Mediaboss Marketing

Crucially, structural adjustment programmes and the Washington Consensus need to be replaced though preferably not by China simply replacing the US as the global hegemon. Yanis Varoufakis and his colleagues propose a new global economic architecture whereby, to keep the world economy in balance, national surpluses and deficits would both be taxed, with the funds raised being channeled into a Global Green New Deal. They also want to change property rights, so that 10% of the shares of large companies are placed into a global equity fund and the dividends disbursed as a global universal basic dividend. Over time this percentage could increase until we end up with a kind of world-wide market-based socialism.

An alternative vision is for deglobalisation. Instead of entire countries being turned into massive export processing zones, Walden Bellos deglobalisation paradigm advocates production primarily for local markets. Trade and industrial policy including subsidies, quotas and tariffs would be used to protect local markets from flooding by corporate-subsidized commodities and strengthen manufacturing sectors. Measures for land and income redistribution would be taken, helping to create vibrant local markets and local sources of financial investment. Meanwhile, the multilateral bodies like the WTO, World Bank and IMF that have been vehicles for neo-imperialism would be replaced by regional institutions built on cooperation instead of free trade and capital mobility.

Some are squeamish about the idea of deglobalisation, worrying that it means nationalist isolationism and indeed, that is what the term has come to stand for in its nativist iteration (though this is wildly different from what Bello has in mind). More fundamentally, there is a question mark over whether a system of nation-states competing within the framework of global capitalism no matter how attenuated that version of capitalism might be can ever really transcend economic imperialism and trade wars (or actual wars for that matter).

Yet shortening supply chains, at least for essential items like food, seems like a no brainer from an environmental as well as a global justice perspective. Lets carry on our thought experiment of imagining a future beyond the nation-state: instead of states competing for resources on a lopsided playing field, we can envision the stewardship of commons by local communities that are relatively self-sufficient but networked transnationally. There would be no need to squabble over resources because instead of a logic of scarcity there would be a logic of abundance. This doesnt mean that everyone in the world would suddenly be able to fly every week or own a Ferrari we are living within planetary boundaries here. Murray Bookchin wrote that real abundance is not about being able to satisfy an infinite parade of desires, but having the collective autonomy to choose our needs (i.e. decide whats important), and work out how to satisfy them together therein lies true freedom.

The response to Covid-19 has put us at risk from encroaching authoritarianism and has further exposed the lack of trust people already had in their political systems. In liberal democracies, the decades of neoliberalism have hollowed out democratic institutions, as power has been transferred to transnational corporations. Politics has become about marketing and spin, and citizens are treated as consumers.

Meanwhile, spreading democracy has been a cover for the invasion and occupation of territories that were supposed to be sovereign by imperial powers. Marxists, anarchists and feminists have long asked whether capitalism is compatible with democracy at all. The gap between what liberal democracy promises in theory and what it has delivered has led to many people punting on illiberal democracy instead, with anti-democratic leaders being democratically elected.

If we are going to put the brakes on the ecological and social catastrophes under way, we will need to democratise democracy. Its not for nothing that one of Extinction Rebellions key demands is for citizens assemblies. The rapid transformations we will need to our social structures will have to be decided upon collectively, if we are to avoid eco-authoritarianism or eco-fascism. Peoples assemblies, town halls, participatory budgeting, citizens juries, and properly resourced, empowered local governments will be key.

Democratising democracy obviously means taking big money out of politics, but it also means removing the line that separates politics from the economy. In liberal democracies, huge swathes of society are out of reach of the decision-making powers of the citizenry. That will need to change. As discussed, we will need workplace and economic democracy, where fundamental decisions about provisioning are made by everyone, not just ruling elites.

The question of scale arises again here. Democracy isnt really democratic if the resources people are enjoying in one part of the world are actually being pilfered from other parts of the world, or if they are producing environmental impacts felt elsewhere. One proposal to ameliorate this is to introduce democracy on a global scale through a world parliament, where every citizen in the world would be able to directly elect representatives.

Others have criticised the idea of a world parliament as universalising a single version of politics and imposing it onto the entire globe, thereby reproducing the colonising drive it is supposed to combat. They prefer the idea of unity in diversity in the Zapatistas words: one world where many worlds fit. In this vision, the issue of scale would be addressed horizontally rather than vertically with autonomous communities working together to solve large-scale problems.

Citizens assemblies and town halls are about supplementing representative democracy with more direct forms of democracy. Down the line, we could take this much further. The horizontal, confederalist approach described above has direct democracy at its core. Direct democracies already exist Chiapas and Rojava are famous examples, and there are many impulses towards what Ashish Kothari calls Radical Ecology Democracy. Here, the commune or neighbourhood is the basic political unit, with people meeting face to face to make the decisions that affect their lives. For larger-scale issues, there are representative local assemblies and municipal councils, but these are accountable to the grassroots level.

These movements reject the nation-state as the locus of sovereignty, viewing the state as inextricably bound up with environmental destruction, repression and patriarchy. Radical Ecology Democracy instead advocates local custodianship of the commons combined with bio- and eco-regionalism. Crucially, to avoid repeating the patriarchy of the state, these direct democracies must be and are explicitly feminist, enshrining gender equality in their constitutions and instituting women-led committees on womens rights. And again, thinking about local communities as the locus of sovereignty doesnt have to mean parochialism and isolation. On the contrary, going beyond the nation-state can mean removing borders to the free flow of people and ideas.

Globally, women carry out 76% of unpaid labour mainly domestic and care work, which takes place inside the home. The family home can also be a dangerous and even deadly place for queer people and women, as one in three women suffer violence, usually by an intimate partner. The pandemic has intensified these problems and brought them further into the light. Given the reaction to an article we published on ourEconomy on the coronavirus and the family, challenging this most fundamental of institutions can make people, erm, emotional. If youre lucky, the family is also the source of deep bonds of love the stuff that makes life worth living, another thing that the virus has driven home.

But, as the authors of Feminism for the 99% point out, the unique feat of capitalism was to separate the public from the private, delegate the private to women and banish it to the home. Without the unpaid and invisible domestic, care and emotional work of women, the capitalist economy would not be able to run. Because it is women who carry out most of this reproductive labour, it is also women who are on the front line of environmental breakdown; as they are the main providers of food and fuel, they are worse impacted by flooding and drought. The U.N. estimates 80% of those who have been displaced by climate change are women.

Under neoliberalism, women are being more and more squeezed, making up an increasing proportion of the paid workforce as well as doing the vast majority of unpaid work. This has led to the erection of vast global care chains, as women who can afford to outsource their unpaid work to less well off women, often from the global south, who have their own families to care for. These gendered and racialised structures need to be transformed.

Read more here:
How to fix the world - Open Democracy

Want to know why many areas in the Philippines have been in lockdown for more than 45 days now, nearly 8,000 Filipinos have been infected by the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 with more than 530 dead, the economy damaged, many facing unemployment or bankruptcies, the education of our youth made uncertain?

To borrow Marc Thiessens answer: Because China is a brutal totalitarian dictatorship.

We are in the midst of a pandemic lockdown today because the Chinese Communist regime cared more about suppressing information than suppressing a virus. Doctors in Wuhan knew in December that the coronavirus was capable of human-to-human transmission because medical workers were getting sick. But as late as Jan. 15, the head of Chinas Center for Disease Control and Prevention declared on state television that the risk of human-to-human transmission is low. On Jan. 18, weeks after President Xi Jinping had taken charge of the response, authorities allowed a Lunar New Year banquet to go forward in Wuhan where tens of thousands of families shared food and then let millions travel out of Wuhan, allowing the disease to spread across the world. It was not until Jan. 23 that the Chinese government enacted a quarantine in Wuhan. (This virus should be forever linked to the regime that facilitated its spread, March 18, 2020)

For a time, when China appeared to have domestically managed the pandemic it created, the sense of glee amongst its propagandists, including those here in the Philippines, was palpable. The US system doesnt work they say. Democracy is inefficient. Freedom is overrated. All this with the obvious intent of advocating that the Philippines turn away from its democratic, human rights, and rule of law values, and copy instead Chinas totalitarianism.

Or in other words: Give up your rights and just do what we say.

Unfortunately, for them, they celebrated too soon. China was shortly thereafter required to upwardly adjust its fatality numbers by 50%. Wuhan, the first city afflicted with the China coronavirus, is still reeling from the pandemic. And just last week, Hubin, a city of 10 million residents, was summarily locked down.

Twenty-one million mobile phone subscriptions have also been canceled, which, though not necessarily corresponding exactly to deaths, is still a significant indicator of the damage China inflicted on itself. Not subject to speculation though is Chinas 6.8% drop in economic growth, its lowest level in 30 years.

Compare that with the fairly successful efforts of Taiwan. Most experts were predicting catastrophic deaths due to its close proximity to China. And yet Taiwan, as of this writing, has only 429 infections and six deaths. With no lockdown, with great transparency, no loss of human rights, and its businesses continuing to operate.

Of course all eyes are on Sweden, with some 19,621 infected and 2,355 dead. Yet, it fares favorably when compared to the Netherlands, the UK, France, Italy, and Belgium on deaths per 100,000 population. Without a lockdown.

And all indications are the Swedes have already weathered the worst. With a fairly unscathed economy, Sweden is now better placed to confront a coronavirus second wave should it happen.

And contrary to the misleading information given out by mainstream and social media, even the country that progressives and leftists love to hate, the US under President Donald Trump, is relatively doing well.

Yes, the US has nearly a million infected and over 56,259 dead. Yet Johns Hopkins data shows the US with one of the lowest death rates per 100,000 compared to other major countries. This without undue restriction on freedoms in most of the US States. Seven states, in fact, have little to no restrictions. Remember, it is the State governors, not Trump, that have the power to declare lockdowns in their individual states.

Only 13 to 15 US states have stringent lockdowns. And interestingly, it is the States that turned away from their democratic foundations, led by progressive leftist governors, that have the most infections and fatalities. The top four states New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California alone account for 50% of US cases, with the rest scattered across the country in comparably minimal numbers.

Democracy may have stumbled in the early goings but it has ultimately proven more effective than authoritarianism or totalitarianism. National Democratic Institutes Adam Nelson is right: A vital yet overlooked antidote to pandemics [is] democracy. While the virus spreads, Chinas crackdown on freedom of expression has created an environment where doctors are stifled, the free flow of information is curtailed, health recommendations are ignored and the death toll rises.

Open societies are simply more able to harness creativity, innovation, energy, motivation, and optimism in people. In relation to pandemics, transparency allows a better grasp of the situation, while encouraging its people to find the best solutions and cure.

All the while retaining the benefits of human dignity and rights.

Lets hope and work that in beating this pandemic, Filipinos also gain a better appreciation of and work harder to uphold democracy and civil liberties.

Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence.

https://www.facebook.com/jigatdula/

Twitter @jemygatdula

Read this article:
Democracy versus the coronavirus - BusinessWorld Online

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is assuring voters that upcoming elections will not falter despite the coronavirus pandemic, making sure that no citizen has to choose between their health and the right to vote.

Last week, Benson joined a virtual townhall hosted by Emgage, a Muslim American civic engagement organization, where she talked about absentee voting and election workers.

With the current health crisis, Benson is encouraging voters to cast ballots by mail. All eligible and registered voters in Michigan may now request an absent voter ballot without providing a reason after a constitutional change during the 2018 election. Nearly a million voters took advantage of their new right in the presidential primary election last month.

The right to vote by mail for every citizen in our state isnot changing. Its going to be available in every election this year, and every election will be held this year. For citizens that are able and want to exercise that right, you can request your ballot be mailed to you directly. You can find that request from on our website or with your local clerk. Simply fill it out, sign it and return it and when the time comes you will receive your ballot in August and November, Benson said. I encourage you to do that, and to encourage members of your community to do that as well. Oftentimes people dont know they have that right, and if they do they dont know how to access it.

Many jurisdictions have decided to postpone their May election to August, but communities that need to hold their election in May will do so primarily by mail. All registered voters were mailed applications to apply for an absentee ballot, along with postage paid return envelopes if they had a May election scheduled.

Clerk offices will remain open through election day for voters with disabilities and people who forget to mail their ballot in time and need to drop it off, and must be available for any same-day voter registrations.

Senator Ruth Johnson, former secretary of state and chair of the state Senate Elections Committee, called the vote-by-mail plan an absolute disaster. She had been urging Governor Whitmer to push the elections to August.

Senator Ruth Johnson

Ive been begging them to reschedule and consolidate with August, I warned them of all the potential problems and now what were seeing is even worse than feared, she said. We saw these issues in Wisconsin. People reported never getting an absentee ballot they request or a ballot they completed not getting back to the clerk in time to be counted.

Due to Michigans robust vote by mail option, Benson says we are better positioned to avoid a situation much like what happened in Wisconsin during their recent in-person presidential primary.

Milwaukee election officials announced the city would open only five polling locations for the primary. The city typically has 180 voting cities, but axed other locations due to mass poll worker shortages.

In Michigan, were much better positioned to avoid a situation like what happened in Wisconsin from the get-go. We have a robust vote by mail program that is established, it is sacrosanct, it is in our constitution and weve been working to implement it effectively since I took office over a year ago, Benson said. The vote by mail system was created by voters. Because of that, so many voters already want to do it and believe in the system.

For now, communities with scheduled elections are moving ahead with preparations to ensure voters and poll workers safety. Election workers will be provided with PPE equipment, and Bensons office is developing physical distancing guidelines.

Were working to ensure that all voters can have confidence when they access their vote, however they choose to access it in an election this year, that their vote will be counted safely and securely, and were putting protections in place for all who are working elections as well so they can do their essential job safely and securely, Benson said.

Bensons office is aggressively recruiting new election workers, as many of the seniors who usually serve and staff elections may not want to risk in-person interactions on the next election day. The recently launched Democracy MVP program encourages citizens to sign up to be an election worker to assist clerks and count ballots. Workers will not serve at traditional polling places, and will adhere to strict public health guidelines. Learn more and fill out the interest form at Michigan.gov/DemocracyMVP.

Over 1,600 people applied in 10 days to be a part of the program, which is four times whats needed for the May 5 election, according to Benson. However, she encourages citizens to continue to sign up.

We are at a very unique and critical moment in the history of our country. But as much as theres a health crisis, as much as theres an economic crisis, theres also a potential crisis for our democracy if we dont preserve the access and integrity of our elections, Benson said. That requires all of us as citizens to stand up and ensure that our democracy stays on schedule, thats why were moving forward with our elections.

Read the original post:
Secretary of State: 'Democracy will not falter in age of COVID-19' - Spinal Column Online

Has the fourth estate overstepped the mark, piling undue pressure on a beleaguered British government doing its utmost to navigate through a national catastrophe that was not of its own making? Thats certainly the conclusion of our political masters, who three weeks ago briefed that their polling showed public dissatisfaction with gotcha questions from journalists.

It is the verdict, too, of Robbie Gibb, the former BBC head of political programming who became director of communications under Theresa May. Journalists at press conferences were asking questions through the prism of political culpability and were hunting for government U-turns, he claimed, suggesting they focus on medical queries about the virus instead. Even Lord Sugar chimed in, arguing that the public do not want or need to blame, let alone require constant criticism of our government, who are doing their very best in a very difficult and unprecedented global emergency.

Why are government outriders so keen to delegitimise scrutiny, to portray any questioning as sabotage; to cast dissent as embittered opponents opportunistically lashing out, contemptuous of Boris Johnsons mystical connection with the British electorate? As it happens, polling finds that the newspaper most consistently critical of the governments strategy this one has been judged to be doing the best job of covering the pandemic by the public; the most pro-government newspaper, the Sun, the worst job. Independent polling has not shown any public backlash against a supposedly excessively critical media: it is a myth.

Far from being a victim of partisan skulduggery, the government is facing little scrutiny for the largest civilian death toll outside of conflict. In the middle of March, the governments chief scientific adviser, Chris Whitty, declared that keeping coronavirus deaths below 20,000 would be a good outcome. As of today the official number of coronavirus deaths in hospitals and in the community stands at more than 26,000, making the UK the third-worst-hit country in the world, behind Italy and the US. We are still at least a year away from developing a vaccine.

So when Johnson simultaneously insults and deceives the nation, saying, many will be looking at our apparent success, where is the deafening outrage at a prime minister who has made Britain an international case study in what not to do in a pandemic? A fortnight after assuming the premiership, Johnson declared that our first duty is to protect the public in the most basic way. He has betrayed that most basic and sacred responsibility of government.

The governments attempt to airbrush from history their embrace of herd immunity a policy even Donald Trump denounced as catastrophic has been aided and abetted by a largely supine media. Instead of being opposed, the strategy was facilitated by some parts of the media. While Lombardy in northern Italy appeared consumed by a biblical disaster, ITVs Robert Peston was writing an article headlined Herd immunity will be vital to stopping coronavirus.

When the British government abandoned contact tracing after 10 deaths and 590 confirmed cases, it made a choice. If we hadnt stopped it on 12 March, our epidemic would have been much less, as Anthony Costello, a professor of global health, puts it. They effectively allowed it to spread. As the virus passed from person to person, the country had insufficient surgical gowns, visors, swabs or body bags, because the government had failed to buy personal protective equipment in its pandemic stockpile. Now ministers clap and cheer the key workers they left exposed to a deadly illness. If the media cannot land a blow on the government for decisions that lead to thousands of avoidable deaths, then what is it for?

The systematic attempt to stifle even mild attempts by the media to hold government to account is itself dangerous. A fortnight ago, a senior cabinet source told the Telegraph: We didnt want to go down this route in the first place public and media pressure pushed the lockdown, we went with the science. If there had been more determination by the media to challenge the governments decision to make Britain an international outlier in the pandemic, lockdown may have happened earlier and thousands of lives could have been spared. Decisions made by our government have left us one of the most devastated nations on Earth. The cost? Personal suffering as thousands of families mourn the loss of loved ones and unnecessarily grave economic and social turmoil. If our democracy cannot hold our government to account for turning an inevitable tragedy into an avoidable national catastrophe, then it has failed altogether.

Owen Jones is a Guardian columnist

Here is the original post:
If we can't criticise the government for avoidable deaths, what's the point of democracy? - The Guardian

Vice President Mike Pence, who leads the White House coronavirus task force, refused to wear a mask Tuesday as he met with doctors and patients at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota. After the tour, Pence was asked by reporters why he violated a Mayo Clinic policy requiring everyone in the hospital to wear a face covering or mask.

Vice President Mike Pence: Let me say, as vice president of the United States, Im tested for the coronavirus on a regular basis, and everyone who is around me is tested for the coronavirus. And since I dont have the coronavirus, I thought itd be a good opportunity for me to be here, to be able to speak to these researchers, these incredible healthcare personnel, and look them in the eye and say thank you.

On Tuesday, the Mayo Clinic tweeted that it had informed Vice President Pence of the masking policy prior to his arrival. Later in the day, the tweet was deleted without explanation.

Continue reading here:
Pence Refuses to Wear Face Mask During Tour of Mayo Clinic - Democracy Now!