Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

Public education and maintaining democracy [letter] | Letters To The Editor | lancasteronline.com – LNP | LancasterOnline

Our nations Founding Fathers assumed that candidates for elected office would be God-fearing, moral, highly principled folks committed to the ideals enshrined in the Constitution.

To further safeguard the integrity of the American experiment, the states established free, public schooling (Horace Manns Common School Movement), equipping future voters with the ability to differentiate statesmanship from political chicanery.

Specifically, the schools were charged with teaching citizens to separate fact from opinion; to recognize authors and speakers biases, purposes and intended audiences; to identify inconsistencies and contradictions in written and oral discourse; to draw conclusions based upon relevant, timely and influential facts; and to remain open-minded by setting aside personal feelings.

When followership abandons these aforementioned problem-solving techniques, democracy is imperiled.

Sustaining a democratic form of government requires cognitive effort and critical thinking on the part of those who elect their representatives. Once elected, these government servants must be held accountable by their constituencies. While in office, oversight should be wielded by Congress itself but, ultimately, the voting public passes judgment by exercising its will to reelect (or not).

It is my hope and prayer that statesmen and stateswomen who are committed to the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution, the uplifting of all people, the pursuit of justice, fairness and domestic tranquility will replace self-serving ideologues whose conduct can be described as hateful and treasonous. Their conduct also seems fearful and beset by feelings of perceived persecution, which scapegoat the disenfranchised for ones imagined loss of past bounties.

For my prayer to be answered, those casting ballots Nov. 5 must vote rationally, reasonably and empathetically, while minimizing prejudices, biases, distortions and uncritically accepted false narratives.

James L. DeBoy

West Lampeter Township

Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.

Error! There was an error processing your request.

More:
Public education and maintaining democracy [letter] | Letters To The Editor | lancasteronline.com - LNP | LancasterOnline

Voters sound off on disinformation and democracy – theday.com

Story comments on theday.com are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. Please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report" link included on every post.

Please note that comments are monitored by theday.com staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove comments that are off-topic, unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code of any kind, or include hyperlinks to objectionable material may not be posted.

Read the full policy here.

Close

Go here to read the rest:
Voters sound off on disinformation and democracy - theday.com

South Africa’s ‘Born Frees’ Are Disillusioned With Democracy – New Lines Magazine

Three decades ago, on April 27, 1994, a seismic shift reverberated across South Africa. After centuries of white minority rule and legalized racial segregation, Black South Africans stepped into the polling stations to cast their votes in general elections for the first time.

It was a historic moment marking the official end of apartheid, a system that had entrenched racial segregation and denied basic freedoms to Black South Africans. Just days later, Nelson Mandela, the head of the African National Congress (ANC), was inaugurated as the countrys first Black president, symbolizing hope and the dawn of a new era of equality, liberty and justice. The ANC was swept to power on a tidal wave of Black enthusiasm as previously disenfranchised voters voted for the first time, motivated by promises of a better life for all.

Three decades later, that promise rings hollow for millions across the rainbow nation, a term coined by Archbishop Desmond Tutu to describe the multicultural diversity of post-apartheid South Africa.

For the born free generation those who were born after the 1994 transition, the oldest of whom mark their 30th birthdays this year 2024 marks a bittersweet milestone, as the anniversary of apartheids demise coincides with another important event on May 29, when South Africans go to the polls to elect their new government.

The born frees were supposed to be the first generation to experience true freedom and equality in a democratic South Africa. However, the reality for many of these young South Africans is far from what was promised.

Dreams of middle-class life in the lush suburbs of South Africa, or even of affluence, have instead been met by the nightmare of continued poverty, deteriorating services and power blackouts on a scale unimaginable in a country once considered a beacon of hope and shining example for the rest of Africa.

On paper, and in the minds of South Africas ruling classes, the rupture of 1994 has brought about some profound changes to the social landscape. The advent of democracy has helped to create a growing Black middle class, increased access to education across racial lines and restored basic human dignity to Black South Africans.

South Africa also boasts a constitution hailed as one of the most progressive in the world. It enshrines the rights of all citizens, regardless of race, religion, gender and sexuality, and is celebrated for clearly defining and practicing key democratic principles. Yet despite its lauded constitution, the reality on the ground tells a different story of poverty and extreme inequality.

Tessa Dooms, author of The Colored, a book that delves into the history of mixed-race people in South Africa, and who is mixed-race herself, says that the born frees are disillusioned with the concept of democracy in South Africa. The lack of development in South Africa is giving democracy a bad name. We are one of the few countries in the world that tick the boxes of good governance but our people are not seeing the benefits and dividends of democracy. The youth are struggling to transition into having a fully fledged life. All they know from birth is democracy, and democracy only, so they think its democracys fault, she told New Lines.

Katlego Mahoa, a 30-year-old hairdresser from Soshanguve in Pretoria, voiced her disappointment at the countrys failure to live up to its rhetoric: I was born three months after the historic elections and as I was growing up I would hear stories from my grandmother and my mother about the dark apartheid days. In all fairness, we now have the freedom to move wherever we want to, vote for who we want, live where we want but honestly, that is not the reality. We are still living in an unjust society.

In a startling survey by Afrobarometer, a pan-African research network, taken prior to South Africas 2019 elections, it was revealed that 70% of South Africans were willing to trade elections for jobs and security. Five years down the line, this sentiment is still alive in parts of the country.

Kgomotso Modise, a 31-year-old recovering drug addict, said he turned to drugs out of hopelessness after failing to finish primary school. This led him to the streets, where he got hooked on nyaope (a street cocktail drug composed of cannabis and heroin, bulked out with powder-based substances including antiretrovirals).

Eish, he said, expressing annoyance, life in the ghettos is no walk in the park. We struggle to make ends meet and are driven to get involved in criminal activities. Where is the better life that we were promised? Where are the jobs and good schools in the shanties? Mara [but in South African slang], we were better off in white regime.

As the country gears up for its seventh election since the end of apartheid, the nation faces a myriad of challenges that threaten its progress. Almost 12 million people between the ages of 18 and 30, the born frees, will form one of the major voting blocs in the most contested election since the ANC took power in 1994.

Polls suggest South Africa is headed for a historic turning point in the upcoming election. For the first time, the ruling ANC could lose its outright majority. In 1994, the ANC won 62.6% of the vote. In 2014, the ruling party garnered 62.2%, which later fell to 57.7% in 2019.

This decline in the ANCs fortunes is directly linked to its failure to drastically change the lives of the majority of Black people. The latter rallied solidly behind the party when the winds of change blew across the South African political landscape in 1994 and repeatedly came back to the polls in its support, despite the lack of delivery on the ground. Yet with one of the highest unemployment rates globally, millions are now trapped in poverty, relying heavily on social grants, such as the social relief distress grant, popularly known as the 350 rand grant (equivalent to $19 per month). This grant is given to South Africans, permanent residents and refugees who have no financial support from any source.

The situation has worsened since the end of apartheid, with unemployment standing at 32.9% in the first three months of 2024. The latest statistics from Stats SA indicate a 45.5% unemployment rate among young individuals aged between 15 and 34 years. Unemployment rates are highest among young and Black people.

To many, the harsh realities of unemployment and a lack of economic opportunities mirror apartheid inequalities. According to the World Bank, South Africa is the most economically unequal country in the world, with 10% of the population owning 80% of the wealth, and Race remains a key driver of high inequality in South Africa due to its impact on education and the labor market.

Wealth disparities have left millions of Black South Africans mired in poverty. The explosion in the number of informal settlements across the country epitomizes South Africas economic decline since 1994. The collapse of inner-city services, with potholed roads, dead traffic lights, uncut grass and broken water pipes, is a clear indication of a country whose leadership has lamentably failed to live up to its promises.

This years election represents a watershed moment. A born-free revolt against the ANCs incumbency could shake up South Africas politics and accelerate demands for more radical reforms to tackle inequality and improve service delivery.

If young people turn up en masse to vote, I dont think any of us can predict what they are going to do because they are not monolithically voting on any political lines, not on race or class lines. If they turn up we are going to have an unpredictable election, Dooms told New Lines.

The history of previous elections shows, however, that given South Africas apartheid past, as long as opposition parties are perceived to serve the interests of non-Black racial groups, not even their promises of a better future can sway the opinions of enough Black voters to make an impact.

Despite the born frees being born into a nonracial democracy, racial inequalities and segregation still persist for them, with unequal education opportunities and continued residential segregation along racial lines Blacks living in townships and whites in the suburbs.

Bronwyn Leigh Davies, a white 22-year-old fine arts honors student at the University of Witwatersrand, grew up well aware of the racial tensions in the country. She believes that generational racism still exists in South Africa and that this too will spill into voting patterns. We still have a lot of institutional and structural echoes of what happened in the past, even just looking at where people live, Davies told New Lines. People still link together culturally, even during breaks at the university. We automatically group together based on race and culture. Given South Africas history of racism, it is almost impossible for the nation to escape the grip of identity politics. Race remains an inescapable fault line that cuts across generations.

Raeesah Chandlay was 8 years old when apartheid ended. She is Indian and grew up in Lenasia, a predominantly Indian neighborhood that was proclaimed an Indian township under the apartheid group areas act of 1958. Chandlay, who is a conservationist and writer, told New Lines that a lot of the youth are disillusioned and justifiably angry. So much has trickled down from the apartheid regime and this has continued to shape the mindset of the youth. Realistically, race dominates everything in everyday South African life.

Against this backdrop of inequality, the likelihood is that the born frees will cast their votes in alignment with their identities and traditional party allegiances. Political parties across the country are actively trying to win the youth vote, as they recognize their potential to swing the upcoming elections. In its campaign messaging, the ruling ANC has been emphasizing its legacy as the party that ended apartheid and brought democracy. It promises continuity and stability after serving for three decades. However, the ANC is grappling with disillusionment among the born frees over corruption and a lack of economic opportunities.

Earlier in the year, during the February State of the Nation Address, President Cyril Ramaphosa told a fictional story about Tintswalo, a child born at the dawn of democracy whose life has since benefited from the governments policies after apartheid. In his speech, Ramaphosa highlighted Tintswalsos upbringing with access to essential services like water, electricity, education and health care, basic services denied to many Black South Africans prior to 1994.

The speech was met with much criticism. When you look closely at the reality of Tintswalo, the society Tintswalo is growing up in, its increasingly becoming a state where we are losing faith in a democratic institution. We are in a state where the national coffers are completely eroded, Xolelewa Kashe Katiya, of the civil society group Indlulamithi, told the South African broadcaster Newzroom Afrika.

As the May 29 date draws nearer and the major opposition parties race to win the youth vote, many of them are cognizant of the fact that this group of voters has little or no experience of apartheid and that their issues are different from those of their parents and grandparents.

Typically perceived as a white party, South Africas second-largest party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), has rebranded itself as a nonracial, pro-business alternative to the ANC as it makes inroads with South Africas young electorate. The DA has campaigned aggressively to shed its minority, white party image and appear as a party for all races that is committed to job creation and economic growth.

Twenty-eight-year-old Nicholas Nyati was born and raised in a rural farming community in Kirkwood in the Eastern Cape. Nyati, who is both Black and the DAs interim youth leader, dispels the idea that the DA is a party that only looks after the interests of white South Africans. Thats pure propaganda and politicking by the ANC to tarnish the DAs image, he told New Lines.

Although he was born two years after South Africas first democratic elections, Nyati does not agree that he was born free and is urging the youth to vote for a party that will give all South Africans equal opportunities. I was not born free. I went to school at a school that has a pit toilet. I had to sleep in a laboratory. Thats not freedom. Even if Im lucky enough to graduate from an institution of higher learning, I struggle to get a job. Even to get a job, I must bribe someone, thats truly not free.

The vacuum created by the mismanagement of South Africa by the ANC allowed those who disagreed with the way things were being run internally to leave and form their own parties, seeking to do things differently. The biggest break from the ANC happened in 2008, when, in the aftermath of the ouster of Thabo Mbeki as president by a faction led by Jacob Zuma, disillusioned members formed the Congress of the People (COPE). In the election a year later, they took 1,322,027 votes, winning a 7.42% share of the total.

Three years later, the ANC expelled former African National Congress Youth League president Julius Malema for bringing the party into disrepute. The following year, he founded the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), and his fledgling party won 25 seats in the national assembly in the 2014 national election.

Under the radical leadership of Malema, the EFF has adopted a populist platform that seeks to appeal to disillusioned youth. Malema and his fellow members of Parliament attend the august house dressed in red industrial work clothes, rubber boots, miners hats and domestic workers outfits, to symbolize that they represent workers and the poor masses.

In its campaign messaging, the EFF is calling for economic transformation and pushing for the expropriation of land without compensation to white owners. Other key policies include the nationalization of banks and mines, a subject that has struck a chord with disadvantaged young people.

In universities and townships, the EFF has launched an aggressive outreach campaign where millions of youth reside. The EFF is pressing upon the desperation of the youth and they are making promises that they cannot easily fulfill. The EFF says the things that young South Africans want to hear, but when it comes to implementation their track record is not good, said Dion Forster, a South African Methodist minister and academic who serves as a professor of public theology at the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.

South Africas economic woes, coupled with a lack of opportunities, have seen the rampant enthusiasm that manifested around the 1994 election visibly wane, particularly among the young. The ANCs attempts to encourage participation by wooing popular musicians and other artists to be part of their campaigns have failed to translate into voting numbers.

In recent elections, there has been a trend of low voter turnout among young people. In 2019, the Independent Electoral Commission reported that only 56% of eligible voters between the ages of 18 and 29 registered to vote and that the voter turnout in this age bracket was significantly lower than the national average of 66%.

The social activist Malik Dasoo, who comes from a middle-class family, has had a privileged upbringing and went to good schools. He was not subjected to the socioeconomic challenges that millions of Black South Africans face. Things have gotten worse from the promises of 1994. As a kid you wonder why? But as you grow up you see that its the deficiencies of our government and an uncaring attitude of the private sector, Dasoo told New Lines. The youth havent mobilized as a coherent demographic to the extent that they did during the anti-apartheid movement. They can do it by voting but they are disillusioned by the voting process. Thirty years of democracy, but every time you go out to vote, things get worse.

The country once viewed as a shining example to all other African countries of how to get it right has fallen off its pedestal. The disillusioned youth are likely to be a key factor in deciding what direction South Africa will take in the foreseeable future. It remains to be seen if the divisive color lines that define South Africa, even today, will be breached by the desire for a better life.

Theres anxiety about what is going to happen. Theres also this quiet hope because for the first time in 30 years we have a chance of unseating the ANC. This has never been presented to us as a possibility before, says Dasoo, as the clock ticks toward an election that could drastically change South Africas political future.

Become a member today to receive access to all our paywalled essays and the best of New Lines delivered to your inbox through our newsletters.

Continued here:
South Africa's 'Born Frees' Are Disillusioned With Democracy - New Lines Magazine

Analysis | The Texas GOP takes the party’s hostility to democracy to a new level – The Washington Post

One of the more remarkable responses to Donald Trumps loss in the 2020 presidential election has been the vilification not of voter fraud but, instead, of voting.

Because Trump claimed that the election had been tainted by rampant fraud and because no evidence of fraud emerged, many of his allies scrambled to find a middle ground in which they could claim that the election was somehow suspect without having to amplify those claims. Many settled on the idea that the election was unfair because states had expanded voting mechanisms because of the pandemic.

These arguments often centered on exaggerated or untrue claims that these expansions violated state constitutions. But they also shared another quality: They were complaints that too many people voted. Sometimes these criticisms were at least layered with hand-wringing that, say, ballot drop boxes allowed for more fraudulent votes to be cast, which is not true. Often, though, they were just complaints that it was too easy to cast a ballot and, by extension, that too many legitimate voters were able to cast votes for Joe Biden.

This line of rhetoric (which is omnipresent once you start noticing it) is a reflection of the Republican Partys long-standing apathy about the process of submitting issues to voters and tallying their responses. The electoral college has been hailed by the right as not only necessary but wise, even though it can award the presidency to the less-popular candidate (as it did for the Republican nominees in 2000 and 2016). Republicans have trotted out the hoary, overstated dichotomy between democracy and republicanism; some, like Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), went on to try to help Trump retain power despite losing the 2020 election.

Over the weekend in Texas, the state Republican Party offered up perhaps the most explicit example of separating election results from actual voting. At its convention, the party proposed and its delegates approved a platform demanding that winning statewide office necessitate also winning at least half of Texas counties.

The endorsement of a constitutional amendment mandating that criterion will almost certainly not result in it being implemented and, even if it was, it would probably face significant legal challenges. But that this is considered a viable approach to distributing power among the leaders of the states largest political party is remarkable.

Its worth fleshing out how ridiculous the idea is. For one thing, there are a lot of very big, very empty counties in Texas, which has 254 such subdivisions. The 127 least-populous counties are home to about 916,000 people, a total that is only 3 percent of the statewide population. There are seven counties that, by themselves, have more residents than those 127 counties. But even if a candidate won all seven of those counties (and the 14.8 million people who live in them), she could be defeated if her opponent won those 127 smallest counties and one more. And that means a Republican: Those smallest counties backed Trump by an average of 59 percentage points in 2020.

The proposed amendment would apply only to statewide offices, so lets consider the 2022 gubernatorial contest between Gov. Greg Abbott (R) and former congressman Beto ORourke (D). Abbott won 235 counties, 107 more than he needed to secure a majority of counties won.

The distribution of the county-level vote margins in that contest looked like this:

But that misrepresents the number of residents in each county. If we scale the circles by total votes cast, you can see that the election was closer than the chart above might suggest (though Abbott still won handily).

If we adjust the results so that the Democrat ORourke won by one vote (adding Democratic votes across counties to match the statewide distribution), we get a result that looks like the chart below. ORourke gets more votes but is still 98 counties short of a majority of counties won.

Because rural areas of Texas (and the broader United States) are more heavily White, the proposed rules effect is to provide an enormous advantage to White Texans. In the scenario above where ORourke wins, about three-quarters of the states non-White population lives in the counties where he prevails. But according to the proposed constitutional amendment, the winner would be the Republican who prevailed in the majority of counties, counties where a majority of the states White population lives.

There is a reason that county-level apportionment was used in the Jim Crow-era South, as historian Kevin Kruse noted over the weekend.

If Texas Republicans embrace this return to a county-unit type of system, he wrote, theyll actually have created something even more unequal than the scheme concocted by segregationists of a century ago.

How many Democratic votes would we need to add for ORourke to win a majority of counties? About 14.2 million in an election where 8.1 million votes were cast.

If we transfer votes from Abbott to ORourke, that number drops, but the point remains: The ability of a Democrat to win statewide office in the state would be significantly hobbled under the scenario proposed by the Republican Party. Which, of course, is the point.

Again, this will not be effected. But it is worth considering for the light it sheds on other efforts from the party, such as the backlash against expansions of voting access in 2020 or protectionist views of how the electoral college and Senate allocate power. Thats particularly true when considering why Texas Republicans think this is important now: because the party is at increasing risk of losing statewide elections. The 2020 presidential margin in the state was the narrowest since President Bill Clintons 1996 reelection.

If voting isnt securing you the power you seek, you can try harder to win votes. Or you can change the rules so that power isnt as securely tied to voters.

Visit link:
Analysis | The Texas GOP takes the party's hostility to democracy to a new level - The Washington Post

Manchin to keep Energy gavel after dumping Democratic Party – E&E News by POLITICO

West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin left the Democratic Party on Friday and registered as an independent, further cementing his yearslong fallout with the party.

Manchin announced in a statement that he changed his voting registration to have no party affiliation at West Virginias State Capitol in Charleston, along with a photo of him holding what appears to be a registration form.

I have never seen America through a partisan lens, he said in a statement announcing the switch.

Manchin plans to stay in the Senate Democratic Caucus, however, and keep his positions there, including as chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. He is also a member of Democratic leadership, as a vice chair of the caucuss Policy and Communications Committee. Charlotte Laracy, a spokesperson for Manchin, said he will continue to caucus with Democrats.

The change comes as Manchin has repeatedly clashed with President Joe Biden and his former Democratic colleagues over a host of matters, most prominently implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act, Democrats landmark climate law. Manchin has also joined Republicans on numerous votes seeking to overturn Biden administrations energy and climate actions.

The switch to independent could have implications for Manchins political future. He said last year he wouldnt run for reelection and didnt run in the Democratic primary this month for his Senate seat or for governor.

But he has considered running as an independent for the Senate and has reportedly faced pressure to run for governor. The registration keeps his options open for an independent run for either office. Both races are in November.

Manchin said in his Friday statement that since joining the Senate in 2010, I have seen both the Democrat and Republican parties leave West Virginia and our country behind for partisan extremism while jeopardizing our democracy.

He added: Today, our national politics are broken and neither party is willing to compromise to find common ground. To stay true to myself and remain committed to put country before party, I have decided to register as an independent with no party affiliation and continue to fight for Americas sensible majority.

Manchin has previously brushed away suggestions that he might run for Senate or governor as an independent, though he has not ruled out a run.

He told reporters this month that hes an ally of Steve Williams, the mayor of Huntington and the Democratic nominee for governor, who faces long odds against Patrick Morrisey, the Republican nominee.

Steve Williams is a friend of mine. Weve known each other for 40 years. I contributed to his campaign, I encouraged him to run, he said May 20. I dont know where this is coming from, so I cant really say anything.

The statement came after West Virginia MetroNews reported that Republicans opposed to Morrisey, the states attorney general, were pushing Manchin to jump into the race. Morrisey came out ahead in a bruising GOP primary against former state lawmaker Moore Capito and businessman Chris Miller.

Manchin has also mostly dismissed the concept of running as an independent for Senate but has not ruled it out, CNN reported.

He endorsed Glenn Elliott, the mayor of Wheeling, in the Democratic primary, although he has not made an explicit endorsement in the general election. Jim Justice, the current Republican governor, is favored to easily win the race.

Manchin has until Aug. 1 to file for either race as an independent.

Manchin has led the Energy and Natural Resources Committee since Democrats took the Senate majority in 2021.

While his vocal support for mining, coal and other fossil fuels has often angered Democrats, hes been an ally on matters like conservation and some clean energy policies.

He also was a lead author of the IRA, the 2022 law that included $369 billion of spending for climate change and clean energy, the largest climate measure in the nations history.

But since that law has gone into effect, Manchin has been critical of many of the Biden administrations actions to implement it and threatened to join GOP efforts to repeal it.

Manchin has argued it has been too favorable to clean energy at the expense of fossil fuels and domestic energy. He has also clashed with Democrats on other major issues, such as taxation and immigration.

Manchin has been a Democrat since his first run for West Virginias House of Delegates in 1982. He lost that bid but won a state Senate election in 1986. He was later governor from 2005 to 2010.

While the Democratic Party was dominant in West Virginia at the time and Manchins centrist and conservative positions were welcome there, the state has since moved dramatically toward Republicans, who hold all major state offices and all but a handful of legislative seats.

The national Democratic Party has also united in more liberal positions in that time, including on issues around environmental policy.

The Senates other three independents, Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and Angus King (Maine), all caucus with Democrats and some hold leadership positions. Sinema was a Democrat until 2022 and was allowed to keep her spots.

Reporter Garrett Downs contributed.

Read more here:
Manchin to keep Energy gavel after dumping Democratic Party - E&E News by POLITICO