Mediaboss Marketing

In the space of just two years, they went from being a group of activists who could fit on a single bus, to representing the backbone of Portugals new democracy. Not even an inveterate optimist like Mrio Soares the nations former prime minister and president, and the father of modern Portuguese socialism could have imagined how much they would achieve. However, Portugals Socialist Party (PS) celebrates its 50th anniversary at a time of acute adversity, amid constant demonstrations over the Portuguese middle classes deteriorating quality of life. The governing party has a comfortable majority in the countrys parliament, but its mistakes are causing it to come under fire on an almost daily basis. That has included clips around the ear from the president, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, who had enjoyed a harmonious relationship with the prime minister, Antnio Costa, but now roundly criticizes many of his decisions, such as the measures he has adopted on housing.

In just a year, the Portuguese government has racked up several scandals brought about by failed appointments, and right now is in the eye of the storm over its management of TAP, Portugals flag carrier, following the airlines nationalization. A parliamentary inquiry was launched in February. After seven years in government, [the PS] is showing signs of wear and tear, says Antnio Costa Pinto, a sociologist and historian at the University of Lisbon, in an email. But it is still the party that is at the heart of Portugals democracy, particularly because now, with the growth of Chega, a far-fight populist party, the chief center-right party, the PSD, also has a considerable challenge on its hands.

So much has changed since the PS was founded in 1973, at a home in the small Rhineland town of Bad Mnstereifel. Germanys Friedrich Ebert Foundation played a key role in the partys creation, carried out in complete secrecy to avoid reprisals from Portugals dictatorship, which had banned political parties in 1933 and, 40 years later, maintained that prohibition. The Germans paid the travel costs of the small group of Portuguese activists, who met to decide whether to turn the Portuguese Socialist Action, a movement founded by Soares in Geneva in 1964, into a political party. Those who had come from Lisbon opposed the move including Soares wife, Maria Barroso, who voted against her husband. Soares, who had gone into self-imposed exile in Paris after receiving death threats for publicly opposing Portugals colonial wars, was almost alone in insisting that the dictatorship of Marcelo Caetano, who had succeeded Antnio de Oliveira Salazar in 1968, would fall imminently. Soares side of the vote won out, and he was named the PS first secretary-general.

Until a socialist party appeared, the dictatorship would say between us and the communists, theres nothing, and the communists would say between us and the fascists, theres nothing, explains Jos Manuel dos Santos, a former advisor to Soares who coordinated the events marking the partys 50th birthday. Thats a terrible state of affairs, because it strengthened the dictatorship. After the Second World War, the West as a whole closed its eyes to the two dictatorships in the Iberian Peninsula, because the major source of fear during the Cold War was communism. Soares saw that the only way to break that vicious cycle was to create a new organization, which started out as the Socialist Action and then became the Socialist Party.

What Soares couldnt predict was the exact moment of the regimes downfall. On the day of the Carnation Revolution, he was in Bonn to meet Willy Brandt, the German social-democrat who was a major source of support to Soares and Spains Felipe Gonzlez, another Iberian socialist leader who emerged to capitalize on regime change at the ballot box. After returning to Paris, Soares then boarded the train that became known as the Comboio da Liberdade (Freedom Train) and, on 28 April 1974, he arrived back in Lisbon. We called for immediate elections and proposed Mrio as our member of parliament. We only expected to get one, recalls Antnio Campos, one of the Socialist Partys founders, in the television documentary 50 years of the PS: German roots, which was aired by Portugals state broadcaster RTP. Constituent elections were held two years later, and the PS was the most-voted party, winning 116 seats one more than its total number of founding members in 1973.

The world, the country and the party have changed radically over the past 50 years. Despite their divisions, such as the conflict witnessed between Jorge Sampaio and Antnio Guterres, Portugals socialists have resisted the crisis of social democracy better than other European counterparts, and the partys governments have spent a combined total of 25 years in power half of the countrys period of democracy. The Portuguese Socialist Party has always had a Communist Party to its left with greater electoral clout than most European democracies and, since the start of the 21st century, it has also had the radical-left Bloco de Esquerda, the Portuguese equivalent to Spains Podemos, Costa Pinto observes. Despite being at the center of the biggest case of corruption in Portugals democracy, with the accusations against the former prime minister, Jos Scrates, the party has still done well electorally.

In the wake of the Scrates scandal, the Socialist Party moved into opposition, before returning to power against all expectations. In 2015, PS leader Costa agreed a deal with the partys rivals on the left to table a motion of no confidence that removed the conservative prime minister, Pedro Passos Coelho, who had been elected by only a slim margin. And in 2022, again defying the odds, Costa achieved a historic absolute majority that gave his party greater executive power than any other within the European social-democratic family right now. Of the seven governments in which the left is represented, only two have an absolute majority: Malta and Portugals. In the five other countries Germany, Denmark, Slovenia, Romania and Spain they are part of coalition administrations. Europes political map is dominated by the center-right, with populism and extremism making increasing inroads.

In Portugal, the Socialist Party presents itself as the chief barrier against the extremism of Andr Ventura, the leader of Chega. And that, in the opinion of analysts, was one of the chief factors behind the PS landslide election win last year. Its a mission that Costa pointed to when he spoke at Wednesdays 50th-anniversary event in Lisbon. The German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, was in attendance, as was former Spanish prime minister Gonzlez, who was alongside Soares for the moment when Spain and Portugal joined the European Economic Community. Today, there may be a different war, different battle lines drawn, but well always be faced with a war, Costa said, in a speech in which he touted the legacy of socialist policies in Portugal (such as the national health service, state education and welfare assistance). Today there is no dictatorship, but there is a growth in populism that we must fight.

The celebrations, however, have also fanned the flames of internal discontent. Former socialist chiefs have in recent days criticized Costas leadership, accusing him of moving away from the founders values of solidarity and freedom. Perhaps the headline that best sums up the complex times the PS finds itself in was written by Ana S Lopes of the Portuguese newspaper Pblico: 50th-birthday blues.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAS USA Edition

Read the original:
50 years of the Portuguese Socialist Party: from underground activists to stalwarts of European social democracy - EL PAS USA

The 2023 Oregon Active Transportation Summit, hosted by Portland transportation advocacy non-profit The Street Trust, is officially a go. People from all across Oregons transportation industry from advocates to transit agency officials have convened in the Lloyd Center for three days of panel discussions and networking events about all things related to getting around.

The event officially kicked off yesterday with a multimodal scavenger hunt and opening reception. This morning, the Summit got down to business with its first plenaries and panels. First, the Street Trusts Executive Director Sarah Iannarone introduced the Summits theme Move Into Action and welcomed a surprise guest, U.S. Representative Earl Blumenauer, to the stage.

Blumenauer said hed prepared a written speech for the morning but decided to wing it instead and speak from the heart. He praised The Street Trust for hosting an event like this one and emphasized the importance of transportation reform in Oregon and across the country.

Youre on a holy mission here. Really, youre going to help our communities save us from ourselves, Blumenauer said. This is literally a matter of life and death.

Blumenauer covered a range of topics in his introduction speech, from getting rid of minimum car parking mandates to making active transportation options more affordable for everyone. Though he said he is not in favor of declaring war on the automobile, he was very direct about the problems our society faces as a result of car-centric planning.

We have to recognize that how the automobile is so intrinsic with how people think and how they live. And we have to find ways to unwind that in a thoughtful fashion, Blumenauer said. Theres a lot of talk these days about socialism. Lets end socialism for the car.

This mornings panel discussions were focused on public transit. First, we heard from a panel of transit agency leaders from around the state: Sam Desue, Jr., who leads TriMet, Jameson T. Auten from the Lane Transit District in the Eugene-Springfield area and Andrea Breault from Cascades East Transit in central Oregon.Then, several advocates provided a community response to this conversation, offering different perspectives on the issues the transit agency leaders discussed. (Look out for a full recap of these panel discussions soon.)

In between these panel discussions, I talked to several attendees to find out what they were looking forward to in the days ahead.

Jack Blashchishen, the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) coordinator for the Springfield School District (and one-time BikePortland contributor!) said he was eager to meet statewide colleagues from the SRTS program. School transportation has become a key issue for many advocates recently, and there is quite a large SRTS showing here at the Summit.

Im just looking forward to seeing everyone whos part of the statewide transportation community, Blashchishen said.

Rob Zako and Claire Roth, both from southern Willamette Valley transportation advocacy group Better Eugene-Springfield Transportation (BEST), said they see the Summit as an opportunity to cultivate relationships with people from across the state so they can work together to influence transportation legislation in the future.

My personal mission is to break down siloes as much as possible and encourage people talk to each other across disciplines, Roth said. The pandemic hit advocacy like a ton of bricks, and it took a toll on transportation. This is the spring of transportation, were blooming again.

Mary Lee Turner, a disability and pedestrian advocate (and current member of the Portland Pedestrian Advisory Committee) told me she wants to make sure theres a presence of people with disabilities who rely on walking to get around at events like these.

People with disabilities are everywhere, and if we arent, thats because we cant get there, Turner said.

Stay tuned for more BikePortland dispatches from the Summit in the days ahead.

Taylor has been BikePortlands staff writer since November 2021. She has also written for Street Roots and Eugene Weekly. Contact her at taylorgriggswriter@gmail.com

View post:
Advocates mingle at the Lloyd Center for the Oregon Active Transportation Summit - BikePortland

FARGO They sure miss the 1950s in the North Dakota Legislature, that's for sure. That halcyon decade sticks in the minds of some as the idyllic days to which they'd like to return, if discussion about a child-care bill in the House of Representatives this week was any indicator.

Mom staying at home to take care of the kids and cook for Dad. Dad coming home from work and Mom mixing him a drink. Dad watching the evening news and reading the paper while Mom cleaned up supper, washed the dishes and took care of the kids. Dad going upstairs to bed while Mom did laundry and put the kids to bed.

Yeah, those are the days North Dakota legislators want to return.

The fact the 1950s were never as idyllic or halcyon as "Leave It To Beaver" and "I Love Lucy" would have us believe is beside the point. It's the fantasy that counts.

Anyway, that decade was referenced several times during debate over House Bill 1540, which dealt with funding to help ease North Dakota's child-care crisis. Child care, or lack of it, was the No. 1 issue many legislators heard about from constituents before going to Bismarck.

North Dakota, like almost every state, lacks affordable and available child care. It is, as smart legislators on both sides of the aisle point out, a workforce issue. If the state is looking to fill its 30,000 job openings, working parents need affordable child-care options. Period.

Fargo Democrat Karla Rose-Hanson put it best, saying child care needs to be viewed as part of the state's infrastructure. It's that critical.

HB 1540 passed on Friday morning, moving onto the Senate. Republicans, as they are wont to do in North Dakota, killed a similar bill Democrats had introduced earlier in the session and re-worked it to claim it as their own. That's the power of a super-majority.

But it's good news Democrats were able to push forward a bill that would infuse $66 million into child care. It obviously got plenty of Republican votes to pass.

The bad news? Watching the pre-vote comments by conservative Republicans like Dan Ruby, Scott Louser, Jeff Hoverson, Mike Schatz and Donna Henderson as they urged fellow representatives to vote against the bill.

How the sausage gets made in a legislative body is never pretty. Pull away the facade that those making laws are all thoughtful, intelligent people with the best interests of the citizens in mind and, well, the fat and gristle being stuffed into the casing gets nasty.

Take these particular righties.

Please.

Here's a nugget from Ruby, of Minot: "If it's taking your whole check for daycare, then you either need to get a job that pays more or it's better for you to not be giving it all to ... why are you working?"

Is that what they call compassionate conservatism?

From Schatz, from New England: "Many mothers want to raise their children themselves rather than have the government raise them."

Does he know the bill doesn't establish government daycare centers, but instead provides money so families can afford to pay for private daycare?

Also Schatz: "I believe this bill is in the same blueprint as President Biden's agenda and originated with Sen. (Elizabeth) Warren."

What?

From Hoverson, also of Minot: "This idea of the government becoming involved in child care is a well-meaning idea, but that it's also a very leftist, socialist idea. That's how socialism works."

So farming is also a very leftist, socialist idea?

See, the snag with being so dedicated to the "socialism" bit is that you end up being against everything. Because "socialism."

Child care assistance? Socialism.

School lunch assistance? Socialism.

Giving away money to private schools? Sociali-

Oh, wait. Scratch that. Being opposed to socialism is a flexible ideology.

And that's the problem with governing by ideology instead of practicality. North Dakota has a child-care crisis. Democratic legislators recognized that and tried to find ways to help remedy it. Obstinate others would rather insult working women, cry socialism, or both.

If only a Republican could introduce a bill hurtling North Dakota back to the 1950s. They'd find that to be a better solution.

Mike McFeely is a columnist for The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead. He began working for The Forum in the 1980s while he was a student studying journalism at Minnesota State University Moorhead. He's been with The Forum full time since 1990, minus a six-year hiatus when he hosted a local radio talk-show.

Read the original here:
McFeely: In ND legislature, the sausage is particularly gross - INFORUM

I want to start off by saying that I feel very fortunate to attend Oberlin College. I am so grateful for the academic, networking, and lifelong friendship-building opportunities afforded to me during my time on this campus. As a graduating fourth-year, Ive been thinking a lot about these opportunities and how I will deeply cherish them forever.

That is to say, I do not write this piece to bemoan that which I identify as a shortcoming of the Colleges Economics department, but aim to enact change as one of my parting acts as I look toward my fast-approaching graduation.

I recently learned that some departments, such as the Jewish Studies department, arose from student activism. This serves as proof, in my mind, that the College has historically listened to students academic concerns and has consequently enacted change accordingly.

As an avid watcher of the show Gilmore Girls, one of my few expectations upon my arrival to campus was that I would feel like I could learn anything I ever wanted to learn in these hallowed and historied halls like Rory did in her early college days. However, there was one thing I wanted to learn about here but didnt have the opportunity to: the varied types of world economies.

I came to college hoping to major in Politics and minor in Economics, expecting that this combination of departmental study would afford me context as to the broader economic and political realities that shape our ever-changing world.

After taking Introduction to Economics remotely, in the fall of 2020 I quickly realized that this would not be the case.

While, as someone who enjoys statistics and statistical modeling, I appreciated Intro to Econ, a more apt title for the course would have been Introduction to the U.S. Economy. But thats a semantic qualm.

My primary concern is that there are very few courses offered in the the Economics department that focus on non-U.S. economies, and those that do focus on economies beyond our borders do so in one of two ways: exploring the ways the U.S. economy might interact with other economies through trade or exploring the weak institutional frameworks tha[t]could explain a low growth trajectory, as in the case of ECON 310, Economic Development in Latin America.

I would love to have learned about socialism and anarchism, for example, in the same way as we did capitalism in that first Economics course. I later received an education with regard to socialism and anarchism in the Politics department in the course POLT 252 Capitalism, Socialism, Anarchism: Perspectives on States, Markets, and Justice. In that course, I learned about the varied global economies and read theory pursuant to all three types of economy.

However, as it was a political theory course, we did not engage in statistical modeling of any sort. Id advocate for a course such as this one to be taught in the Economics department so as to engage the graphical element deeply present in Economics research.

I spoke with College second-year and Economics minor Ben Rapkin to hear his perspectives on the department.

Many of the professors are incredibly talented and skilled in their field and in finance and their contributions to academia, Rapkin said. Just because its skewed in a particular lens or with particular focuses that doesnt by any means invalidate much of their research.

According to Rapkin, this particular lens comes from the professors backgrounds as well as the current state of U.S. academia.

Just because our nations organized with a certain amount of governmental intervention doesnt mean that in the set of assumptions that they research under and they look at that their mathematical models arent perfectly valid, Rapkin said. It is just an issue of number one, undergraduates are not at the level to really have those discussions and two, many of them just are not focused on socialist organization and comparing that to capitalism.

Rapkin initially wanted to major in Economics, but ended up minoring in the department after finding that it was not as interdisciplinary as he would have liked.

My big issue with the Econ major its really shared by a lot of undergraduate economics programs and put simply, economics is a really complex hard science, Rapkin said. Its trying to describe how pretty much everything in the world can be better, most efficiently done. But a lot of undergraduate economics is very light on math which is understandable. However, even the upper-level classes dont really include a lot of math, which makes it so that any discussion we have is forced onto some very simplistic models that often dont really describe what happens in the economy.

Rapkin also spoke to the limitations of the departments U.S.-centric curriculum.

For most of the courses it was very much focused really all of them, Ill say was really focused on the U.S., Rapkin said. The Econ department leans to a focus on micro[economics]. And so in those classes, it doesnt so much matter which countries specifically, but when we looked at some of the macro[economics] classes such as intermediate macro or public economics those classes both focused very heavily on U.S. economics and how our economy functions as a whole. They didnt really look at a lot of case studies of other countries with different organizations.

Oberlin College, a school that presents itself as academically progressive, seems to fall behind other Economics programs in its failure to include global economies. Other colleges and universities, though, have modeled this inclusive departmental design.

For example, the University of Chicago, which is often recognized as having one of the top Economics programs in the United States, includes The Economics of Socialism in its department, as well as a course titled Labor Markets: A Global Perspective.

Further, the University of Maine offers a Marxist and Socialist Studies minor, which culls an interdisciplinary catalog of courses in economics, philosophy, art history, and more. Harvard University even offered a course titled The Economics of Socialism in its Economics department in the spring semester of 1940.

Our History department doesnt study just U.S. history and our Politics department doesnt exclusively study U.S. politics or, rather, global politics as they relate to the U.S. So why, in 2023, hasnt the College adapted its Economics department to address economies beyond the U.S.?

Read the original post:
Economics Department Overly U.S.-Centric, Should Offer Courses in ... - The Oberlin Review

One of the great delusions of our day is that Scandinavian countries are socialist and so America should be socialist too. Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and others of the ultra-Left repeatedly claim that Norway, Sweden and Denmark (sometimes they include Finland and Iceland too) are prosperous because they are socialist.

Lars Rasmussen knows better. As Danish Prime Minister, he declared in 2015, I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.

A market economy is a capitalist one in which property is largely private and prices are free to reflect supply and demand. It is synonymous with free enterprise. In a socialist economy, by contrast, government owns or controls the means of production and heavily regulates and redistributes everything else. We sometimes call that a planned or command economy because the plans of market participants are bulldozed by the commands of those in political power.

The Heritage Foundations annual Index of Economic Freedom is one of two excellent sources for comparing how capitalist or how socialist a country is. The US, which showed up among the top ten (freest or most capitalist) for years, now ranks #25 in the latest (2023) Index. Denmark and Sweden are more capitalist than America, at #9 and #10, respectively. Norway comes in at #11. Nearby Finland, technically not a Scandinavian nation, checks in at #12. The worlds socialist countriesCuba (#175), Venezuela (#174) and North Korea (#176)are at the other end of the scale; and not by coincidence, they are also among the very poorest.

The other go-to source is the Fraser Institutes Economic Freedom of the World Index. The methodologies and categories of the two indices differ somewhat, producing in turn some differences in country rankings, but the findings are broadly similar: In Frasers most recent Index, Denmark is #10, Finland is #21, Norway and Sweden are tied at #37. Iceland, like the other four a Nordic nation, ranks #19. At #6, the US does better in the Fraser Index than it does in the Heritage Index.

Type Scandinavia socialism or Nordic socialism into the search engine at FEE.org, and youll find numerous articles that address the misinformation on this topicarticles not authored by charlatans, demagogues and class warriors who deploy obsolete data, but thoughtful and well-researched pieces by actual economists and native Scandinavians who know what theyre talking about.

The allegedly socialist countries that seem to work do so not because of the socialism they have but because of the capitalism they possess in abundancestrong evidence that the freer economies are, the better off the people are. Go full socialism and you get a miserable basket case such as Venezuela. The fact is that while Nordic nations dabbled in welfare-state style socialism a half-century ago, they learned some lessons from the resulting stagnation. They reversed course. They are now among the freest, most capitalist countries on the planet according to both the Fraser and Heritage Indexes.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again: Socialism devastates an economy until some form of capitalism is allowed to rescue it. Thats the story of such places as post-war Japan, Hong Kong, and Germany. I can think of no instance in all of history in which capitalism produced economic disaster that socialism subsequently remedied. It just never happens, and that should be totally predictable. Socialism offers no theory of wealth creation; its nothing more than crackpot schemes for the concentration of power and income redistribution, robbing Peter to pay Paul for Pauls vote.

Free markets and small government made Sweden rich, explains Swedish economist and Cato Institute fellow Johan Norberg. The experiment with socialism crashed us.

In another revealing article Norberg quotes a top Swedish official:

Voicing a conclusion of people across the political spectrum, the Social Democratic Minister of Finance KjellOlof Feldt stated That whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didnt work.

Nima Sanandaji, author of Scandinavian Unexceptionalism, tells us that Nordic societies did not become successful after introducing large welfare states. He writes,

They were economically and socially uniquely successful already in the mid-20thcentury when they combined low taxes and small welfare states with free-market systems. Over time, the generous welfare states of Nordic nations have created massive welfare dependency, gradually eroding the strong norms of responsibility that undermine the region's success. This, combined with the growth-reducing effects of a large state, explains why Nordic countries have gradually, over the past decades, moved towards less-generous welfare, market reforms, and tax cuts.

The Economistmagazine described the Scandinavian countries in 2013 as stout free traders who resist the temptation to intervene even to protect iconic companies. They are amongthe easiest countries to do business in. Through tax cuts, deregulation, and privatization, theyve dismantled much of the socialism that nearly ruined their economies.

The claim that socialism is alive and doing well in Scandinavian countries is shameless propaganda, hopelessly wrong and out of date. Those who make such ridiculous claims betray their real agenda of government control by never telling you these facts: 1) Sweden has a 100 percent nationwide school voucher program for schooling instead of the costly, underperforming socialized education system we have here; 2) None of the Scandinavian countries has a nationally-imposed minimum wage law; 3) Scandinavian countries all have lower corporate income tax rates than the US; and 4) In these nations, property rights, business freedom, monetary freedom, and trade freedom are strong, as Sanandaji points out. The same folks hawking Scandinavian socialism never tell you to check out those Fraser and Heritage indexes either.

For more on this topic, see Socialism: Force or Fantasy, especially the recommended readings at the bottom. Dont miss this additional and very important point: So-called democratic socialism is at war with itself; the longer and deeper that any nation pursues it, the more the socialist aspect squeezes out the democratic part. Whenever they come to power, democratic socialists steal not only your stuff but anything they can get their hands onelections, the media, the schools, your children, even your vocabulary.

The Nordic countries of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland have generous welfare stateswhich they have purposely been reducingbut its not socialism that pays the bills. As always, capitalism pays the bills that socialism piles upthat is, until, as Margaret Thatcher put it, the socialists run out of other peoples money.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Clickhereto sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

I have my own way of expressing that same truth: The only thing socialism does for poor people is give them lots of company. Or, Socialism irons out the business cycle by eliminating the boom part.

Read the original:
Dont Call Scandinavian Countries Socialist - Foundation for Economic Education