Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

Democracy in Crisis: Press Briefs – Washington City Paper

Sad little scenes from the White House Briefing Room

Photo by Baynard Woods

Democracy in Crisis is a syndicated column, a podcast, and a blog.

The White House briefing room feels like a mansions pool house, but with the carpet of a church basement. On the eve of the summer solstice, after a week without an on-camera press briefing, the room smells like a grill doused with too much lighter fluid.

Cameramen and techies move around in loose clothes and floral shirts.

A barbecue? one reporter says. Are we invited?

I feel like wed be the main course, another says.

It has just been reported that Sean Spicer, the combative and sometimes dishonest press secretary, may be moving to a new position in the White House. But he is scheduled to be here today.

He walks out even pastier than on TV: The screen eats the makeup. In person, it is cakey.

Im right here. So you can keep taking your selfies and selfie photos, he says at one point.

Reporters who knew Spicer back in the day, when he was a flack for various Congress members, thought he was a good guy. But this gig started bad.

This was the largest audience to ever witness an inaugurationperiodboth in person and around the globe, Spicer falsely stated on the second day of the job, after berating the press for their coverage. His performance prompted Kellyanne Conway to coin the phrase alternative facts.

Like flacks all around the country, the Trump press team believes that social media makes pesky reporters unnecessary.

Someone asks Spicer about the off-camera briefings. We have a tremendous respect for the First Amendmentyour ability to do your job and report and seek out ideasand were going to work with you, he said.

***

Im press. Is this where I should go? I asked the Marine standing at the door of an outbuilding at the end of a sidewalk lined with media booths on my first trip to the White House briefing room.

The Marine said nothing and stiffly opened the door. I walked in and paused.

Can I help you? a woman said.

Im a reporter.

Oh, you cant be here, she said, escorting me out the door. The briefing room is down here.

I tried to ask the Marine.

Oh, theyre not allowed to speak, she said, opening the door to the briefing room for me. It was better for the Marine to let me in somewhere I shouldnt be than to speak to me.

***

During the campaign and at his recent rallies, Trump has relied on the press as one of his primary enemiesthe wrestling heel. Fake news applies to any story he doesnt like.

After the Republican candidate in Montanas special election body-slammed Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs and still won, Trump called it a great win.

We like to think of ourselves as embattled Ben Jacobses, to think of ourselves as Steve Bannon does, as the opposition party. We like to think of Spy magazines stories about Trump, the short-fingered vulgarian. Or we like to pretend we are above the fray, bringing unalloyed truth to the world.

But often we are enablers. Trump, the NBC star, shares a world with TV reporters that the rest of us will never access. Cable news did more to put Trump in the White House than anything else.

The medias adoration of Trump didnt begin with cable and this campaign. There were four stories about Trump in one day's issue of The New York Times newspaper, columnist Jimmy Breslin wrote in 1990. On television that night, all I saw was announcers genuflecting as they mentioned Trump's name.

We love the Trump show. Now the loversthe press and the presidentare quarrelling.

The bull is back, said a reporter waving a small red cape as he walked into the briefing room a few minutes before Spicer came out in front of the lights.

***

In an interview with Laura Ingrahamone of the names being floated as his replacementSpicer justified the off-camera briefings by claiming reporters want to become YouTube stars.

Hes right. But its mostly the new-right media figures who use the briefings to take selfies, making ambiguously racist hand gestures or grandstanding on Periscope like Pizzagate guru Mike Cernovich. After the May 1 briefing, Cernovich made a live-streaming stink, loudly demanding to know why the press corp wasnt disavowing violence against Trump supporters.

These new right media figures act like rebels while primarily serving up propaganda for the president.

***

On May 12, after Trump contradicted his own communications team about why former FBI Director Jim Comey was fired, he suggested via Twitter that maybe the best thing to do would be to cancel all future press briefings and hand out written responses for the sake of accuracy???

The briefings are sort of stupid, but we have to defend them now. Just like we have to defend CNN. While the White House hasn't killed the briefings yet, it has moved toward more limited gaggles and away from on-camera appearances.

After one of these briefings, CNNs Jim Acostaripped the administration.

The question was asked whether the president has the ability to fire Robert Mueller. You wont hear or see the answers to those questions. Youll only be able to read about it.

Acostas general disdain for print is telling. He is in a fury over losing his TV time, even if it is for the sake of the people. But he has not, nor has anyone in the briefing, asked about Aaron Cant, the reporter who is facing decades in prison for following the group that used black bloc techniques to disrupt the inauguration.

Cameras are important, but there are more serious violations of the First Amendment happening. In his postmodern presidency, Trump has succeeded in making the briefings about the briefings.

It will get worse.

See the article here:
Democracy in Crisis: Press Briefs - Washington City Paper

Democracy Must Prevail, Always – Social Europe

Thorvaldur Gylfason

Diversity is desirable in human affairs, as in nature. Most countries strive toward economic and political diversification.

Economic diversification is a way of escaping dependence on a narrow economic base so as to spread risk. Political diversification is another side of the same story. Political diversification is a way of escaping dependence on a narrow political base to spread risk. Fortification of democracy involves political diversification to escape domination by exclusive elites. Too many eggs in one basket is never a good idea.

In 1848, the US was still the worlds sole democracy. Then, after Europe was swept by revolution, democracy gradually began to gain ground. After 1945, structures were put in place to preserve and to spread democracy, with good results.

The number of democracies has remained unchanged, however, since 2002. Moreover, the US was recently downgraded by Freedom House to a democracy grade that is lower than that given most countries in Western Europe. The Guardian newspaper in the UK recently designated the Chancellor of Germany as the new leader of the free world.

Within the EU, Hungary and Poland show signs of disrespect for democracy and human rights. This is why now is a particularly unfortunate time for Icelands Parliament to show similar disregard for democracy and human rights by failing to ratify a new constitution accepted by 67% of the voters in a national referendum called by Parliament in 2012.

Put differently, now is a particularly good time for Iceland to send the rest of the world an uplifting signal about the beauty and utility of inclusive democracy, a signal that would be welcomed by advocates of democracy and human rights around the world. For four years now, Parliament has neglected to transmit such a signal, inviting the rest of the world to wonder why.

We need to stay awake. In a letter to his friend John Taylor in 1814, John Adams, US President 1797-1801, evoked Aristotle: Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

For four years now Icelands Parliament, led since early 2017 by a Prime Minister straight from the Panama Papers, has been trying to trump the will of the people by turning the new crowd-sourced constitution drafted on Parliaments initiative by 25 directly elected representatives of the people into a constitution for political parties and their paymasters. Too many Icelandic MPs take their cue from the oligarchs in the fishing industry who cannot reconcile themselves to the new constitutional provision that declares that Icelands natural resources belong to the people, a polite way of saying that they do not belong to the oligarchs. This provision was accepted by 83% of the voters in a national referendum in 2012. Too many MPs also cannot bear the prospect of equal voting rights, i.e., equal weight of votes in urban and rural constituencies, because equal rights according to the new constitution would render some of them unelectable. That provision was accepted by 67% of the voters in the referendum as was the bill in toto.

Those two key provisions, on the peoples right to the rents from their natural resources and on equal voting rights, involve human rights and, therefore, can be brought before international courts of justice if Parliament persists in refusing to respect the will of the people. In a binding opinion issued in 2007, the United Nations Human Rights Committee instructed Iceland to remove from its fisheries management regime the discriminatory element favoring the oligarchs at others expense. The government of Iceland promised to oblige by enacting a new constitution that would address the issue, a promise that remains unfulfilled. Further, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe has, correctly, likened the unequal weight of votes in Iceland to a violation of human rights.

In a national referendum political power is at its source, in the hands of the people. To justify their disrespect for the overwhelming victory of the new constitution in the 2012 referendum, some opponents of constitutional reform claim that the referendum was advisory. The Brexit referendum was also advisory. Even so, the British Parliament did not consider trumping the will of the people. After the financial crash of 2008, in fact, the Icelandic Parliament did respect the will of the people by resolving not to make any substantive changes in the bill approved in the 2012 referendum. Parliament then failed to ratify the bill, leaving it on ice in the middle of the night where it has remained ever since, leading the Social Democratic Prime Minister Jhanna Sigurardttir to declare: The past few weeks were the saddest period of my 35 years in Parliament.

In view of recent developments in the US, some of Icelands MPs may feel emboldened by their new distaste for democracy.

The beauty of democracy is not that it always produces the best results. No, the beauty of democracy is that it produces results that, in a civilized society, we must always respect.

I learned my favorite definition of democracy from Lord George Brown, who served in Harold Wilsons Labour government during 1964-1968, on his visit to Reykjavk in 1971. He then said: Democracy means that there shall be no one to stop us from being stupid if stupid we want to be.

Democracy is inseparable from human rights which are inalienable by our laws as well as by international covenants that we have sworn to uphold. Democracy must prevail, always. There can be no exceptions from this fundamental principle. Those who claim otherwise and act accordingly play with fire.

Based upon a recent presentation at Berkeley University

Thorvaldur Gylfason is Professor of Economics at the University of Iceland and Research Fellow at CESifo (Center for Economic Studies) at the University of Munich. A Princeton Ph.D., he has worked at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington, D.C., taught at Princeton, edited the European Economic Review, consulted for international organizations, and published some 200 scholarly articles and 20 books as well as 900 newspaper articles plus some 90 songs for voice and piano as well as mixed choir. He was one of 25 representatives in Icelands Constitutional Council in session from 1 April to 29 July 2011, elected by the nation and appointed by parliament to revise Icelands constitution.

Read the original:
Democracy Must Prevail, Always - Social Europe

What to do when Viktor Orban erodes democracy – The Economist

rG'-&'GO>iN>O'Q49nx0pR7^?iZ><<>OoL}jMn8g<9'W/_O`oWOQoz5?DJDQv~2]Mxj39^;z+^HN'G x0mo6=~?d}qRGUXN:<<}h,+|lQ&K~X~fY4tfRoY Wg&e4]FogIzNcEZLNfAGxY&=Dk}_pt29&|y_#Sl5?963N.W]Mzh-'Gl2_5E3Yvz=RQ=Y,`ttyi4?f Ar|=6s"'xMj$qYx''=h)oga}'zg[~p~2Y|89&pUoWtc-q8['G%xiF4YYyvE `>iCFo.hJQ9xCmuN?c|q=<8(M;5tRmQ4OJ*'MUUE~aJaS 64jzXCW[3=Tj =`4i9R_AzPi PL3y5_,mV?w%?1eSVuyM&uOmnl>:maF`IeNGqGrHV[$3- >T00/-4AE>-? DO={?x^r.%tVVpwdLL6I,z~:_.&'bYy|:NmK+vWdq4xO j=:]M!`zz.9}Mf <;~v:rEfLgGkV{[-f 42d`sr'cm~=zSc_G',m?xu>$~UXk>u_|j@wf=b 9{w^f guy||O}~iZ/q?YUlM;pNVMe; z+Mof%H,v_1"==]..4F PS$IigfuGs ?eO |G{0vOy&a`#tGvK-uCP _2U2CWf'lt1X ?L_>2]qh:J5d6;toihQ$k5vfu2IsnlRidbgF$t.r~A!tOmd^7UbzF_z="N~"]Wf;vn|R>x(y($@I?1#&_OnD"?@.f*3_ 7u|3~6x=#qhmr~]0?hV]|{LA~29A{(>1/$||~#{aA/8MNIT^u#YBU?}FKtXEC1KC C, M*A@ww*y|Hjbn8--7yXf4 <%/D;*/v0}#&B$jomnEDu][^tvOgqNnK}[.YCGu{:mH4d3KWU@%&.ONyF&M?Ot'~-7qCuqEQ-fK)_l:Qww=k77/;2;zgorz~/6//J_L7O|GY:}ENgWgL/~}|o.w/?|KW^}?+j{0{1g8z~w_]ij7ilyF4?W?|f??oi^[I};O/._a_> o/^{nY3#p{a ?yu~8;/rYVt_|='w,89oz_IQuB1cqexH~%b7]%5Wiclhy#~[=&bqFE^7rCZIG-fS$S-l7>hG}gCfVveql*iCBH#s'q;.Bt|PoZ7qLC&vuT 'zf[378XA4bor,EQo&[w2|`G]`{Szz|@$c3n"Ph}+ARwXm1+@]V35|dK])qmfMg9"Ndu{T=wCS}Mrs fvcYi(uYW}dhL5`q7^[;zV7F NysjR::>4?_ ay>T-#{d9e}Ng[|@ ];m+]GE^G.i76|1adF|/IMhuJWd#9k5=;,.sueXW2c4bkg}x #mv[ 7^]_F>L5'q*a,1?%fNNvv!eZK;BtXB|VS*5c5hNkZt-dv'~`F3?r1Rh^UO|Gg]Zqf(:]?>0gA:!:aF)tp?* j/xrwngZ|Wwy6zqWC4^K ?f%y ^B`g/qMSs!DzGnCXoluPxm8Oz"g?}XW!v:3sY1[tP,xHFd1gCKvU3$(oa1>MqxNThqg)yc>c$y{[}8NufIQ^i=(D+^"H#xG#fF~X:~387>Zo1I 2X{OeG&2px<7d# IX]w{gz~X}{&-w<|m!7xPKB {[x|d=72cyvf>=T}a1/nNVc>1?)pycng=h(3|]9z$EUAJ(~m|`vc nknS'>h*At+_to]g-97X[FD-]v< xxzHXB?8kzmK{{c.zqzb(7]g=bpUx:q#`hlt8I~.@+lq&kOaq6aKoVU@K; NWsvDs8[:1fA@~VbqS ?Pf&tq`Woru7S,W-C ,!h]Kq%IIYozCy?nc9GRNk")R@7eUd(FR^;xn{k|T9?m>f6,|azo:-?K$?i?e$ rKQmT~x TF8QM3}8r_yTjV|_"'fV${)Uy.$URq8dIQs6$#K?L;_2poXob|pX<69#3azSHw~Nz"uoS ^{u:fTmo0MoxU[[/L(:f-jEl`F?qksz{Mvm]{+K^J< ?d|%'vCCx;szZ_&fz?_0@#}d6/rLLdQ2&A'>byK5Dr!O|2im TIldIvn("C-uh>~{TD~rDLvv{ ^ulp!7+{ W~,f8YO}vg LEyyi<0yD'O26;Ee%5gC*P|G3I}.' ~.b. '^g|vKcNy5**ebCL{bK/Dyx7f>>1Np?}a^3su.eQxXG^Y~}:9uU]z8;g'y]^n_~f|"tqMQPiM*(iX$IhA**@9W~kPlUy.o)T5R aO^W7_++ eK a2^2ao% UNRV;%+i(!R>2[G-m]SKa5eyh` %Ter.EO/OF6lIQq;u>)xt7g?G[?F8T>@~OzcpEqa%2.Ul!] ]]~x{X7V4vb@$[!M( 85BV(U(b>yZ.XQ72`E^:>4p#i(o_5z# k] M /K3h#KkW2U-#';'Mrg >~1iiQ- ~CEbF;H wGw,{~Ko@z1C,hzY}0:eU~g m1*Re3 = 0t9`Fd j5Fas V-[i */iC5}E1Yj2~1j7D]5X?]1?]m+]vD*<1f}u>}iPz&Zh

<"9"{Y{wA|/Wowg+Zdq1cpek4h".I17BC#!lw(sCo@:``Kb_vi9zvf-S )Wc&/gJ>]sGZNFe7 e.{s'8rM3|Nox6,qnm?}vdy:'M@-bBuy0LLEdFa8%hWm*.hRH[44Z x_f'Fp78LxaPUftC[-C6^Z`k20M;%f jwfplSEd.l$G*D!L@V3=x7FH?Adr+>k&14kWJw <0 |eJ;`MyfTtoJx+v|;X CQZlU#vu 8CA`;mjR_O&j^O^wWd8k+{Rpj> lZJyy"9C>#j#Q]<`Pr|gVMs!o C,%jvJMYp~V"HmX`XsCl8-tTXZ4`9,8]OrV9*qQ::0H #G03Py/x n AS/VM>sz>a*F+^/#dWV80q5qPg7s|S3o^($MUDFy)PL0 8Bt$g>/5NWifP6YGajR[ X>*]|-N}[aufyg2SeTWPP,&Pb3F6s(Yb0+5fsFw6-.ORwB8&"]b@W@H0 5C9*$L<3QYZDr~j*[-K8AE(P+")aF|P +62-}Dp&M)L#?n~6.5"[Piy1nom`?,&O66Kvm:>cHrUF@C|QUgT%*_hKc;YB T!R3JDmsEKPHv8zT;I-VmE$ 0"pL&Y(y1*D6ES0&@qW d X5MxFW>oDSg 'N3rTp?f7ZwMw!!W%E%d%F$f4 $-XS dn$NF .,, VllrAAMEfc]X M)v`lL;-uzu 6R/'vbIjZuj2?L4/eV-nac z2T2S5)1<$T_ rd}|lw@SACCb;P_ZaY=[rDhkv(n69 }DVqx6d`'CAz+|lb,i0*/= cHM~Bs?4f1X:89i`J+D[HO[Lb6FF@zFVBHQ`mB2YYS`~N A={ >t*9EAD t0uAael8cTucT@z&5*Z;;Y0Uuf:y&aVL;xYCe@kM_[`VxSfkZKU"0=gIu@2+ c6>`/@UT2@WV@MK(Xm`HRJA5r'qv%~l|oAFa:-^ saCkncX=KZ]o3b <"P{S^Zc}dh5a^>iIdHIxBqGGCOBTA||J#xfc '/cpBl'W4*g&eN,f^Zj#:^is#Xv0,`u=.]T /$=vfu##Cv;!]aU#.jTaFP[Tp['M J|Bqk?jeF3.hof+RF^)/5NZvW@xeT}}{VdBebc6>LzHtN%@|ry8r e;Eft{^alWXnA<5MQA~{5MAz%G k]080[$. psaz`@lJRp"k,a'c'#*J_G_K?(o36bfmC '}DY, ~4"8(J'2^L3[ Ou*Kl4i..t~-f)!+BS3VW6L``vjK&%P 3US?JtNF xYQFv^c ;z)gb/^i1'%aO Kk#'9gQsEi0G%"k c]=7(59Fqsn6XL91Va6D[.25 8VVDjr}G;&s%@P00JZ@5Y/? S6^5ZkR[8 qjK;<%Gwhj`{I965_9SXe,W)?;X#nN77Mt(J@V*S XECHZSPpYyZ;/82Pt]T;3 a 0!L~k.'XZ53('{?B=*>Guy?!:]^Ojn 8"8 JZ0,k]ae"mz!fO&@/h*@'<{w:o95! nA?uvD QLK?Eekm~,|4?E^gK':xnW@Q9-j)B/ lry9zy2 MhQx@I'&7q.K40'06F]UZ1h?eU"8%BOiA&Zb!>#2e<4d:58h Or_VBJR/lZZVDXV}i,"9!d#q@LsK5l 1+8YfR24I(F<' )Abm84d7X{k&>)A^%,c~gqY2/FR$Qj+PbnD7j*tkf5jjIoUtp$Gk6n$Q]`!5Ud#TlU)Q/$1+2HF 5WlaPzt$;>2gj48[fqNY2Zq~fVBo%n%#&r8F |Da*8,,A`T1*4[5fDhH w ^M:pBsJ#,DWT?M^WTI%.P/(kSts!ob;V-L 3=A!5 4568J&a37k

_l;`*-kcolm<#4lXd|/~xOcwD-roM34Cj"jVi|Q|yXF|5I:Lo(Dej*5@LQs!B+u]8UMcC&B{g["g1gqUwQm8Rl5K '8`VA^84LXfUHmmO |qtP^9q#aaz49n6f 37s/* [U=*JcvOX&C1A~W70D.Xn}VM.5SCas!T ?^CI9 o3Hax xtYqX&k~/_UpK+G4eKJCxT5003<% %^J"%~M<'%cII?)8KFmgB82XEMrS"OHSe9I,lT9u"h [.|$B2phQPY;"dW)1TKLxW#jx(B."xFK#e!e@Fp#S,F8n[<6>%V#H!vQ7"ed89Lwz_c }uKV!KovaTv]+F&UB &*52!U'eRHlAx80E# [*[I6+/,Ybk>F|O@ Q(d$Ya5xb4<&pZS^[VV!;fX4 zfc-[LpaO`Q`s)AXv0MigbpL0 j7-:Xcs`".)( *GQ"Z%0 ]l +f%FgrO_DWC4-)qvJlYl,1#tD5+TAg@bx,$D):R-j< .)wI@X *B1%/mbz{@8 V*u$w`dOh[`Cw"HQT2(oAjD3H0$ ! 93A&/BUQ /+xF-VF3X/"YlAj>xJ_'fCI6Kl)o"/<1;5kHbI[G`i?23JB=(N/v gD2n}w8 A

See the original post:
What to do when Viktor Orban erodes democracy - The Economist

Thailand’s Winding Road to Democracy – The Diplomat

Thailands latest constitution set a roadmap for elections, but analysts fear true democracy may never return.

Thailands 20thconstitution was enshrined into law this April, and with it came fresh powers for the ruling military junta, increasing the militarys involvement in politics with the introduction of a military-appointed senate and forcing any future government to adhere to the juntas 20-year development plan.

The constitution also included additional provisions for King Maha Vajiralongkorn, stripping the constitutional court of its power to call a meeting in the event of crisis, while allowing the King to travel without appointing a regent. Importantly though, the constitution paves the way for elections to take place once again in Thailand, heralding the return of democratic rule.

Before a date can be set for the election however, the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) must first draft and submit 10 organic laws that will act as a template for the new electoral system. After these have been ratified by the National Legislative Assembly, King Vajiralongkorn will, if all goes to plan, sign off on them, and thatwould signal the start of the five-month window during which the new election must be held. This would see elections, in theory, being held at the end of next year.

But even at a glance it is clear that the elections will notmark the full return of democracy; instead, Thailand will have a democracy constrained and limited in its scope. Dr. Tyrell Haberkorn, a fellow at Australian National University, argues that despite claims otherwise, The new constitution creates a permanent place for the military in government and seeks to normalize their intervention. The new constitution risks institutionalizing authoritarianism rather than paving the way for democracy.

At a recent public forum event providing an update on the process of the organic laws and looking forward to the planned elections, high profile Thai political figures shared Haberkorns trepidation at the authenticity of the returning democracy.

Speaking at Chulalongkorn University, Chaturon Chaisang, former deputy prime minister and cabinet minister in the governments of Thaksin and Yingluck Shinawatra, outlined his fears regarding the timetable of the elections: As far as the schedule of elections is concerned, the timeline keeps changing. There is room for postponement and I am not sure if the election will be held as scheduled.

Norachit Sinhaseni, former permanent secretary of foreign affairs and speaking as spokesman for the CDC, stressed that the ten organic laws have to be in place before elections can be held, raisingthe possibility that the date of elections could be moved backwards. The roadmap set out is uncertain, stated Chaturon, while the director of the Institute of Security and International studies, Thitinan Pongsudhirak, reiterated that the the entire democratic process can be pushed back.

Chaturon also is fearful that the elections introduced by the junta will be of little substance. Most important will be whether the election is meaningful, or whether it will be meaningless. That is important, he noted. As a former close ally of the Shinawatras, he remains a prominent member of the pro-Thaksin Pheu Thai Party, which he said is not happy with the new constitution.My own partys position on the constitution is that we think that it is undemocratic and detrimental to the development of this country.

One of the key aspects of the laws is the effect they will have on political parties and how they operate. Chaturon explains that he has major concerns about the organic laws [impact] on political parties. Under the new laws, for a candidate to be selected in a constituency to contest the election, they must be nominated by the local branch of the party, which itself needs at least 100 registered members to become a branch. Chaturon is fearful that branches may be unable to secure 100 registered members. The new rules, he believes, will lead to administrative difficulties and conflict. The party role will be limited, it will be difficult for small parties to survive and new parties to form.

Kasit Piromya, former minister offoreign affairs and a prominent member of the Democratic Party of Thailand, shares Chaturons skepticism about the effect of new rules on political parties. The constitution, he feels, is worryingly restrictive, limiting the role of political parties; there is not much room for us to play.

The organic laws, for instance, outline the method for picking a perspective candidate. From a list of 100 people, every member will be able to vote for up to 15 candidates, which many believe will lead to polarization within parties and factional infighting where potential powerful figures will hold a disproportionate amount of influence. Political parties should facilitate people into the political process. The party must belong to the people and to the members, Kasit said, expressing fears that this function will be restrained once the laws come into place.

Worryingtoo are the qualifications to be put into place, restricting who can and cannot become a member of a political party. There is disqualification from certain occupations if you are a member of a political party, making people not want to become members, Chaturon explained. He feels that it will lead to more polarization within society, reducing the possibility of a successful return to democracy.

The transition to democracy in Thailand will surely be accompanied bymajor efforts from political figures keen to ensure its solid implementation. Kasit though, after 13 coup detats in the countys history and three years of military rule, is despondent and sees a lack of desire for a return to popular rule. I cannot see how democracy can move forward. The process of democracy here is a farce, he lamented. Referring to the Thai middle class who have accepted the junta, he argued that the demand for a quick return to democracy is just not there. Kasit admits that if he was leader, he would not contest the elections such is his disillusionment with how they are being set up and run by the junta.

As the Thailand government sets out its roadmap to democracy, those wishing for its return are excited as much as they are cautious. Steps have been taken to implement a schedule for elections, but it is susceptible to delay while a clampdown on the freedom of political parties is worrying for many.

As the country moves slowly moves toward elections, the stakes could not be higher, according to Thitinan. This is an existential decade for Thailand if it is not a success, I fear a terminal decline for our country.

Alexi Demetriadi is a freelance journalist based in Bangkok who has written for the Bangkok Post and the New Internationalist, among others.

More:
Thailand's Winding Road to Democracy - The Diplomat

Republicans’ contempt for democracy shows in their secretive crafting of the Obamacare repeal bill – Los Angeles Times

To the editor: You report that the justification by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) for formulating the GOPs healthcare legislation in secret was that holding public hearings about it would give Democrats a chance to get up and scream. (Republican secrecy faces mounting criticism as GOP senators work behind closed doors to replace Obamacare, June 16)

Isnt that how democracy is supposed to work? Arent the arguments offered by the opposition party (what Hatch calls screams) meant to help the Senate reach a better outcome?

Republican senators know they do not represent a majority of Americans, so why are they using their slim majority in the Senate to block any input from the opposition? Could it be that they fear prolonged reasoned debate would expose the inferiority of their plan compared with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act?

Legislation in a democracy should always promote what is good for all its people, not what favors less than half of them.

Brian Finney, Venice

..

To the editor: The Times crosses the line on journalistic integrity by challenging the GOPs closed-door approach and its secretive process in addressing how to change the numerous ineffective and inefficient provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was rammed down the throats of taxpaying citizens who were lied to by the bills proponents.

How dare you talk about the Republicans secretive process when Obamacare was championed by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), who publicly proclaimed, We have to pass the bill so that you can find out whats in it.

Please fill in your full name, mailing address, city of residence, phone number and e-mail address below. Submissions that do not include this information cannot be published. This information is seen only by the letters editors and is not used for any commercial purpose. We generally do not publish...

Please fill in your full name, mailing address, city of residence, phone number and e-mail address below. Submissions that do not include this information cannot be published. This information is seen only by the letters editors and is not used for any commercial purpose. We generally do not publish...

Report both sides of the story. The public demands and expects more from the Fourth Estate.

Peter S. Griffith, Arcadia

..

To the editor: Ive been shocked and deeply distressed by the Republican senators secrecy in crafting their healthcare bill, which should be at the forefront of public debate given its scope.

This latest effort by the Republican Senate leaves me feeling yet again like I no longer live in a democracy.

In order to counter this supreme lack of transparency and its harrowing impacts, it is the absolute duty of Californias Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris to make every effort to block this bill. Tactics should include withholding consent on routine matters until Republicans agree to hold hearings on this bill, and offering as many amendments as possible to delay the process.

This is an opportunity for leadership from the Democrats. We need to see that theyre willing to do everything in their power to fight for the welfare of their constituents.

Elizabeth de Mahy, Berkeley

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

See the original post:
Republicans' contempt for democracy shows in their secretive crafting of the Obamacare repeal bill - Los Angeles Times