Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

7 decades into Indian democracy, a royal palace thrives – The Seattle Times

JODHPUR, India (AP) In the summer of 1944, hundreds of royals gathered for the opening of Umaid Bhawan Palace, a magnificent sandstone edifice that dominates the skyline in Indias northwestern city of Jodhpur. It was the last of its kind.

Three years later, India was free from British colonial rule, and more than 500 princely states the semi-sovereign principalities ruled by royal clans faced an uncertain future. Most have faded into obscurity, but the family that built this palace continues to thrive in part by converting a section of it into a hotel.

How many places do you know in the world where you can actually live right where the maharaja is living next door to you? said the hotels general manager, Mehrnawaz Avari. The idea is to treat our guests like kings and queens.

The 347-room palace, considered one of the worlds fanciest residences, was used as the primary location for Viceroy House, a film by director Gurinder Chadha being released Friday in India. The movie details the last days of the British Empire in India and the bloody partition with what became Pakistan in 1947.

The iconic structure in this west Rajasthani city known for its traditional handicrafts was named after Maharaja Umaid Singh, the last king of what was known as the Marwar-Rathore Dynasty. He commissioned the project in 1929 with a spirit of grandness, said royal family associate Karni Singh Jasol. He had a larger-than-life vision.

After independence, most of Indias princely states opted to join the democratic republic, and initially maintained their titles, property and a degree of autonomy. Within decades, the royals lost almost all of it, though. India amended its constitution in 1971, giving its citizens equal rights and canceling royal privileges, including the regular payments royal families received from the state.

Stripped of their allowances and unsure how to survive as commoners, many royal families descended into chaos. Some held onto property, only to lose it amid internal bickering over rival claims.

The properties that they inherited were in a true sense white elephants, Jasol said. The royal families were high on assets, but low on liquidity. They didnt have large bank balances to turn their family properties into something grand or sustain it for the future.

The Singhs of Jodhpur not only maintained their holdings, but managed over decades to grow.

The last reigning maharajas grandson, Gaj Singh, was only 4 when his father died in a plane crash in 1952, making him sole owner of the palace and other family properties, including the ancestral Mehrangarh Fort.

When royal allowances were canceled in 1971, the young Singh patriarch acted quickly. The family opened part of its palace as a hotel in 1978, and turned the fort into a museum, investing profits into preserving Jodhpurs royal antiquities.

They today serve as the main economic levers for the city, said Jasol, who is director of the fort and museum.

The palace is open to visitors year-round, and has become a go-to destination for government leaders, other royals, and Hollywood and Bollywood stars alike. In 2007, British actress Elizabeth Hurley married Indian businessman Arun Nayar beneath the white marble canopy, or baradari, on the palace lawn; they have since divorced.

The palace is divided into a home for Gaj Singh and his family, and a heritage hotel of 64 rooms and suites run by the luxury hotel chain Taj Group since 2005. Designed by British architect Henry Vaughan Lanchester, the palace features elements of the art deco style popular in Europe and America in the 30s and 40s, combined with traditional Indian craftsmanship.

Colonnaded verandas guide ones eye up to intricately carved pillars, stylized sculptures and finally a massive central dome topped by a 30-meter (105-foot) golden cupola.

The cost of the royal experience ranges from $500 to more than $12,000 a night. For those who can afford it, the hotel pulls out all the stops.

Visitors are greeted by a smiling guard wearing one of Jodhpurs famous handlebar moustaches; he opens the door while hotel staff shower guests with rose petals. Peacocks roam the palace lawns. Further inside, pulsating Rajasthani folk tunes fill the air as colorful dancers move in choreographed circles. Guests mingle amid crystal chandeliers and silk-draped furniture.

Gold-leaf furniture and ornate mirrors are arranged around gleaming marble floors, while the walls are decorated with family portraits, as well as leopard skins and the busts of other animals hunted by former royals. The decoration was done over three years by Polish artist Stefan Norblin, who had fled from war-torn Europe in 1944. He also painted frescoes and murals in the royal suites.

The royal family has long focused on conserving the regions heritage as a way to utilize its enormous real estate holdings. It manages trusts engaged in water conservation, education and cultural revival projects, creating employment for thousands of locals.

I know at one time, royalty was a bad word, said Singhs daughter, 42-year-old Shivranjani Rajye. Now you dont have to shy away from it.

The Cambridge-educated Rajye runs most of the familys business operations, though the family heir is her brother, Shivraj Singh, who also lives with his family in the palace. He has kept a low profile since spending several months in a coma after a near-fatal accident playing polo in 2005.

Jodhpurs residents still see the family as their royals, and Gaj Singh as their maharaja. And he very much believes he is the king, said Rajye, elegantly dressed in a chiffon sari with a hint of jewelry.

He never gave up his title he doesnt have it officially, but he knew who he was, and he knew he commanded respect of the people.

___

Watch a 360 video of the Umaid Bhawan Palace: https://youtu.be/LfpCWXcX-v0

___

Follow Vineeta Deepak at http://www.twitter.com/VineetaDeepak.

Visit link:
7 decades into Indian democracy, a royal palace thrives - The Seattle Times

Venezuela: without an independent judiciary, there is no democracy – Transparency International (press release) (blog)

Issued by Transparency International Secretariat

Transparency International, the global anti-corruption organisation, and its national chapter in Venezuela, Transparencia Venezuela, reject the dismissal of the countrys Attorney General by the National Constituent Assembly, because the Assembly is not a legitimate representative of the people.

The make-up of the Assembly, which was elected on 30 July amid widespread reports of electoral fraud, only includes people loyal to President Nicols Maduro. This concentrates yet more power in the hands of the ruling party. The Assemblys summary action to dismiss the Attorney General violates the principle of judicial independence, which is a crucial element of any democracy and essential to the fight against corruption.

Without an autonomous judiciary that provides for checks and balances to the government, democracy is impossible. The lack of an independent Attorney General Office in Venezuela will result in even more impunity for illicit enrichment in a country where corruption is already rampant, said Jos Ugaz, Chair of Transparency International. People die from hunger and lack of medicines while the politically well-connected abuse their power for private gain.

Judicial investigations into human rights violations and corruption cases involving public officials, including those allegations surrounding the Odebrecht network, must continue.

The harassment and intimidation of dissenting voices in Venezuela must stop. This includes the intimidation of ordinary people, opposition politicians and the former Attorney General. It is time for the Venezuelan authorities to listen to their citizens and let them exercise their democratic rights.

For any press enquiries please contact

Natalie Baharav T: +49 30 3438 20 666 E: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Sign up to stay informed about corruption news and our work around the world

Follow this link:
Venezuela: without an independent judiciary, there is no democracy - Transparency International (press release) (blog)

What’s It Like to See a Democracy Destroyed? – POLITICO Magazine

Subscribe to The Global POLITICO on iTunes here. | Subscribe via Stitcher.

Whats it like to watch a country implode? To see a democracy destroyed and an economy crater?

Story Continued Below

Since 2014, American journalist Hannah Dreier has documented just that in Venezuela, once one of the worlds wealthiest nations and still home to what are believed to be the planets largest oil reserves. She wrote for the Associated Press about what it was like to live in a place with the worlds highest murder rateand the worlds highest rate of inflation. About the breakdown of hospitals and schools, and how the obesity epidemic that plagued a rich country was quickly replaced with people so hungry they were rooting through the garbage on her doorstep.

Most of the time, few paid attention, at least in part because Dreier was the last U.S. journalist even to get a work visa to live in Venezuela; when she moved there to cover the story, she says, I felt like I had walked across a bridge as it was burning behind me.

But over the past week, as Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has declared victory in a fraud-plagued referendum and moved to seize control of the opposition-controlled legislature, the rest of the world hasfinally, belatedlycome to see what is happening in Caracas for what it is: the birth of a dictatorship.

In Washington, President Donald Trumps administration imposed direct personal sanctions on Maduroan insult reserved for only a handful of the worlds toughest tyrants, such as Syrias Bashir Assad, North Koreas Kim Jong Un and Zimbabwes Robert Mugabeand his regime insiders. Maduro, Trump said in a statement, is not just a bad leader; he is now a dictator.

The United States, however, continues to be Venezuelas largest customer for the oil that provides more than 95 percent of the countrys income, and has refrained from targeting the industry for sanctions despite Maduros move to finally establish a socialist police state, a development set in motion more than a decade ago by his charismatic predecessor Hugo Chavez.

Dreier, who has just returned to the United States after completing her assignment in Venezuela, may well end up being the last American journalist to get that permanent visa for Caracas, at least for a while (though her colleagues at the AP emailed after this was posted to assure me they are still covering the story and intend to replace her). She is this weeks guest on The Global Politico, our weekly podcast on world affairs, and we talked about why she thinks the new U.S. sanctions on Maduro might help him as much as hurt him, how the crisis has many in Venezuela pining not for their lost freedoms but for the rise of a mano duraa strong handto restore lost order, and just what crazy things you can get used to living in a place thats falling apart.

I found her account incredibly compellingfilled with the absurdities of life as a society unravels. At first, it seems almost comic, as when Dreier spends the day reporting at a plastic surgeons office and watches eager would-be beauty queens coming in with cut-rate Chinese bootleg breast implants once others became impossible to find. And Dreier tells me she spent her first year in Venezuela convinced the media narrative about the country falling apart was all wrong.

Then, Dreier recounts, her life changed. First, her friendsmiddle-class young professionals like herselfstarted losing weight. She lost power and water. Crime became so rampant her colleagues congratulated her on a good robbery when she was held up in broad daylight and all she lost were her belongings. By the time she was grabbed off the street after an interview one day earlier this year, she was overwhelmed with relief when she found out shed been snatched by the secret police and not far more vicious kidnappers.

Money became almost worthless, and she started carrying paper grocery bags full of 100-bolivar notes to pay for even small things. Her choices for food were empty supermarket shelves or $25 black-market Cheerios. She watched as ordinary people stood on line for bread, milk and toilet paper. One day the bakery around the corner started organizing a queuenot to sell the bread they had already run out of, but for the privilege of allowing people to rummage through their trash. The screams she heard one morning were of neighbors savagely beating an accused thief; a lynching, it was called.

You never had to go and try to figure out where the crisis was, she says. "It was on your doorstep.

The full transcript of our conversation is below, and I hope youll take the time to read this sad, funny, infuriating and amazing story of what it was like to report in a country while democracy died there. Dreiers takeaway as she leaves Venezuela is a sobering one: things can always get worse and worse and worse, and theres no rule that says that a miserable situation has to end, just because its too miserable.

***

Susan Glasser: This is Susan Glasser. We have, I think, a really important and fascinating story to talk about this week and a great guest.

Im here in New York with Hannah Dreier, who has just returned from being one of the very few American correspondents still left in Venezuela. As the country has imploded, shes had a unique window on what its like to live in a democracy as it collapses, as it turns and morphs before your eyes into something else.

Hannah, what a unique journalistic experience youve had. As you take up your new role here at ProPublica, I want you to reflect a little bit. How did you get into Venezuela?

Hannah Dreier: I had no idea that it was going to become the mess that it is today. I went down there in 2014 and I was kind of choosing between going to Venezuela or going to Mexico, and it looked like Venezuela might be kind of teetering on the brink of something, and I thought that maybe if I went there I would see something interesting. And if I had known how dramatic, and how bleak and dangerous it was going to get, I dont know if I really would have gone.

Glasser: Sometimes foreknowledge is not a good thing if youre a journalist.

Dreier: Yes. Yes. It looks bad, but I wasnt a war correspondent. Id never lived abroad, really, Id never reported abroad, and if it was as dangerous as it is today, I dont think I could have handled it at the beginning.

Glasser: You saw basically the transformation of one of the richest countries in the world into a completenot only a basket case, economically, I think its one of the biggest and fastest collapses of a civilization, arguably, in recent modern times.

Dreier: Yes. I mean, Venezuela always has all the superlatives. Its the worlds highest inflation by a lot. Its the worlds highest murder rate. A lot of economists will tell you its the most mismanaged economy in the world. And now, a lot of people are saying the worlds most recently born dictatorship.

But when I went down there, it was a great place to live, which sounds crazy now, but its beautiful. You walk around on the street and there are these wild parrots flying above you and these huge Andean mountains off in the distance. And I had a lot of friends who were my same age. They were young professionals and they traveled all over the world, and they were buying apartments, and wed go to the beach every weekend. Wed go to these crazy clubs that were still left over from all the oil wells. And it just felt in some ways like a paradise.

Glasser: Well, in a way, I think thats important context for you, that you saw what it was like before, because the collapse was so rapid and dramatic. By the end, people were eating garbage outside your window.

Dreier: Yes. I think a lot of peoplepeople think of Venezuela as a struggling Third World country, and I think it gets dismissed sometimes as a country thats always been poor and always had problems. But the truth is, it was one of the richest countries in the world in the 70s, and it was wealthy for a long time.

Under Chavez, the standard of living was rising. People there have very fancy tastes. They are very educated. And, so part of, to me, the tragedy of whats happened is that there is just no reason for this level of misery to ever come to Venezuela. It was a country that was making it.

And now, like you say, those friends that I used to hang out withtheyve all moved away. Those apartments are empty. When I came down, there were great restaurants. There was an obesity epidemic, and now as soon as you put a trash bag on the street there are people on that bag, going through to see what they can find.

Susan B. Glassers new weekly podcast takes you backstage in a world disrupted.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Glasser: So, I want to talk about this evolution. But lets start first a little bit more in the headlines. Just this week you had the Trump administration in Washingtonnot known for its democracy promotion; in fact, the same week that it was reported that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was taking democracy out of the State Departments mission statementyou had Donald Trump, of all people, not only imposing personal sanctions on Venezuelas leader, Nicolas Maduro, but heres what Donald Trump had to say about Maduro.

He said, quote: Maduro is not just a bad leader, he is now a dictator, and as a result of that, we, the United States, imposed personal sanctions on Venezuelas leader, something we reserve for only several other, really, of the worlds worst tough guys, Syrias Bashar Assad, North Koreas Kim Jong Un, Zimbabwes Robert Mugabe. However, dot-dot-dot, you pointed out, in a very smart piece, all of those leaders are still in power, and, in fact, these might be the kind of sanctions that have the least impact on Venezuelas crisis. What did you mean by that?

Dreier: Well, so, now that Im not working for the Associated Press, its kind of fun to be able to point out these things that everybody covering Venezuela knows, but you cant usually just say outright.

But, basically, the U.S., with those sanctions, which are very important symbolicallybut, they said that they were going to freeze all of Maduros assets, and all the headlines were: Maduros Assets Frozen. Theres no reason to think Maduro has any U.S. assets. This is a man who railed every day against the U.S. empire. Why would he put his money in Miami property, or anything here?

So, the sanctions will prevent him from buying things in the U.S. and from doing business with Americans, which he wasnt trying to do anyway, and Trump gets to say that this is a big, strong step. And Maduro, in Caracas, is also making hay with these sanctions and spending lots of time talking about them, and saying that they prove that the U.S. is a bully and that the U.S. is trying to ruin the Venezuelan economyso, kind of a gift.

Glasser: And that was the response, as well, when Barack Obama imposed an earlier round of sanctions on certain regime leaders in 2015, right?

Dreier: Right. So, the time that I was in Venezuela, I just saw Maduros approval ratings go lower and lower and lower, it was a steady downward decline, except for this one month in 2015, right after Obama imposed sanctions, and Maduro loved those. He talked about them every single day for a month, and put posters up all around the capital talking about how bad those sanctions were. And people really responded. People said, Thats right. The U.S. is trying to interfere in our politics, just like they always do. And he got this total approval ratings bump. After that, I think the Obama administration backed off, because a lot of people seemed to realize that those sanctions were giving him a tool, not really hurting his administration.

Glasser: So, there is one thing that the United States could do, but its never wanted to do. And what is that?

Dreier: Thats oil sanctions. Ninety-five percent of Venezuelas revenue comes from oil. Its basically the only way the government is getting money right now. And the U.S. happens to be the biggest customer for that oil, and one of the very few governments still paying cash for oil. So, if the U.S. put an oil embargo in place, that would have a huge, dramatic effect, immediately, on Venezuela, and the government would probably default. There would be a reshuffling of alliances. But, it always seems to be that there are only bad options with Venezuela, because those oil sanctions would also probably lead to maybe famine-level hunger, to extreme suffering, and nobody really wants that either.

Glasser: So, were locked in a terrible position of having declared Venezuela a dictatorship, and yet being the main customers propping up the government that weve now declared a dictatorship.

Dreier: Its always struck me as a very strange thing. Weve declared Venezuela a dictatorship, and Venezuela has declared us as basically an evil empire, and yet this oil trade is so central to both countries. So, were kind of locked in this rhetorical battle with each other, but also locked in this very important commercial relationship that neither side seems to want to disrupt.

Glasser: Now, as a reporter there from 2014 on, as you said, for the Associated Pressnot always known for having vivid voice-filled, scenic descriptions, and yet that really was the trademark of your coverage there. And I think what made it stand out so much is that you were one of the few Americans to be lucky enough to get a visa to cover this important story. It hasnt gotten much attention here, but you also covered it in a very un-wire service-like way.

You werent really writing the standard fare of politics, And Maduro said this today, were you? You were really chronicling the collapse of a society. Tell me, how quickly did you understand that was the story, and how did you feel you were able to do that in a way that was different from what a correspondent might have done 20 years ago, covering the collapse of the Soviet Union?

Dreier: Well, so, like you say, I was one of the very few reporters to have a visa there. I was actually the last U.S. reporter to get a permanent work visa, and it felt like I had walked across a bridge as it was burning behind me, and it made me feel a lot of responsibility to tell that story as vividly as I could because there were just so few reporters on the ground.

And, I wish I could say that I went in and immediately started doing these character-driven stories, but the truth is, I went in and did kind of dry reporting about the shortages and about the general collapse. And I noticed that they werent getting the pick-up that I felt they should.

So, for example, I saw that there were these shortages starting to creep into hospitals, and people werent getting the care that they had been able to get even a few years before. And so I wrote a story saying that there were shortages in hospitals, and I dont think anybody read that story.

Glasser: Nobody cared.

Dreier: And that was so upsetting to me, because I saw these people suffering, and it just felt like nobody cared about that. And so, the next time I wrote about hospitals, I followed one girl, who scraped her knee while she was playing, and I told the story of her parents quest to try to get her the antibiotics that she needed to save this girls life. And that story, which I think people could relate to, because every little kid scrapes their knee from time to time, got a huge response. And people donated money to help this family. The girl ended up in very bad shape, but as a result of reader donations, was able to get surgery.

It was just a completely different experience for me, and that showed me that without a human narrative kind of anchoring things, its hard for people in another country to be able to imagine whats really happening.

Glasser: Well, you had a real eye for the telling detail, too. One of your stories just blew me away, classic. You were talking about how wealthy Venezuela had been until so recently, and the sort of va-va-voom public culture, right? There was a lot of plastic surgery. Tell us about that story. The trade in boob enhancements.

Dreier: Right. Well, this is whats always so bizarre to me about Venezuela. Theres so much suffering and poverty and misery; and at the same time, everybody is finding a way to still dye their hair and paint their nails. And so, one way I wanted to try to talk about that was by looking at plastic surgery, which is really central to Venezuelan culture. They have more beauty queens than any other country.

And so, these women were coming in to get breast implants, but there were shortages of implants, and so they had set up this kind of Craigslist for implants, and they were trading these Chinese-made implants that are banned in the U.S., Im sure, are not allowed in most developed countries, but theyd found them.

And so, I sat in a plastic surgeons office one day and just watched these women come in carrying their own implants that they had bought and had in little plastic bags, and they were just putting them in one after the other for $500.

Glasser: Well, it strikes me that that is a common theme through a lot of the reporting that you did, which is the incredible resourcefulness and human ingenuity under stress as your world collapses around you. People had a never-ending ability to adapt. Their resilience, obviously, was extraordinary.

You know, how quickly did it become clear to you when, after youd moved there, that this was a society that was collapsing?

Dreier: I spent my first year there really trying to argue that it wasnt collapsing, because there was already this narrative that it was a dictatorship where people were starving. And thats not what I initially saw. Maduro had just won an election. It was a very polarized place, but half of the country supported him. And, people were on diets. There was a super-abundance of food.

So, I really thought that was a false narrative created by the media. I was almost like what Maduro says today; I was totally on board with that idea, that the media was whipping up a frenzy.

And, I think it wasnt until the people in my life started to lose weight that I really realized that things had changed. And then, people that I knew started to be robbed regularly. Somebody was kidnapped. Somebodys mom was kidnapped. I was robbed. My friends were beaten up. Like, it just, it became obvious that something had really changed and we werent in the same place anymore.

Glasser: When was that? It was in 2015?

Dreier: This was 2015. I think thats really when the crisis started. Because when I came there, they werethe government was using these high oil prices to mask a lot of the economic mismanagement that had been going on for years. And economists knew that; economists were saying, this is totally untenable, this is an economy built on price and currency distortions, but it just didnt matter, because they had more oil than anyone in the world, and oil was at $100 a barrel.

And, when that price collapsed in 2014, it kind of sent the whole economy spinning. And since then, its just been spinning downwards and downwards.

Glasser: Whats so interesting, though, is that it seems like such an outlier. You know, there are plenty of authoritarian societies in the world. There are plenty of oil-dependent authoritarian societies. Look at Russia. We were talking about Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez and their friendship going back all the way to the very beginning of Putins tenure, when I actually saw, crazily enough, the two of them walking around together in Red Squarenot something, I must say, thats an everyday occurrence, that you run into Vladimir Putin, but this really did happen.

You know, look at how differently those two societies have ended upboth authoritarian and much more authoritarian now than they were in 2001; both highly oil- and natural resource-dependent economies. Putin, if anything, has been as or more isolated politically than Venezuela, and yet, hes avoided the collapse that has occurred in Venezuela.

Is Maduro just uniquely incompetent?

Dreier: Yes. I mean, it makes total sense that you saw Chavez and Putin together. Chavez in some ways has modeled himself after the same principles that hold Putin. And people in the slums in Caracasthese are the people who supported Chavez, that supported Madurothey also see those parallels, and they look at places like Russia and like Cuba, and they see governments that are more in control.

One thing that people would sometimes say to me about Cuba is that they are at least, they have kind of a functioning authoritarian government. That, yes, people dont get to vote on their president, but theres no crime.

Glasser: So, this is more like anarchy. Is it just that the police state is not effective at being a police state?

Dreier: Right. One thing that people will say a lot in Venezuela is that they want mano dura, they want somebody to come

Glasser: A strong hand.

Dreier: and crack down, and, yes, have a strong hand with both the criminals and with the corrupt officials.

Glasser: I think this is something Ive heard a lot in Washington, as people have realized, belatedly, the scale of the crisis in Venezuelaif its a police state that doesnt work, then why is the elimination of democracy proceeding? Why arentif these are not effective authoritarians, then why are the opposition not able to be stronger?

Dreier: Yes, because the only thing they can really crack down on well is the opposition, because theyve done a brilliant job of that. A lot of people right now in the opposition are saying all the sacrifices of the last two years were for nothing, and regret fighting so hard. They wish theyd just left the country.

Glasser: And we should say, theyve rounded up and arrested since this referendum the leading opposition figures and theres not really a sense that anyone is going to be able to stop Maduro from taking this next decisive step away from democratic rule.

Dreier: Right. Right. Theyve been rounding people up. The day that Trump imposed sanctions, they took a prominent politicianthe person whod been the mayor of Caracasfrom house arrest and put him back into a military prison, as if to say, Trump, we dont care about your sanctions. And then today, for some reason, they took that same former mayor of Caracas and put him back in house arrest, just moving him around like a total political pawn to kind of flex their power.

And that message is getting through to the opposition. These are people whove been on the streets, really risking their lives for four months now, and theyre exhausted. They get tear-gassed every day, and as far as anybody can tell, its come to absolutely nothing. The country is more in the hands of Maduro today than it ever was.

Glasser: This is an amazing story that you have to tell. So, OK, we were in 2015, and your friends were starting to lose weight, and youre realizing this is a different level of crisis now kicking in. Tell us about how you lived through it. Where did you live? How did you buy food in the store? People are carrying around literally backpacks full of cash. What was it like for you?

Dreier: The Venezuela story, I was living it. You never had to go and try to figure out where the crisis was. It was on your doorstep, literally. One day in 2015, I woke up to the sound of screaming outside, and I looked out and a group of men were kicking somebody who they accused of being a thief. They were doing what they call in Venezuela a lynching, right outside my window. And this happened again and again.

One day this year I woke up and, again, there was screaming, and somebody had set up a barricade right outside my door, and the police were coming with tear gas.

Glasser: But you were living in an apartment building in what was a middle-class neighborhood of Caracas?

Dreier: Yes. I was living in the most protected place I could find. I mean, I chose where I lived because I thought it was going to be really safe and comfortable and great. And it was for a year. And then, in 2015, I started coming home and there would be no electricity. Thats when the water cuts started. And the water never came back, until the day I left I had three hours of water a day. And all of my mornings started with checking to see if there was water, and then kind of cursing under my breath when there was none.

Glasser: So, thats not even like, black market available, but at a price? Food was available to you at a higher price, but water you couldnt get?

Dreier: Yes. I mean, there was just no way to insulate yourself from the crisis when you were there. And the thing you really cant insulate yourself from is violence. So, I was robbed in broad daylight a couple of blocks from where I lived by two men on a motorcycle, and I kind of saw them coming and thought they might rob me, because that was happening to a lot of people at the time, and then they did. And when I told my friends about it, they were, like, Oh, that was a good robbery. Nobody got hurt. That was good and simple. And so your standards just start to change.

Glasser: But you adapt.

Dreier: Yes. And you dont tell the people at home whats happening because you dont want to worry your friends and family. So really, the people youre telling are other people going through the same thing, and it just becomes normalized.

The same thing happened when the secret police grabbed me one day. I was in detention for a few hours and they made all these threatslike, they said they were going to slit my throat; they said they were going to keep me for weeks and weeks; they said I had to stay there until I married one of themand when I got out, I told my friends, and they thought it was super funny. So, I also started joking about it, and we got drinks, and it was just like another thing that happened.

Glasser: You were relieved that they werent kidnappers when they grabbed you off the streets?

Dreier: Yes. Well, they calculated it to be as scary as possible. They rolled up and took me right after I did an interview, and snatched my phone away, and wouldnt say where we were going or what was happening. So, I assumed it was a kidnapping, which would not have been funny. So when we passed through the gates of the secret police headquarters, I was just so relieved. It was just all uphill from there.

Glasser: Yes, you know youve lost a little perspective when its a good thing to be detained by the secret police, right? Thank God!

Dreier: But, I mean, the one thing, like you say, that was very different is that I was never hungry. I mean, for me that was one of the most troubling parts of living there, because my life was so insulated from that kind of real suffering. And its right outside the door, so I could always, if I wanted to, go and spend $25 and buy a box of Cheerios on the black market.

Glasser: How did that work, the black market? Where did you go? Was there a sign?

Dreier: So, when I first got down to Venezuela, I was horrified because I couldnt find flour or sugar or eggs. Id wanted to make cupcakes my first day there to bring into the office, like an American treat, and I went to a bunch of supermarkets and couldnt find anything, and I started to really worry. But then, after Id been there about a month, I found the black market, and never had that problem again.

The black market operates in kind of a gray area. Its almost like a farmers market in the U.S. There are these outdoor markets where they sell produce, and then there will be kind a secret area where theyre also selling a bunch of goods at illegal prices. Or, itll be in the second floor of a market, and you have to know to go upstairs.

And, occasionally the government will crack down and there will be a big raid and theyll confiscate all of the black-market goods and probably give them to the military to keep everyone happy. But usually its not that hard to find things, and you can get food there, diapers, coffee, shampooall of the things that are impossible to find in supermarkets youll find kind of hidden beneath produce or in a little back area of the market.

Glasser: Was that a dollar economy, or was everything still in

Dreier: It was definitely dollarized. Everybody in Venezuela has this application that tells you the black-market rate, but its been banned so you cant get it.

Glasser: Its an app?

Dreier: Well, we had to use an app because the government blocks the website, and Venezuelans, yeah, Venezuelans have phones, and occasionally, when the black market hits some new low, the app will send out an alert and you can see it. Its got

Glasser: Text messaging enabled.

Dreier: Yes, yes. So, everybody will suddenly look down at their phones, and youll know that the black-market rate just hit a thousand. And people will check it day-to-day because the inflation is moving that fast, that prices might change from the morning to night, based on that app.

Glasser: Thats one of the amazing things, actually, about this collapse of this modern economy inboth, so quickly, but also in this technology-enhanced and enabled moment. I mean, when the Soviet Union fell apart and there were bread lines in 1991, there was no app to tell you where to go to get toilet paper or where to get bread.

Go here to see the original:
What's It Like to See a Democracy Destroyed? - POLITICO Magazine

What price democracy amid Venezuela’s political turmoil? – The Guardian

Venezuelas president Maduro delivers his weekly broadcast in Caracas Photograph: Reuters

Ken Livingstone (Letters, 5 August) is spreading misinformation about Venezuela a country I came to love and then mourn in my years living there. Iam the proud husband of a Venezuelan and have watched my extended family suffer hardship and worse as the country has been plunged into turmoil by Maduros inept and corrupt regime. It isimportant to note that Maduros government is partly enabled by support from ignorant overseas voices.

Livingstone appears to dismiss the accurate observations that opposition leaders had been arrested by the Maduro government as propaganda. Onthe contrary, the arrests of Leopoldo Lpez and Antonio Ledezma and now the dismissal of Luisa Ortega from the national assembly, are verifiable facts that demonstrate all too clearly the intention of the Maduro regime to admit no criticism or opposition at all. The government of Venezuela is far from the benign force for social good that Livingstone bizarrely insists it is. We are witnessing a cynical power grab by a corrupt and ruthless cartel. To call it otherwise is to betray democracy and justice. Dr Richard Harrold Leiden, Netherlands

While Venezuelas rightwing opposition boycotts elections and calls for a military coup or foreign invasion, we are to understand that they are in fact champions of democracy (Tensions mount as Maduro ignores critics, 5August).

Whatever the undoubted problems with Nicols Maduro, your photo showing newly elected constituent assembly members from indigenous and other minority groups is likely to disturb the US and its allies, who believe such people do not belong in legislative palaces, and that billionaires rather than bus drivers should lead countries. Peter McKenna Liverpool

Good to see that champion of democracy, the Vatican, calling for a suspension of the newly elected assembly in Venezuela. As you report, it joins a group of United Nations experts who stated: The government of Venezuela must stop systematically detaining protesters and end the growing use of military tribunals to try civilians.

Has anybody mentioned this to Donald Trump? Perhaps he might show the same respect for the human rights ofthose detained in Guantnamo Bay. Declan ONeill Oldham

The Tories and their media allies have been very interested in what Jeremy Corbyn has to say about Venezuela recently. WillTheresa May be pressed with equal vigour to condemn the attempted military coup against President Maduro? Sasha Simic London There are two sides to all issues concerning government and society, a debate that forms the basis of politics. Developments in Venezuela show that the country is divided, but it still has an elected government and an electoral system. The protests do not mean that the Maduro government is without substantial support in Venezuela. I believe there is also such support in the UK especially among trade unionists, academics in Latin American studies and others. The Guardians backing for the anti-government side in recent weeks in various articles, editorials, cartoons and commentary has a four legs good, two legs bad tone.

Nothing could be more dangerous than the Venezuelan government being forced out by US-led action, already mooted in some quarters. Its much too soon for the destruction of another politically vulnerable, oil-rich state by such means. Dr Kevin Bannon London

The problem with Oscar Guardiola-Riveras piece on Venezuela (The problem for Venezuelans: Maduros opposition would provide no relief, theguardian.com, 3 August) is that it is makes unsubstantiated claims. For example, he says that the rightwing opposition cant rally a majority beyond the middle-upper classes. He seems to ignore that the opposition won the parliamentary elections of 2015 by a major landslide.

Here are the facts: the national electoral commission controlled by the regime convenes in weeks a poll to establish a national assembly while refusing to call regional and local elections, though it was constitutionally mandated back in 2016.

Maduro then suddenly calls this poll to change the 1999 constitution which Chvez himself called the best in the world. His real intention is to dissolve a congress that was democratically elected by the people. The fact remains that the regime faces an economic crisis of its own making. Yes, Maduro inherited the institutional and financial mess from his predecessor, but he also lacks the charisma and capacity to overcome it.

His own ideological stubbornness and a complex web of power, which includes links between the military, illegal mining and drug cartels, makes his own administration something of arollercoaster. Finally, I would remind Dr Guardiola-Rivera that Venezuela in 2017 is not the Chile of 1973 and that we would be doing Salvador Allendes memory a disfavour by continuing to make these unfair comparisons. Dr Jairo Lugo-Ocando University of Leeds

Prior to the French Revolution, the issue preoccupying compassionate European thinkers was how to end the barbarism of self-righteous survival of the holiest Christian cliques seizing an unfair share of the means to sustain life with impunity.

In 1784, Kant defined enlightenment as the adolescent stage in the existence of humankind, akin to the adolescent stage in the existence of every intelligent social animal, when immature ignorance of what sustains its existence is naturally succeeded by the mature understanding that its existence is sustained by the unconditional love of and for ones kind. Unlike Asa Cusack (What the left must learn from Maduros failures in Venezuela, 3 August), Marx and Engels had studied Kant, and recognised the significance of the self-taught compassionate solidarity developed by the new factory-based communities in Britain to mitigate their collective suffering without the advantage of a university education.

The current problems of humankind are the consequence of the systematic corruption of university-educated intellectuals by self-righteous survival of the richest mercenary cliques and corporations determined to continue seizing an unfair share of the means to sustain life with impunity. We are reaching the end of the age of enlightenment. It remains to be seen whether it will be marked by the triumph of compassion, or the premature extinction of the most intelligent species on earth. Steve Ballard London

Join the debate email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

Read more Guardian letters click here to visit gu.com/letters

Continue reading here:
What price democracy amid Venezuela's political turmoil? - The Guardian

Pakistan’s Democracy Will Survive – Project Syndicate

LAHORE The decision by Pakistans Supreme Court to remove from office Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who had a comfortable majority in the National Assembly, is viewed by many in the West as an ominous sign of renewed political instability, if not heralding a return to authoritarianism. But Pakistans political history suggests otherwise.

Todays Pakistan emerged not in August 1947, when it gained independence, but rather in December 1971, when, after a bloody civil war, the countrys eastern region became Bangladesh. Afterwards, Pakistan was governed as a parliamentary democracy, led by the charismatic Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

But charges of large-scale vote-rigging in the 1977 elections triggered widespread unrest, which not only brought down Bhutto (who was ultimately executed), but also led to a military coup. General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq took over the presidency in 1978, and remained in the position until his death ten years later.

Zias death brought to power another democratically elected civilian prime minister: Benazir Bhutto, the daughter of Zulfikar Ali and the first woman to lead a Muslim-majority country. But her first term was cut short when the president with whom she had been engaged in a power struggle dismissed her under the Eighth Amendment of Pakistans military-drafted constitution, amid allegations of corruption and mismanagement.

Soon after, Sharif took over as prime minister. His first term ended in 1993, when he resigned under military pressure. That cleared the way for the return of Bhutto, who remained prime minister until 1996, when she was dismissed yet again this time, by her own Pakistan Peoples Party.

In 1997, it was Sharifs turn again. But his confrontation with the military had intensified over the years, resulting in another coup in 1999, leading to eight years of military rule under General Pervez Musharraf. In 2008, Musharraf resigned under popular pressure, and a new election brought Asif Zardari, the widower of Benazir Bhutto, who had been assassinated the previous December, to the presidency.

Ignoring constitutional requirements, Zardari did not transfer executive authority to his prime minister, and instead expected the two prime ministers who served under him to follow his orders. Zardaris five-year tenure reinforced the presidential system in Pakistan. That changed, however, with Sharifs reelection as prime minister in 2013, when parliamentary democracy was fully restored.

Of the 45 years since the civil war, Pakistan has spent 24 under presidential rule, and just 21 as a parliamentary democracy. But the current situation characterized by an independent judiciary, free press, active civil society, and chastened military favors the continuation of parliamentarism, regardless of Sharifs dismissal.

And, indeed, the trajectory of Pakistans government so far appears promising. Shahid Khaqan Abbasi a well-educated former petroleum minister, who is regarded as a skillful manager is now serving as interim Prime Minister. That could mean that he will serve for 45 days long enough to elect Shahbaz Sharif, Nawaz Sharifs younger brother, as Pakistans next leader. Alternatively, Abbasi could remain in office until the next general election, to be held in May 2018.

The latter approach offers distinct political advantages. Shahbaz Sharif has served for almost a decade as Chief Minister of Punjab, the heartland of the governing party, the Pakistan Muslim League, which is still led by Nawaz. And he has some promises to fulfill before leaving that post beginning with the reduction of electricity brownouts, which undermine economic and personal wellbeing, particularly during what has been the provinces hottest year on record.

Punjab also needs better urban infrastructure. The population of Pakistans cities is growing by 6% per year, raising demand for improved transport, water management, sanitation, and solid-waste collection, as well as for education and health services. This is particularly true in Punjab, where the urban population increased by nearly 26% between 2001 and 2011.

Sharifs provincial administration is already addressing these issues, and tangible improvements are expected by the spring. Keeping Sharif in Punjab may well be the best way to ensure that things go according to plan, and thus that the Pakistan Muslim League can count on strong voter support there in the next election.

That outcome would reinforce the continuation of Pakistans parliamentary system, which matters for the rest of the Muslim world as well. Social stability, which so few Muslim countries enjoy, demands political systems that are open, inclusive, and representative. This is all the more true today, when the median age across Muslim-majority countries stands at around 25 years. The worlds 1.6 billion young Muslims are, thanks to technology, exposed to the world outside their borders, and tend to favor greater openness and opportunity.

This holds lessons for outside powers, too. The United States has long supported friendly authoritarian regimes, such as that of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. But while this may seem to serve US interests today, it will eventually stoke instability and social violence that could spill over in an already-troubled region.

Pakistans political system has undoubtedly faced serious challenges in the past. But the dismissal of Sharif need not portend a return to instability or, worse, military rule. Following in the footsteps of India, where a reasonably inclusive political system has underpinned relative peace and stability for almost 70 years, Pakistan seems still to be moving along the path toward democratic consolidation.

Continue reading here:
Pakistan's Democracy Will Survive - Project Syndicate