Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

Democracy in Action – The SandPaper

By Gail Travers | on March 18, 2022

To the Editor:

March 13 was the Ocean County Democratic Committee meeting and the annual mini-convention to nominate county and congressional candidates to appear on the party line for the primary ballot in June. It was quite an example of the people demanding democracy.

The Democratic leadership sent out notice of the meeting and most committee members received this postcard less than a week before the meeting. Also contained in this notice was an amendment to be voted on at this meeting. This amendment was to allow vote by mail (VBM) to be used for the election of the Democratic leadership, currently led by one of New Jerseys infamous bosses.

After reading the amendment, it seemed like dj vu, going back 12 years when Wyatt Earp did the same thing with extending the term of County Committee members and leadership from two to four years.He gave short notice about the meeting, including the fact that we would be voting on this amendment at the meeting/mini-convention.Its very sad that he didnt learn from that past experience where he failed to give members enough time to understand and digest all the implications of pushing through such an important amendment.

The current VBM amendment has so many loopholes and dangerous precedents that utilizing this voting method for a party election being controlled by the current leadership from the creation of the ballot to the counting and announcing the results opens up so many opportunities for fraud and deception. Its like putting the fox in the hen house.

I think we should have three meetings on this proposed amendment before adopting it. The first meeting should be the presentation of the amendment and the formation of a committee to develop the iron-clad procedures and send out a draft document to members. The second meeting should be for the appointed committee to present its results to the membership and get feedback. The third meeting could be to vote on the amendment. Thats what a responsible organization would do.

The scenario stated above is not what happened this past Sunday. We were not willing to just vote for this amendment without adequate vetting. Many committee members had valid questions.As a result, the chairman kept pushing back on us until a motion was made to table the discussion for a future date with follow-up containing air-tight procedures and controls before we would vote on such a major change in how we do business.

Leadership must understand that gone are the days of backdoor deals and ruling over political fiefdoms within our local Democratic organizations.We must continue to fight for participatory democracy within our County Committee. We are committed to winning this fight and our victory on Sunday is just a start.

Marianne P. Clemente, president

Barnegat Democrat Club

County Committee member

Continue reading here:
Democracy in Action - The SandPaper

Fight the disinformation that threatens our democracy: Think like a fact-checker | Editorial – NJ.com

How is it possible, you might ask yourself, that nearly half the country believes the 2020 election was stolen? Or that the QAnon conspiracy, which holds Barack Obama is part of a pedophile cabal that eats babies, is now as popular as some major religions?

How could the best educated nation in the world be full of people who cant distinguish fact from fiction?

False information travels six times faster than the truth on Twitter, research has shown, but while 95 percent of Americans agree this is a problem, only 2 in 10 say theyre very concerned that they have personally spread misinformation, a 2021 poll found.

Yet misperceptions abound, and the left is not immune: During former FBI Director Robert Muellers investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, Democrats were falling for unfounded conspiracy theories about Trump having sexual trysts with prostitutes in Russia. Still, Republicans in the Trump era have embraced the most dangerous misinformation of all, President Trumps baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

The challenge now is for Americans to learn to sort good information from bad, a skill that seems to be in short supply. And the place to start is in our public schools.

You get some information you dont just put that information into a story, you check it out. Thats the core of what were asking everyone to do, thats the core of media literacy, says Sen. Vin Gopal, chair of the states education committee. You dont just take something as fact, you compare it with other information, you use your brain a little.

New Jersey, to its great credit, is trying to do something to fix this. As Florida is banning schools from using the word gay, we are charging in the other direction. A bipartisan bill reintroduced in January would have them learn in the classroom how to spot false news and use critical thinking skills when assessing the truth of what theyve read.

A troubling 2019 study by Stanford University of prospective young voters found they were easily duped by what they saw online. More than 96 percent of high schoolers failed to do a simple Google search to reveal the organization behind a climate change website was funded by fossil fuel companies, for instance, and more than half believed a grainy video on Facebook was strong evidence of voter fraud in the U.S., even though it was actually shot in Russia.

Interestingly, it was Sen. Michael Testa, co-chairman of the Trump campaign in New Jersey, who first approached Sen. Shirley Turner with this legislation to combat disinformation among students. It seems like we make strange bedfellows in some respects, said Turner, a Democrat, but I felt this was a good bill and asked him if I could co-prime it.

We agree we do need more than a course on civics; this should be woven into a K-12 education. Testa told us his wife, a school librarian, has spoken to him about students over-relying on Internet sources such as Wikipedia; they need to have the skills to use their own critical thinking to decide if the resource theyre looking at is a reliable resource, he said. Right.

But Trump was a man known to spread inaccurate stuff on social media, like his rigged election lie that spawned the violent insurrection at the Capitol. So how does Testa square this with his role as chairman of the Trump campaign?

I mean, I gotta be honest with you, I havent been really following Ive been focused on my constituents in Legislative district 1, he said, after a long pause. I was focused on, you know, maybe selfishly, my own reelection in 2021. To me, that election was now two years ago. So, I think those of us in New Jersey have moved on from the 2020 election.

But does he believe that Trump was spreading disinformation? I dont know why youre even going there, Testa said. This is a bill that looks like its getting bipartisan support, and how this is even tied to President Trump is beyond me. Because its not.

Lets move on: A good bill is a good bill. The New Jersey Center for Civic Studies at Rutgers already offers a PowerPoint for teachers to use on media literacy, a useful starting point. It offers tips for spotting false news and identifying errors in reasoning, like a red herring: An intentional diversion to redirect the conversation away from a topic that someone does not want to address.

This problem, of course, is not limited to kids. American adults need this kind of education as well.

What do we do with all of the adults who havent had media literacy instruction or a civics course? Thats tougher, asks Arlene Gardner at the New Jersey Center for Civic Studies at Rutgers. Several people have asked us about a civics course for adults. Maybe Ill suggest to Rutgers that we offer such a course.

Not a bad idea.

Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com.

Bookmark NJ.com/Opinion. Follow on Twitter @NJ_Opinion and find NJ.com Opinion on Facebook.

Tell us your coronavirus stories, whether its a news tip, a topic you want us to cover, or a personal story you want to share.

See the original post:
Fight the disinformation that threatens our democracy: Think like a fact-checker | Editorial - NJ.com

How refugees strengthen democracy and solidarity – The New Statesman

As Afghanistan fell to the Taliban last summer, ordinary Afghans were urged to fight for democracy. The then president Ashraf Ghani asked civilians to defend the countrys democratic fabric; of Afghan troops, President Biden shrugged, Theyve got to fight for themselves, fight for their nation. Days later, Ghani fled the country; weeks later, foreigners military personnel, diplomatic missions, international NGO staff also left, leaving Afghans to face an uncertain future of Taliban rule.

In contrast to Ghani, Ukraines President Volodymyr Zelensky has remained in Ukraine to resist Russias invasion. When offered evacuation, Zelensky reportedly responded, I need ammunition; not a ride. And ordinary citizens willingness to stay and fight, as Michael Walzer emphasises, reveals the extent of their loyalty to Ukraine.

The courage of civilians during occupation and war, from Afghanistan to Ukraine, is in equal parts humbling and inspiring. But the humanitarian disaster of these conflicts has forced many to flee, and it is important to recognise that this is not an act of abandonment. In fact, leaving their war-torn countries can allow refugees to continue resistance from afar. And provided they have secure status, rights and resources, refugees can engage in a politics from below that may help repair the democratic fabric of the countries they have left.

Albert Hirschman, who fought in the Spanish Civil War and helped Jewish refugees flee occupied France, famously identified exit, voice, and loyalty as the options for dissatisfied citizens: they could leave, stay and complain, or stay and accept their circumstances. Although these were initially theorised as mutually exclusive options, the relationship between leaving, protesting and acquiescing is far more complex.

This complex relationship is evident in the context of migration. Exit can reflect loyalty to a particular constitutional vision of society one that is under threat or one that is yet to be built. And exit is often essential for voice: for providing information, for criticising the regime back home, and for pursuing alternative political ideals.

Refugees are a critical source of information, especially when the use of social media and other forms of communication are restricted in the country they have left, as they have been under the Taliban, or when artillery fire makes communication from the front lines impossible, or when communications infrastructure has been targeted. Not only do refugees provide more recent news from the places they have left, but they can also connect media and advocacy organisations abroad with people who are still there. This is especially critical in places journalists have limited access to Afghanistan; Xinjiang, where the Chinese government persecutes Uyghurs and other minorities; and the conflict zone in Tigray province in Ethiopia.

Refugees also provide critical perspectives on the regime they have escaped. From the relative safety of exile, they can speak more openly, engage more critically, and sustain practices of criticism and complaint abroad that are suppressed back home. Exile can be a leveller, upending old hierarchies and ensuring that perspectives marginalised in their home country, say of women and other groups, are more easily expressed and better attended to.

Lastly, the greater openness of exile allows for organisation. Political opposition, such as the Afghan Womens Parliamentarians Network, currently based in Greece, can regroup to reflect on the path forward, and new alliances and associations can be built that devise alternative visions of political life . European and American allies have already discussed how to support a Ukrainian government-in-exile, which would be crucial to ensuring a legitimate voice for free Ukraine in the event that Vladimir Putin installs a puppet regime.

This is not to paint too rosy a picture of refugees political efforts; they do not always play these emancipatory roles. Refugees are often traumatised by the ordeals they have endured, or remain subject to threats in exile, and are unable or unwilling to engage with what is happening in the country they have fled. Since those who are able and willing to leave their countries are often living in different circumstances to those who choose, or are forced, to stay (who may lack, for example, the resources or networks that enable migration), politically engaged refugees may be driven by ideals that do not resonate with many in their homeland. And refugees may engage in the morally hazardous politics of long-distance nationalism where, for example, they help to sustain armed conflicts, through arms and diplomatic support, far away from the front lines.

As a result, refugees are easily dismissed as trouble-making armchair revolutionaries, and some countries have even tried to limit the political rights of refugees and asylum-seekers. This is a mistake. Refugees need more political autonomy, not less, and third parties host states, civil society and international NGOs should enable rather than inhibit the vital roles that refugees play in their home countries.

To begin with, refugees need rights and resources, including safe routes by which to claim these. Otherwise, they are unable to lead minimally decent lives: they are shunted to the margins of society, and risk being contained in detention facilities, camps or isolated asylum accommodation. They are unable to pursue an education, work, or family life much less to engage politically with their home countries. Perpetuating this limbo is an affront to the values of decency, dignity and the rule of law.

Second, third parties need to act in solidarity with refugees, attending to their perspectives on what is happening in their country, on what counts as assistance or a solution, and on how to bring these about. Needless to say, refugees will not agree among themselves on these vexed questions, but their often well-informed views are regularly ignored by powerful actors abroad and armed actors back home.

Specifically, acting in solidarity with refugees prevents host-state actors from treating them as pawns to further their own strategic interests. This includes the tendency to focus on the economic contributions that refugees make to their home countries: policymakers often treat refugees as resources that can be used to further a variety of economic and political goals, but this fails to recognise refugees as political agents who are entitled to a say in determining what those goals are and how they should be pursued.

It is worth noting that refugees also make political contributions to their adopted countries, which debates about the economic costs and benefits of hosting refugees largely ignore. For one, refugees can helpfully complicate the political discourse in their host countries. They may reveal the connection, past and present, between countries of origin and of exile, and the ways that the states now eschewing responsibility have contributed to the very crises forcing refugees to flee.

In doing so, refugees can reanimate anti-racism and anti-poverty movements in host societies, cultivating transnational solidarity with and among other marginalised citizens contending with the legacies of imperialism, racism and Islamophobia, and economic dispossession.

And finally, refugees can strengthen an incipient international ethos. Latin Americans fleeing authoritarian regimes in the middle of the 20th century played a central role in fostering the global human rights discourse that fundamentally re-oriented global politics and that continues to shape the world today.

Hannah Arendt once described refugees as the bearers of ill tidings, writing that it was not only their own misfortunes that the refugees carried with them from land to land but the great misfortune of the whole world. Arendts ill tidings were of the dangers of nationalism; today, refugees also bring news of rising authoritarianism, imperial misadventure, extreme poverty and climate disaster interrelated phenomena that no border will keep at bay and to which we are all, ultimately, vulnerable.

European countries and their citizens are evidently more able to recognise that they share a common fate with some refugees than others. In response to Russias invasion of Ukraine, the EU has activated the Temporary Protection Directive for the first time; Ylva Johansson, the EUs Home Affairs Commissioner said, Millions more will flee and we must welcome them. This response is a marked departure from the EUs response to other refugees, and reveals, among other things, the capacity to respond to large refugee flows in a way that respects the dignity and agency of refugees. Refugee crises, it turns out, are in part created by the response of host societies.

The response to Ukrainian refugees seems to be driven by the sentiment that if Ukrainians can be refugees, then anyone can, and that what Ukrainians are fleeing is a threat to what those in liberal democracies hold dear. But this is true of most refugees. Afghan refugees, for example, are fleeing authoritarianism and the generalised violence that decades of war and foreign occupation bring, as well as drought and chronic food insecurity induced by climate change and exacerbated by punitive sanctions.

Ultimately, refugees from Afghanistan, Ukraine and other conflicts are not mere messengers bringing advance warning of the crises they have barely escaped; they can also inspire new ways of thinking about communities, belonging and borders, and can be architects of political repair and reconstitution back home and abroad.

Ashwini Vasanthakumar is Queens National Scholar in Legal and Political Philosophy and Associate Professor of Law at Queens University in Kingston, Ontario. She is the author of The Ethics of Exile (OUP).

This article is part of the Agora series, a collaboration between the New Statesman and Aaron James Wendland. Wendland is Vision Fellow in Public Philosophy at Kings College, London and a Senior Research Fellow at Massey College, Toronto. He tweets @aj_wendland.

Sign up for The New Statesmans newsletters Tick the boxes of the newsletters you would like to receive. Morning Call Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. World Review The New Statesmans global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. The New Statesman Daily The best of the New Statesman, delivered to your inbox every weekday morning. Green Times The New Statesmans weekly environment email on the politics, business and culture of the climate and nature crises - in your inbox every Thursday. This Week in Business A handy, three-minute glance at the week ahead in companies, markets, regulation and investment, landing in your inbox every Monday morning. The Culture Edit Our weekly culture newsletter from books and art to pop culture and memes sent every Friday. Weekly Highlights A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. Ideas and Letters A newsletter showcasing the finest writing from the ideas section and the NS archive, covering political ideas, philosophy, criticism and intellectual history - sent every Wednesday. Events and Offers Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.

Read the original post:
How refugees strengthen democracy and solidarity - The New Statesman

‘A flagrant slap in the face of democracy’: NW Ohio Democratic politicians react to another round of court-rejected maps – WTOL

The Ohio Redistricting Commission has until March 28 to submit a new map, making it unlikely that a May 3 primary will include state House and state Senate races.

TOLEDO, Ohio The Ohio Supreme Court has rejected proposed statehouse district maps for the third time. The states' Redistricting Commission has failed to present a constitutional map in the eyes of the court, months after the original deadline to do so.

"Courts have sent people to jail for less, on a daily basis, for contempt of court," Ohio Sen. Teresa Fedor, D-Toledo, said.

Fedor says the Republican-controlled commission keeps presenting gerrymandered maps in order to maintain their majority in the statehouse.

"It's hubris. They want to keep the status quo, supermajority and where politicians are ruling, not the people," Fedor said. "Democracy means people rule, not politicians."

And with Ohio's primary election currently scheduled for May 3, the delay in new maps could put that and future elections in jeopardy.

State rep. Paula Hicks-Hudson, D-Toledo, says the idea that the state would move forward without regarding what the court says is un-democratic.

"That one branch of government should ignore the other co-equal branch of government, that is absurd and it is un-American. It is a flagrant slap in the face of democracy," former Toledo mayor Hicks-Hudson said.

WTOL 11 also reached out to Republican state representatives. The majority did not respond to our request, however, Ohio state Rep. Derek Merrin (R-Monclova Township) did respond, saying his schedule did not give him time to do an interview.

The Ohio Supreme Court is ordering the commission to submit a new map to Secretary of State Frank LaRose by March 28.

In a memo to boards of elections, LaRose, a Republican, describes what he says are political motives for delaying the primary, including pending lawsuits.

LaRose has instructed county boards of elections to continue preparing for a May 3 primary, but without state legislative races included.

"Let there be no doubt, however, that we will continue to prepare for a May 3 primary election that includes statewide, congressional and local contests, unless directed to do otherwise by the Ohio General Assembly or a court order," LaRose writes.

MORE FROM WTOL 11:

Here is the original post:
'A flagrant slap in the face of democracy': NW Ohio Democratic politicians react to another round of court-rejected maps - WTOL

Switzerland ready to pay for defending democracy in Russia-Ukraine war, says PM – WION

Switzerlands president Ignazio Cassis said that Russias invasion in Ukraine is driven by devastating madness and Switzerland is prepared to pay the cost for protecting freedom and democracy.

Although Switzerland generally refrains from taking sides in most global disputes, they have decided to impose the same sanctions on Russia as the European Union. However, Cassis made it clear that Switzerlands neutrality was not at stake due to the decision and it was taken after proper deliberation.

However, he said that Switzerland could not simply stand by in the confrontation between democracy and barbarism and the country was prepared to take an economic hit as a result.

Also read |

On February 24, the face of the world changed, and not in a good way. We must valiantly and tirelessly defend freedom and democracy. This has a price. A price that Switzerland is ready to assume, he wrote in Le Temps newspaper. This war is driven by a devastating madness which shatters all the principles and values of our civilisation, he added.

Although there is no current impact on Switzerlands economy due to the sanctions, Cassis said that the conflict may cause harm to them in the long run and they need to be ready for the possibility.

There is no solution which, with a wave of a magic wand, would save Switzerland from the consequences resulting from the current situation, he said.

Also read |

Switzerland cannot tolerate this war without reacting,.

Russia has massively violated the prohibition of the use of force, a principle anchored in international law. By remaining inactive, Switzerland would have played the game of the aggressor.

Watch |

(With inputs from agencies)

Read this article:
Switzerland ready to pay for defending democracy in Russia-Ukraine war, says PM - WION