Mediaboss Marketing

Bear any burden.

We're past the point of shifting blame. We know who gave us the presidency of Donald Trump, and it wasn't Hillary Clinton or Jill Stein or James Comey.

The culprit was democracy.

Even if you defend democracy on the grounds that Trump lost the popular vote, it's still a lame argument. After all, what kind of sensible political system generates 63 million votes for a thuggish incompetent to become its supreme leader?

Democracy was rarely an exercise in smooth sailing. Now, this.

"The choice of Mr. Trump, a man so signally lacking in the virtues, abilities, knowledge and experience to be expected of a president, has further damaged the attractions of the democratic system," wrote an exceedingly glum Martin Wolf in the Financial Times this week. "The soft power of democracy is not what it was. It has produced Mr. Trump as leader of the worlds most important country. It is not an advertisement."

Wolf isn't wrong, of course. If General Electric Co. had gone bonkers and installed Trump as CEO, the smart money would've deserted the company, fearing for its future. Yet what's to stop Trump from doing far more damage as president?

In an interview with Vox, political scientist Larry Bartels said:

History clearly demonstrates that democracies need parties to organize and simplify the political world. But parties dont make the fundamental problems of democratic control disappear; they just submerge them more or less successfully. When professional politicians are reasonably enlightened and skillful and the rules and political culture let them do their job, democracy will usually work pretty well. When not, not.

Democracy is not working pretty well in the U.S. Still, while there may be no reason to grant Trump himself patience, the democratic system itself has earned some.

Shashi Tharoor, a longtime United Nations official who is now a member of the Indian parliament, emailed:

Every system of government produces uneven results: There have been wise monarchs and feckless ones, capable benign dictators and incompetent ruthless ones, brilliant statesmen in democracies and people who owed their leadership positions to luck (the weakness of the alternatives) or merely inoffensiveness (the least unacceptable candidate). . . .

The strength of democracies is that because their leadership emerges from the will of the public as a whole, the system has a way of accommodating to them and very often, blunting their worst mistakes. Undemocratic systems have nowhere else to turn, and no established way of making the turn. So however flawed individual leaders may be, the self-correcting mechanisms built into democracy limit how much damage they can do.

Clear thinking from leading voices in business, economics, politics, foreign affairs, culture, and more.

Share the View

The nation's intelligence bureaucracies and news media are already shaking the foundation of the Trump presidency, leak by damaging leak. Courts are constraining some of the White House's baser impulses. Democratic and civil society opposition is fierce, and has been joined by a small but intellectually potent cohort of principled conservatives. Inflection points, from the scheduled testimony next week of former FBI director James Comey to the midterm elections in 2018, present opportunities to educate the public and strengthen resistance. Whether anything can induce Trump's Republican enablers to abandon him is unknown.

"If democracy produces a renewed commitment to democracy," said Harvard historian Jill Lepore in an email, "democracy is working."

In his book "The Confidence Trap," political scientist David Runciman pointed to the 1970s as an era in which democracy seemed to be marching haplessly toward failure, yet turned out to be gaining strength. In an interview with me last year he said:

Apparently the Chinese leadership is enjoying watching Trumps rise, because it seems to confirm all their suspicions of democracy: Its hucksterism plus stupidity. But in 1974 the Soviet leadership thought Watergate showed that democracy was finished. How could it survive such a scandal?

It survived, of course, and even thrived, eventually grinding down the Soviet Union. A similar emergence from the Trumpian ashes is possible. But it is not assured. Wolf is correct to worry that democracy everywhere is undermined by Trump anywhere. Yet with profound exceptions, democracy has been very good both to Americans and the world. Both may yet rally to the cause.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story: Francis Wilkinson at fwilkinson1@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Katy Roberts at kroberts29@bloomberg.net

Original post:
Democracy Faces the Enemy Within - Bloomberg

Asenior US foreign affairs official gaveone of the most awkward press conference responses ever witnessed in response to aquestion about Saudi Arabias attitude to democracy.

Having served as US Ambassador to Jordan and Iraq and been in Al Anbar Province in 2004, as it became the deadliest region for US forces in Iraq Stuart Jones might have been considered more than able to fend off questions about Saudi Arabias apparent lack of enthusiasm for elections.

Instead the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for the Near East Affairs Bureau, freshly returned from accompanying President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to Saudi Arabia, seemed completely stumped by the relatively straightforward reporters question.

He was asked: While you were over there, the Secretary criticised the conduct of the Iranian elections and Irans record on democracy. He did so standing next to Saudi officials. How do you characterise Saudi Arabias commitment to democracy, and does the administration believe that democracy is a buffer or a barrier against extremism?

Um, said Mr Jones.He took a deep breath. He tried again: Err

And then the senior State Department official fell completely silent. For 16 seconds, although to Mr Jones it may have seemed more like an eternity.

Behind his spectacles, Mr Jones seemed to be staring into space, lost in thought or panic possibly considering his response, perhaps hoping the ground would swallow him up, or maybe wondering why on Earth he hadnt wrapped up the press conference before allowing that one last question.

Finally, a full20 seconds after the question was asked a pause described by one experienced commentator as the longest ever seen from a US official Mr Jones managed a stuttering response.

It made no reference at all to attitudes to democracy in a kingdom where only three elections all of them merelyfor local councils have been allowed in 52 years.

The official State Department transcript seems to have tidied things up by removing the agonising pause and the hesitations, but the video shows Mr Jones full response to have been: I think what we would say is that, uh, at this meeting, we were able to, err, make significant progress with Saudi and GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] partners in, uh, both making a strong statement against extremism and also, um, and also putting errerr, putting in place certain measures through this GCC mechanism where we can combat extremism.

"Clearly one source of extremism one source one err terrorism threat is coming from Iran. And thats coming from a part of the Iranian apparatus that is not at all responsive to its electorate.

There is then yet another pause, Mr Jones staying stock still before a fellow State Department official says okay to indicate that the press conference is over. Mr Jones then quietly thanks the assembled reporters, collects his papers and exits before anyone is rude enough to ask a follow-up question.

In the aftermath, the reporter who asked the question, Dave Clark, AFPs Washington-based diplomatic correspondent, has shown admirable tact.

I asked about Saudi democracy, he said. I found his pause eloquent.

It was pretty awkward being there, added Mr Clark,originally from Newcastle.Especially as I wasnt trying to embarrass Jones himself.

In fairness to Mr Jones, characterising US ally Saudi Arabias attitude to democracy may require American officials to consider their words carefully.

Saudi Arabia has been a monarchy ruled by the Al Saud family since the kingdom was founded in 1932.Since then, elections of any sort have been rare. In the 40 years between 1965 and 2005 there were none at all.

This century, there have been three elections, in 2005, 2011 and 2015. All of them, however, were just elections for municipal councils whose powers were limited to local issues like street cleaning and rubbish collection.

In 2015, for the first time in the kingdoms history, women were allowed to vote and stand as candidates. Prior to that, the kingdoms Grand Mufti, its most senior religious figure, had described womens involvement in politics as opening the door to evil.

But in 2015, with women in Saudi Arabia still not permitted to drive or to address men who were not related to them, female election candidates could only speak directly to female voters.When attending gatherings of male voters, they had to speak from behind a partition or have a man read their speech for them.

At a national level, Saudi Arabia does have a consultative assembly, but the emphasis is very much on consultative. The Al Saud royal family continues to appoint the government, and no political parties are allowed.

All of which may explain Mr Joness difficulties.

Prior to facing Mr Clarks final, apparently unanswerable question, he had briefly discussed his impending retirement.It was, Mr Jones explained, a decision he had made more than a year ago, just a personal choice and nothing to do with the outgoing Obama and incoming Trump administrations, both of whom he had been delighted to serve.

His response, and the fact he gave it before facing Mr Clarks question, also shows that Mr Jones retirement was in no way related to his press conference performance.

He will, though, be missed by at least one reporter.

Im sad hes leaving, said Mr Clark.

Read more from the original source:
Senior US official reduced to very awkward silence when asked about Saudi Arabia's attitude to democracy - The Independent

The New American Leaders Project targets community leaders who are rooted in movement building and ready to champion an inclusive democracy.

Sayu Bhojwani speaks at an event for The New American Leaders Project, an organization whose aim is to prepare first- and second-generation immigrants to run for public office. (Photo courtesy of the New American Leaders Project)

I was only 13 when I first felt like a political outsider. I stood on my familys balcony, overlooking the central commercial square in Belize City, and watched rioters loot businesses and disrupt the rhythm of life in our otherwise sleepy and idyllic Caribbean home. It was 1981, and Belize was in the final months of its independence struggle. Some were happy with negotiations between Belize and Guatemala, which had long made territorial claims over Belize; others were not.During those weeks of turmoil, I discovered how fragile my parents felt in a country they had made their home. The feeling of not quite belonging is the blessing and burden of millions of immigrants no matter where we are. Its shaped not only my personal journey, but also my professional life over the last four decades.

The feeling of not quite belonging is the blessing and burden of millions of immigrants no matter where we are.

My family emigrated from India to Belize in 1971, when I was 4 years old. We had left a city with a population of nearly 6 million people for a city with 125,000 residents, a country where we were in the majority for a new home in which we were a conspicuous minority. A year after we moved, my parents heard of the sometimes violent expulsion of Indians from Uganda by Idi Amin. They lived with caution in their new homeland, fearing a similar fate.

Initially, my parents hoped to build an economic cushion and return to India. But in 1975, when then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi declared a state of emergency in India, they settled in for the long haul. My father joined the Lions Club, my mother gave birth to her fourth child, and together they built our familys retail business.

In 1981, when Belize won independence after decades of struggle, the British government gave Belizeans the option of retaining their British passports or obtaining new, Belizean ones. My parents chose the latter, in a show of loyalty and maybe even in an expression of fear.

I grew up in this way clunky in our patriotism and tentative in our political engagement.When I made my way to America, I brought that baggage with me but also felt the freedom of being a second-generation immigrant. With that freedom, a sense of entitlement overshadows a sense of hesitation.I still often feel like an outsider, but unlike my parents, who accept that as the price of their minority status, I fight it.Not just on my own behalf, but also on behalf of other immigrants like me, for whom America is their chosen home.

Ylenia Aguilar, who recently became a US citizen, was elected to the school board in Osborn School District in Phoenix, Arizona in 2016. (Photo courtesy of The New American Leaders Project)

Those early years of my life created the foundation for the work I do now helping to prepare first- and second-generation Americans to run for public office. This work is rooted in my personal journey of negotiating identity and navigating power. This parallel path is the heart of the immigrant narrative, isnt it? Understanding, loving, being who we are while learning, challenging, exploring how that makes us both powerless and powerful.

In my work at The New American Leaders Project, I search for these answers while attempting to help others find them. I am on the same journey as those we train leaning into our stories, our power, while recognizing that our fellow citizens are not all ready for these stories, this power.Our signature training targets community leaders who are rooted in movement building, self-aware and ready to be champions for an inclusive democracy.

Over a weekend, we teach three things, rooted in the values of authenticity, inclusivity and accountability. First and foremost, we help them explore their leadership journey, and how it has been informed by their own or their familys immigration story. With that as a foundation, they are able to craft an authentic stump speech based on the core values that motivate them to run for office.

Arizona State Rep. Athena Salman (Photo courtesy of The New American Leaders Project)

Second, our training encourages participants to think about how our current political system favors those who always vote instead of opening democracy up to new or low-efficacy voters. Often, these are immigrants or people of color who have not been invited to participate, and by reaching out to them, candidates can be far more inclusive.

Finally, we push back against the message that immigrants are takers, not makers. We suggest that our communities can and should be stakeholders in democracy by contributing to campaigns. This helps ensure that elected officials are accountable to the community, as voters and donors. At its core, our training is about creating a democracy that is stronger because everyone participates.

We know this model works because even in 2016, one of the most hate-filled election cycles in recent memory, 67 percent of our 39 alumni won their races for local and state office in Arizona, California, New York and Michigan. Now, these leaders from the newcomer communities most under attack in our society today American Muslims, the formerly undocumented, children of refugees are serving on school boards, city councils and state legislatures.

Among them are Ylenia-Aguilar, who is now a member of the school board in Osborn School District in Phoenix, Arizona. The election that brought Ylenia to the school board also happens to be the only election in which shes ever voted. Formerly undocumented, Ylenia, the parent of two boys who attend schools in the district she serves, had only recently become a citizen. She and her boys campaigned by knocking on doors and sharing her vision for schools with the districts residents. She was the top vote-getter in her election.

Lan Diep, the son of political refugees from Vietnam, was elected to the San Jose City Council in 2016. (Photo courtesy of The New American Leaders Project).

She is exceptional, but shouldnt be an exception. Today, she joins the under 2 percent of local and state elected officials who are Asian American and Latino, the two fastest growing immigrant groups in the country.

America is woefully unprepared for the diversity of its current residents and its future citizens.Our newish nation was designed for the benefit of white men, not to guarantee power and representation to a multiracial polity.Our democratic destiny is far from our demographic destiny. We need to change that.

Our democracy is stronger when everyone participates. No one knows that better than San Jose City Council Member Lan Diep, the son of political refugees from Vietnam, who lost his first election by 13 votes, ran the following year, and won by 12 votes.

Our policy is better when it reflects the needs of all Americans.Thats why Arizona State Rep. Athena Salman, another one of our graduates, read a humanist prayer on the House floor, asserting that We come from a variety of backgrounds and interests, but the passion that ignites us; the fire that burns within us; is similar.

Stephanie Chang is the first Asian-American woman elected to the Michigan House of Representatives. (Photo courtesy of The New American Leaders Project)

Our legislatures are more effective when they represent diverse perspectives.Stephanie Chang, the first Asian-American woman in the Michigan House of Representatives, brings her multiple identities as a Taiwanese American, a woman, a mother, and a District 6 resident to the table. Thats why she got 71 percent of the vote in the Democratic primary.

Even with Lan, Athena and Stephanie, were nowhere close to where we need to be for a representative multiracial democracy. That could be daunting for some people. For me, its motivating.

When I do this work, I am that girl on that balcony in that small country that my parents chose to bring me to, wishing I had a political voice. Like Maria Cruz Lee, a recent participant in our program, who never thought shed say, One day, Id vote for myself, I stand on the shoulders of my ancestors who felt silenced by fear. Our journey has been long, and there is a ways to go. But we are fueled by what New York City Council Member Carlos Menchaca calls our immigrant heart. A heart that is strong, open and unstoppable. A heart as American as any other.

The rest is here:
Former NYC Commissioner Is Helping Immigrants Run for Office - BillMoyers.com

By Maria Corina Machado By Maria Corina Machado May 31 at 7:00 AM

Maria Corina Machado (@MariaCorinaYA) is a leader of the opposition, head of the Vente Venezuela party and a former member of the Venezuelan National Assembly.

Venezuela is suffering a political, economic, social and moral nightmare that has turned our country into a failed state in the hands of criminals. Though there is a formula for halting and reversing this tragedy, time is clearly working against us. The cost of overcoming the crisis is immense, but not confronting it decisively, as we have already begun to do so, will have unbearable consequences.

It is urgent that we set out along this path.

With his latest dictatorial action of illegally convening a Constituent Assembly, Nicols Maduro has shut the door on Venezuelas last opportunity for a purely electoral solution. All institutional channels for demanding change such as a presidential recall referendum and regional elections had already been blocked by a regime that systematically violates civil liberties and human rights in order to remain in power.

Having no other recourse through which to assert our will, Venezuelans have poured onto the streets in protest for over 50 straight days, in an epic quest for the recovery of our democracy. Our resolve is irreversible, despite the regimes brutal response to our plight.

Fifty-seven citizens, most of them in their early twenties, have been killed. Thousands have been injured. And over 2,500 have been detained arbitrarily, some being summarily tried and sentenced by military courts, all for having exercised their constitutional right to peaceful protest.

Maduros regime can no longer hide its dictatorial nature from the world. International support for the democratic cause is overwhelming and internal support for the regime is eroding with every passing day. Former government loyalists, such as the Prosecutor General and justices of the Supreme Tribunal, have wisely chosen to stand by the Constitution and not by those who flagrantly violate it. Eighty percent of Venezuelas population demands a change in government. Faced with this inescapable fact, and no longer able to silence it, the small ruling clique has had no choice but to radicalize its repressive, murderous agenda even further.

The immediate course of action for change is clear and tangible. The following sequence of events will allow us to forge ahead:

Out on the streets, as Venezuelans, we will continue to escalate pressure by means of firm and peaceful protests, a fundamental right that is enshrined in our Constitution.

The armed forces must obey and enforce our Constitution. Soldiers must stop aiming their weapons at a defenseless citizenry fighting for their freedom. We expect that they will soon begin disobeying orders that require them to do so.

The international community must continue to remind the Venezuelan armed forces, and everyone in the chain of command, that crimes against humanity committed by the regimes repressors have no statute of limitations and will not go unpunished.

The National Assembly, elected through the votes of 14 million Venezuelans in December 2015, shall be recognized as the only branch of government with sufficient legitimacy of origin, attributes and capabilities necessary to safeguard an orderly process of transition to democracy.

The countrys political leadership is urgently committed to establishing a broad National Accord that will encompass all sectors of society, including all sympathizers of the current government who are willing to take part in a pluralistic framework and to adhere to the tenets of liberty, democracy, justice and universal human rights.

This National Accord, based on the undeniable legitimacy of the National Assembly, will give way to a transitional government of democratic unity, tasked with the mission of reestablishing the rule of law and sanity in Venezuela.

This process will prioritize the provision of humanitarian aid needed to put an end to our countrys health and hunger crisis, while addressing the internal security risks that stem from armed paramilitary elements threatening stability and governance. It will also enact measures aimed at immediate stabilization of the economy, as well as the crucial institutional recovery of our justice system and electoral branch. All political prisoners will be released.

Once the rule of law has been affirmed, the transitional government will be under the obligation to call for presidential elections, in a reasonable and prompt time frame. It is through free, universal, transparent and internationally observed elections that citizens will elect a new legitimate government and usher in a sovereign Venezuela.

Today, Venezuela is paying with the dear blood of our youth for the deliberate impoverishment of an entire nation, carried out by a corrupt elite through obscene, complicit deception. Rest assured that lessons have been learned. Dignity should not be mistaken for naivete. These are the final days of a brutish, mafia-style dictatorship, and we must maintain our guard as it prepares its final, desperate blows.

Now that we have understood our power in the path to freedom, Venezuela is more united than ever. We have arrived at the point where victory is palpable. Freedom is finally within our reach.

More:
Venezuela's epic quest to recover its democracy - The Washington ... - Washington Post

President Trump wants to siphon billions of dollars from public schools to fund private and religious school vouchers. Its an idea thats bad for kids, public education and our democracy.

Today, vouchers are used by less than 1% of the nations students. Trump and his Education secretary, Betsy DeVos, want to change that. Trumps new budget proposal would make historic cuts to federal education spending, while diverting $1 billion into voucher programs a down payment on his oft-repeated $20-billion voucher pledge. We believe the presidents plan would deal a terrible blow to public schools and to the 90% of Americas children who attend them, while doing almost nothing to benefit children who receive vouchers.

Although our organizations have sparred and disagreed over the years, such is the danger to public schooling posed by Trumps embrace of vouchers that we are speaking out together on this issue. The Trump-DeVos effort to push vouchers, or something equivalent through tax credits, threatens the promise and purpose of Americas great equalizer, public education.

At a time when low-income children make up the majority of public school students, we as a country must do more to support families, teachers, administrators and public schools. Trumps plan would do the opposite.

Public schools have never fully recovered from the Great Recession. Research, common sense and our collective experiences working with children, families and schools tell us that we must invest in, not cut back, public education. That means providing high-quality preschool for kids, and the social, health and mental health services they need. It means making sure students are reading at grade level by the end of third grade; that they have powerful learning opportunities, including career and technical training that can prepare them for college and work; and that they are guided by well-supported teachers and other education specialists. It means addressing the federal governments deep underfunding of special education and building a culture of collaboration among teachers, administrators, parents and communities.

The Trump-DeVos budget and voucher plans, while still lacking in details, would eliminate more than 20 education initiatives, including after-school and summer programs, career and technical education, teacher professional development and funding to lower class size. Public money would go instead to schools that lack the accountability and civil rights protections of public schools. DeVos alarmingly fueled these concerns during a congressional hearing last week, when she repeatedly declined to say the Department of Education would withhold vouchers from schools that discriminate, including against LGBT students or students with disabilities. She similarly sidestepped questions about accountability.

We believe taxpayer money should support schools that are accountable to voters, open to all, nondenominational and transparent about students progress. Such schools district and charter public schools are part of what unites us as a country.

Champions of an essentially unregulated, free-market approach to K-12 education, including DeVos, counter that theirs is a better path to helping students in need. But the facts show that where vouchers have been put into practice on a meaningful scale, they hurt student learning.

In April, the research arm of the Department of Education released a study of the federally mandated voucher program in Washington. It showed voucher students did worse in math than similar public school students, and it adds to a growing body of education research that concludes that vouchers may harm rather than help student achievement. In fact, the results of voucher tests, compared with other reforms, are the worst in the history of the field, according to Kevin Carey, education policy director at New America.

Administration officials have suggested what amounts to a back door way to increase the reach of vouchers: tax credits for corporations and the rich who contribute to third-party voucher funds. The nations School Superintendents Assn. looked at states where such credits are already in place and found that, in some cases, the donors have been able to make a profit off the backs of taxpayers and ultimately kids. And what Carey calls the shell game of moving money through these funds makes it difficult to account for how the money is spent.

The Trump administrations perverse priorities are increasingly clear: Impose the biggest cuts to federal education funding in memory and slash support to poor children and families by cutting Medicaid, food stamps and other programs, all while cutting taxes for the rich. It is an agenda that betrays millions of families seeking a better life, and one at odds with what this country stands for. Public schools are a fundamental engine of opportunity in this country. We will stand together to defend them.

Jonah Edelman is chief executive of Stand for Children, which advocates for quality public education. Randi Weingarten is president of the American Federation of Teachers.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

View original post here:
School vouchers don't just undermine public schools, they ... - Los Angeles Times