that if dumb voters are the problem, maybe dumb people shouldnt be allowed to vote. If you want to take part in the democratic process then you really should know what you are doing. Anything less is simply irresponsible.

The idea that only the knowers should be allowed to vote, the epistocracy, runs through Plato and J S Mill, and has recently been championed by the American philosopher Jason Brennan in his book Against Democracy.

Whatever else one might think of it, an epistocracy at least has the merit of rational justification for its franchise limitations; unlike other examples from the recent history of our democracy such as exclusion on grounds of class or gender and our current, entirely arbitrary exclusion on grounds of age. Far from being anti-democratic, as its critics suggest, an epistocracy can be seen as the purest form of democracy. A democracy open to all, regardless of age, gender, class, religion or race, provided they show themselves to be fit to participate.

Consequently, the primary question becomes: how might we determine fitness for democratic participation? Brennan favours giving people a test. A sort of qualifying exam, passing which earns the candidate a license to take responsibility for their political views in the hustle and bustle of democratic decision making. It qualifies them to influence decisions which affect the lives of others and serves to protect the public from unskilled tyros.

Instead of a test, Mill views our established social and cultural structures as providing the best indicator of qualification for democratic participation. Mill suggests that everyone should get a vote, but, depending on an individuals position in society, some people should have more votes than others. Mills is a sort of meritocratic democracy.

Of course, there are serious problems with all this. Mills reward-by-position would only ossify prevailing social structures. Covid has led to a sharp reappraisal of the importance of roles as diverse as care-workers, nurses, pub staff, delivery drivers and so on. Mills scheme would not have stood up to Covid. Nor does it explicitly work to ensure the quality of a democracy. With appropriate weighting, a fascist state could be made to run on Mills method. As could Putins form of Russian democracy.

The all too obvious problem with Brennans exam-driven alternative is: Who sets the test? Now I dont think this is as great a problem as some critics might believe, but Im not going to argue the case here because there is a much bigger, practical obstacle. It is all fine and dandy when newly enfranchised groups are celebrating the acquisition of their shiny new democratic rights, but what about when you do the reverse and snatch the vote away from people and label them not good enough?

It is possible to do, and in the US, current voter suppression tactics show that it is even possible in a self-styled democracy.

But before going down that route theres an alternative make sure that our people are properly educated. All of them givenan education which places critical thinking at its core. An education that goes out of its way to nurture respect for reason, respect for persons, for truth, for fairness, for justice for these things underpin the democratic process. Explicit political education would also have a role. But it is critical thinking that is the essential ingredient in achieving the goal of a politically literate population. Individuals must be able to pick apart the claims that confront them and their implications. They must be able to spot the fakery and falsehoods that litter the grounds of contemporary politics.

Finland is already well ahead in this effort to educate a critically aware and capable population. This has been largely in reaction to the Russian disinformation programmes of the previous decade. In the UK and US, however, we have a problem in that so recent untruths have come from our own governments.

I can hear the screaming now. Educational programmes such as those sketched here will be attacked as indoctrination or brainwashing, or, even worse as progressive. But as Neil Postman, author of Teaching as a Subversive Activity said:

The best things schools can do for kids is to help them learn how to distinguish useful talk from bullsh*t. I think almost all serious people understand that about 90 per cent of all that goes on in school is practically useless, so what I am saying would not require the displacement of anything that is especially worthwhile. Even if it did, I would still be able to argue that helping kids to activate their crap-detectors should take precedence over any other legitimate educational aim.

Subversive? Yes. The last thing most governments want is an interested, critically-thinking, lie-detecting, politically literate population. Political extremism grows through ignorance and by offering the snake-oil of easy answers to simplified questions. And so we are led by people who can, with impunity, run the country on extraordinary claims about bleach and Brexit, immigrants and eye-tests.

Read this article:
The problem with democracy it's you - TheArticle