Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

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

From War to Cholera, Yemen Is Facing World’s Largest Humanitarian Crisis – Democracy Now!

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: So, talk about what is happening right now in Yemen, how devastating the situation is.

KRISTINE BECKERLE: Its hard to describe in words how devastating it is, to be totally frank. So what youve got is what the U.N. describes as the worlds largest humanitarian crisis. And that means thousands upon thousands of cases of cholera, famine for millions across the country, and, on top of that, youve got parties at war who have been fighting for now more than two-and-a-half years, who seem to have no regard for the ways in which that war is affecting the civilian population. Human Rights Watch has documented over 80 apparently unlawful coalition attacks in Yemen that have hit schools, markets, homes, hospitals. Last Sunday, we heard new reports about them hitting a market, killing around 20 people. And this iswhat weve seen is these attacks continuing and there being very little response in terms of the international community pushing for either the attacks to stop or accountability for the attacks that have already occurred.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn to the U.N. emergency relief coordinator, Stephen OBrien, addressing the U.N. Security Council late last month.

STEPHEN OBRIEN: Yemen now has the ignominy of being the worlds largest food security crisis, with more than 17 million people who are food-insecure, 6.8 million of whom are one step away from famine. Crisis is not coming. It is not even looming. It is here today, on our watch, and ordinary people are paying the price. ... It is important to bear in mind that malnutrition and cholera are interconnected. Weakened and hungry people are more likely to contract cholera and less able to survive it. According to estimates, 150,000 cases are projected for the next six months, in addition to the broadly 60,000 current suspected cases since last April with 500 associated deaths. The scale of this latest outbreak is, as well as being depressingly predictable, a direct consequence of the conflict. And had the parties to the conflict cared, the outbreak was avoidable.

AMY GOODMAN: This is U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Stephen OBrien addressing the U.N. Security Council. I want to ask you, Kristine Beckerle, about Human Rights Watchs call for an arms embargo on Yemen.

KRISTINE BECKERLE: So, weve been calling for an arms embargo on Saudi Arabia, in particular, given the sort of strength of the evidence that has mounted against Saudi Arabia, in particular, as the leader of the coalition, in terms of carrying out war crimes and violations of the laws of war in Yemen. Others have echoed that callAmnesty, many other NGOs. And whats amazing is, lastjust recently, 47 senators in the U.S. tried to block an arms sale to Saudi Arabia. So youre seeing governments across the globe, basicallybecause, in the U.K., arms sales also are subject to judicial review. The Netherlands has imposed a presumption of denial on arms sales to Saudi Arabia. So youre seeing countries really take steps.

But its not enough, because, in the end, the U.S. arms sale is going forward. In the end, Donald Trump went to Riyadh and said, "Heres $110 billion in arms." In the end, the U.S. is still providing significant support to the coalition, that is carrying out these attacks in Yemen, and, as we just heard in terms of the humanitarian crisis, also blocking, impeding and delaying the flow of aid into a country that, again, is facing famine and cholera.

AMY GOODMAN: And the major winners heresince Trump talks about winners and losersthe weapons manufacturers here in the United States?

KRISTINE BECKERLE: Basically, right? So, its one of those things where youre seeing, in a very gross way, the prioritization of profit over civilian lives. And its sort ofat what point do you sort of take the step and say its not worth it to sell another weapons deal, when it not only means that, first, the message youre sending to Yemeni civilians is that you dont care, and, second, that what youre saying to U.S. officials who are involved in these deals, that "Dont worry. Just take the risk of potential legal liability and move forward, and things will be fine"? And I think that thats quite problematic, again, because this isnt a new war. These allegations arent hidden or secret. Nothing is unknown. So the U.S. and other arms manufacturers and arms sellers cant say they dont know. So the question is: OK, now you know; when are you actually going to take the action you need to take?

Link:
From War to Cholera, Yemen Is Facing World's Largest Humanitarian Crisis - Democracy Now!

Is American Democracy Really Under Threat? – The Atlantic – The Atlantic

The White Houses increasing inaccessibility to the press; the violence against lawmakers and journalists; the apparent ease with which Russia preyed on Americans deep political divisions and distrust of government; and the presidents efforts to delegitimize the media, his opponents, unfavorable court rulings, and independent investigations into his campaigns ties with Moscow, have all contributed to a sense that American democracy is battered and besieged.

America is no more immune from collapse than were some of historys most stable and impressive consensual governments, Victor Davis Hanson wrote last week in National Review. Fifth-century Athens, Republican Rome, Renaissance Florence and Venice, and many of the elected governments of early 20th-century Western European states eventually destroyed themselves, went bankrupt, or were overrun by invaders.

America Isn't Having a Constitutional Crisis

Whoa now. Is the United States really in such bad shape? Two recent expert surveys help put the countrys challenges in perspective. They highlight precisely where the U.S. political system is currently strongest and weakest. And together they convey a message that is at once reassuring and unsettling: America isnt end-times Athens or pre-Vichy France. Far from it. But nor, in certain respects, is it a healthy democracy.

In May, amid the fallout from Donald Trumps firing of FBI Director James Comey, the democracy-monitoring group Bright Line Watch polled more than 1,000 political scientists in the United States on whether America was adhering to a list of 29 democratic principles. What they found is that the vitality of American democracy depends on your definition of democracy. The U.S. performed well on measures of free expression but poorly on measures of political civility and equality, with the quality of elections and checks and balances on power earning mixed results.

Most respondents agreed, for instance, that the U.S. government met democratic standards for protecting the right to protest, preventing electoral fraud, deterring political violence, and not interfering with the press. But most disagreed that the U.S. met standards for granting citizens an equal opportunity to vote, stopping officials from exploiting their public office for private gain, and conducting politics and formulating policy based on a common acceptance of basic facts or expert consensus.

Relative to a similar survey in February, in the early days of the Trump administration, the political scientists voiced greater concern about several principles, many of which involve constraints on executive power and relate to two of the most prominent elements of Trumps presidency so far: the travel ban and Russia investigations.

Bright Line Watch also asked respondents to assess on a 0 to 100 scale the overall performance of American democracy at the moment, and to do the same for other periods in U.S. history. With the caveat that evaluating the present is different than evaluating the past (especially the distant past), heres what Bright Line Watch found: The quality of democracy generally improved from the nations founding to 1975increasingly most steeply after 1950 with the passage of civil-rights and voting-rights legislationbefore plateauing for decades and then dipping to pre-1975 levels at the dawn of the Trump Era. (As The New York Times cautions, the Bright Line Watch survey is not based on a representative sample of political scientists, and academics tend to be more liberal than the general public.)

A poll by another democracy-monitoring project, the Authoritarian Warning Survey, helps place Americas political problems in an international context. In May, 68 democracy scholars compared the behavior of American political leaders since January to the typical behavior of politicians in other mature democracies. On average, the United States was judged to be within the norm for consolidated democracies in terms of the rejection of political violence and the protection of civil liberties. It was considered to be just outside the norm when it comes to constraints on executive power, respect for an independent press, and commitment to free and fair elections in which political opponents are treated as legitimate. And, most remarkably, it was deemed significantly outside the norm on political rhetoric that honors democratic principles. When asked what recent development posed the greatest threat to American democracy, the most common response was Trumps dismissal of Comey.

In his analysis of the results, Michael Miller, one of the academics behind the Authoritarian Warning Survey, noted that the respondents expressed greater alarm about democratic breakdown in the United States than one would expect based on traditional indicators of the fragility of democracy in a given country, including average income, literacy rates, the age of the democratic system, and the percentage of democracies in the broader region. A model with these variables created by Miller put the chances of American democracy collapsing within four years at 1 in 6,700, which makes the United States one of the worlds most secure democracies, roughly on par with Belgium. (Its worth noting that Belgium has its own democratic problemsit once went 589 days without an elected government between 2010 and 2011and that Switzerland looks far more stable than the United States, with the odds of democratic breakdown in the next four years about 1 in 32,500.) The participants in Millers survey, by contrast, on average estimated the odds of the U.S. not resembling a democracy in four years at 11 percent.

Yet this is a highly unlikely future for the United States, Miller argued. [T]he most likely downward path for American democracy is not full breakdown, but a steady erosion of democratic norms and practices as seen in countries such as Poland and the Philippines in recent years, he wrote. Democracy experts generally agree that the U.S. has started down this path, but remain cautious about how far it will go before turning back.

Its tempting to be heartened by the fact that the survey respondents were most concerned about political rhetoric since rhetoric is short of action, Miller added. But anti-democratic rhetoric can erode the norms holding democratic compacts together. Anti-democratic language today, he warned, can predict anti-democratic behavior tomorrow.

Here is the original post:
Is American Democracy Really Under Threat? - The Atlantic - The Atlantic