Category Archives: Populism

Doubts tear apart the European nationalist right. Where to go? In France, Italy or Germany in the parties of the classic extreme right and in the formations of populist nationalism the battle that took place a few years ago in the Republican Party of the United States is repeated when Donald Trump launched an opa that radicalized and transformed the old party of Ronald Reagan and the Bush family.

The battle, in Europe, faces, on the one hand, those who consider that Europeans are not Americans and that, to conquer power, a dose of moderation is necessary that allows them to get rid of the ultra stigma and attract voters who shun the stridencies and the middle classes who decide the elections. On the other side are those who argue that their respective nations face existential dangers such as immigration and that this is not the time for half measures. The solution is radicalism.

In France, the fight between moderators and radicalizers is being fought these days between Marine Le Pen leader of the National Regrouping (RN, heir to the historic National Front) and candidate for the third time for the presidency in 2022 and ric Zemmour, the polemicist who has overwhelmed by a leader on the right, without yet having declared himself a candidate, and equals or exceeds it in some polls. In Italy, the leader of La Liga and former Minister of the Interior, Matteo Salvini, and, to his right, Giorgia Meloni, the leader of the Brothers of Italy and an ally of Vox in Spain, compete. In Germany, the hangover from the September federal elections sows discord between moderates and radicals in one of the defeated, the radical right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.

It is a tension that is actually observed in the right-wing bloc as a whole, says political scientist Cristbal Rovira Kaltwasser, co-author of Populism. A brief introduction (Editorial Alliance) and professor at the Diego Portales University in Chile. And so it is. In France or Spain, the tension between centrism and the turn to the hard right also hangs over the parties of the traditional right. Rovira Kaltwasser adds: In any right-wing party, it happens: Either we move more towards the center voter or more towards the radical voter. And this is also seen in these radical and populist rights. They say to themselves: Is it worth continuing to radicalize and be faithful to our pure ideology? Or do we adapt some of our ideas to win the battle?

Le Pen has been trying to iron out the harshest angles of the party founded by his father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, for a decade, since he took the reins of the National Front. It is what in France has been called the demonization: leave the corner of the plagued. Marine Le Pen has changed the name of the party, has said that she was neither of the left nor of the right and has captured the workers vote. At times she has even presented herself as a feminist and environmentalist leader. He has vindicated the central figure of the French democratic consensus (and his fathers black beast) such as General Charles De Gaulle. And he has parked a central point in his program: the exit of France from the European Union and the euro.

The result is considerable, but insufficient. In 2017, Le Pen the daughter reached the second round of the presidential elections and, although she lost to Macron, almost 11 million French people voted for her. Two years later, his party was the most voted in the European elections in France. But, in part due to the French electoral system, which gives priority to the most voted party or candidate, the RN has not come to power in all this time: it has six deputies and, of the 36,000 French municipalities, only governs a dozen towns or small cities .

Join now MRT to follow all the news and read without limits

Subscribe here

Zemmour, who in just over a month has gone from nothing to 15% of the vote in some polls, has occupied the empty space that Le Pen has left on the extreme right with an apocalyptic speech against immigrants and their children and against the Islam. It appeals to people frustrated by the RN, tired because they have seen that nine presidential attempts six by Jean-Marie and three, with the current one, by Marine Le Pen do not work, says political scientist Jean-Yves Camus, a specialist in the extreme right. Not being stained by the Mark Le Pen or National Front, and although its speech is more extreme, it also attracts voters from the traditional right that of Presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy who would never have voted for a Le Pen and, instead, are seduced by Zemmour. I am the RPR candidate, said the polemicist, referring to the old Gaullist party of Jacques Chirac. His intention is clear: an opa on the traditional right in the image of Trump on the Republican Party.

There are echoes of the struggle between Le Pen and Zemmour in the pulse that Salvini and Meloni maintain in Italy in the wide space that goes from the populist, nationalist and radical right. Salvini, after his tumultuous passage through the government that placed Italy on the crest of the European populist wave in the wake of Trumps victory in the United States, undertook a trip to the center. The former Eurosceptic voted in favor of the investiture as president of the Council of the European priest Mario Draghi, who has ministers from La Liga in his government. My ambition is not to represent the radical right, said Salvini, convinced that, to be a hegemonic force, one must get out of the populist and radical corner. The burgeoning Meloni, a politician with origins in neo-fascism and part of the same group as Vox in the European Parliament, has surpassed a blurred Salvini, a co-religionist of Le Pens party in the EU, in polls.

The AfD, in Germany, experiences similar tensions that the legislative ones of last September have aggravated. The German far-right party is the fifth force with just over 10% of the vote, although it has become strong in two states of the former German Democratic Republic. Its co-chairman, Jrg Meuthen, considered the representative of the moderate wing, announced this week that he was resigning from office.

Trump, president of the United States from 2017 until last January, continues to cast his shadow in Europe. Rovira Kaltwasser analyzes: The signal from Donald Trump, in the American case, is clear: what the Republican Party says is that the solution is to radicalize, not to moderate. This is observed by radical right-wing populist parties, and they say: Look at the example, we must remain faithful to our principles and only then can we try to increase our electoral flow. The opposite strategy would be that of leaders like Le Pen, who, after successive attempts to gain power, has concluded that he needed to soften aspects of his program. But I think, says the political scientist, that there are factions in these parties for which, in reality, the issue of access to power matters less to them: what they want is for their ideas to gain ground in public space.

It is a family fight: ideological and strategic. In other words, a debate of ideas and a debate on the path to power. The question is whether the complaints end up frustrating these efforts. In Germany, the AfD has lost a million votes compared to the previous legislatures. In France, the sum of the voting support of Le Pen and Zemmour in the polls is close to or exceeds 30%, more than Macron and the left. Division is not always a sign of weakness.

Follow all the international information at Facebook and Twitter, o en our weekly newsletter.

Disclaimer: This article is generated from the feed and not edited by our team.

Original post:

Moderation or radicalism, the dilemma of the extreme right in Europe | International - Market Research Telecast

Old political orthodoxies are being scrambled by a combination of the COVID-19 pandemic, the influence of former President TrumpDonald TrumpMcAuliffe takes tougher stance on Democrats in Washington Democrats troll Trump over Virginia governor's race Tom Glavine, Ric Flair, Doug Flutie to join Trump for Herschel Walker event MORE and the deep current of polarization tearing through the nation.

One prime example, which came into focus last week, centers on Republicans, private business and the role of government.

Texas Gov. Greg AbbottGreg AbbottSunday shows preview: Supply chain crisis threaten holiday sales; uncertainty over whether US can sustain nationwide downward trend in COVID-19 cases Mike Siegel: Potential McConaughey candidacy a 'sideshow' in Texas governor race On The Money Big businesses side with Biden in Texas vaccine standoff MORE (R) issued an executive order Monday banning vaccine mandates in his state, including by private entities.

Abbotts action cut across the wishes of numerous corporations in his state who had issued, or were planning, such mandates.

Some major corporations with Texas headquarters, including American Airlines and Southwest Airlines, are pressing ahead with their mandate plans, putting themselves on collision course with the governor.

But the bigger point is Abbotts break with the traditional conservative belief that government should have a very limited role in regulating business.

Some corporations want a mandate; he is using the power of government to tell them they cant have one.

High-profile Republicans had already become more willing to be critical of big business, especially as corporations have taken overtly political positions on social issues.

Back in May, amid a furor over new voting laws in Georgia, Sen. Ted CruzRafael (Ted) Edward CruzThe CDC's Title 42 order fuels racism and undermines public health Ocasio-Cortez goes indoor skydiving for her birthday GOP rallies around Manchin, Sinema MORE (R-Texas) told this column that Democrats had sought to weaponize the corporate world and that some CEOs had been willing to enlist their companies in the political agenda of todays Democratic Party.

Meanwhile, intra-conservative debates about the reach of government have also gone beyond the corporate world into other areas, such as education.

Conservatives in the recent past generally supported devolving as much power as possible to local school boards, which they saw as a counterweight to the heavy hand of centralized government.

But as some school boards have moved to impose mask and vaccine requirements in response to the pandemic, they have found themselves in the crosshairs of the right. Most notably, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantisRon DeSantisThe CDC's Title 42 order fuels racism and undermines public health Chicago sues police union over refusal to comply with vaccine mandate Crist says as Florida governor he would legalize marijuana, expunge criminal records MORE (R) has been engaged in a protracted battle to stop schools in his state from imposing mandates.

Abbott, Cruz and DeSantis are all considered possible presidential contenders in 2024, where they could be vying for the presidential nomination ofaRepublican Party where former President Trump still holds enormous sway. Trump favored a bombastic populism that often put him at odds with GOP orthodoxy on topics such as free trade.

Abbott portrayed his mandate ban as a direct challenge to President BidenJoe BidenPressure grows for breakthrough in Biden agenda talks State school board leaves national association saying they called parents domestic terrorists Sunday shows preview: Supply chain crisis threaten holiday sales; uncertainty over whether US can sustain nationwide downward trend in COVID-19 cases MOREs decision, announced last month, to pursue vaccine mandates or testing requirements for businesses with 100 employees or more. The text of Abbotts executive order referred to Biden bullying many private entities into imposing COVID-19 mandates.

His decision drew a counterpunch from White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiPressure grows for breakthrough in Biden agenda talks Sunday shows preview: Supply chain crisis threaten holiday sales; uncertainty over whether US can sustain nationwide downward trend in COVID-19 cases Biden giving stiff-arm to press interviews MORE who accused him of making a choice against all public health information but perhaps in the interest of your own politics.

Some Republicans acknowledge there has been a big shift.

Its not a conservatism rooted in a government philosophy, said Kevin Madden, a GOP strategist who served as a senior adviser to 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyDefense & National Security Military starts giving guidance on COVID-19 vaccine refusals Blinken pressed to fill empty post overseeing 'Havana syndrome' GOP rallies around Manchin, Sinema MORE. It is more cultural in the sense of outrage politics, left-versus-right, us-versus-them. It is not about whether government is going to be involved. It is more along the lines of: Government is going to be involved. Who is going to get the spoils of government?

On the left, there is long-standing skepticism about whether the GOP really has any consistent principle at all about the appropriate role of government.

At the same time as the Texas governor is purporting to be standing up for individuals who want to resist vaccine mandates, for example, his GOP-dominated state has also passed a hugely controversial law that amounts to a near-total ban on abortion something which most Democrats see as an affront to personal choice.

Meanwhile, independent experts note that conservatives have often taken rather flexible views on the appropriate role of government.

Conservatives have been open to government action even though their rhetoric presents themselves as being anti-government, said Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. It is more about priorities. When it comes to national security or spending on defense or tax subsidies for business, they have been more than happy for government to take a role.

Among conservatives supportive of the kinds of stances taken by Abbott and DeSantis, however, there is a much different view. They believe conservatives are simply trying to act as a corrective to an excessively aggressive Biden administration and a corporate world overly eager to prove its wokeness.

Its about righting wrongs, it is about creating an equilibrium, said Brad Blakeman, who served in former President George W. Bushs White House. Businesses should be engaged in business not in social engineering. If you are in the business of selling airplane tickets, sell airplane tickets. If you are in the business of selling cars, sell cars.

Blakeman also pointed out, on the education question, that there has been an apparent upsurge in more conservative-leaning parents getting involved in their local school districts something that he saw as a welcome empowerment of parents, even as it has led to some angry clashes.

Above it all, though, is the reality of a Republican Party where Trump looms large not just as a past president and a possible 2024 contender, but as the practitioner of a scorched-earth brand of politics, in which there are only really two sides: for us or against us.

You just cant put Trump aside, said Madden. He has upped the outrage quotient of populist politics and he is going to define the partys profile and its approach to these big policy fights and cultural fissures for the next 20 years.

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.

Read the original post:

The Memo: Conservatives change their tune on big government | TheHill - The Hill

Once upon a time, Democrats in the industrial Midwest could count on the votes of the blue-collar, often unionized workers of the many factory and mill towns dotting the region. But according to a new report by Democratic strategists previewed in the New York Times, over the last decade many voters who live in blue-collar strongholds that have lost manufacturing jobs have embraced former President TrumpDonald TrumpMcAuliffe takes tougher stance on Democrats in Washington Democrats troll Trump over Virginia governor's race Tom Glavine, Ric Flair, Doug Flutie to join Trump for Herschel Walker event MORE and the Republicans. Now Democrats are in a quandary, facing the prospect of the collapse of their once-fabled blue wall. What happened? And what should they do about it?

Popular perceptions aside, and as I have written before, today there is no monolithic Midwestern Rust Belt of struggling manufacturing and mill towns. There was once a common economic storyline among the small, mid-sized and large manufacturing communities strung through the fields, forests and along the rivers and lakefronts of the upper Midwest.

But this manufacturing-based economy, rocked by globalization, technological change and new competitors has undergone decades of restructuring. and in some places the total disappearance of manufacturing plants and their well-paying jobs. Communities have struggled to adapt.

Today there are two Midwests the many former factory towns that have made the transition to a new, more diversified economy; and others that have lost their economic anchors and are still struggling.

In todays tech-driven, knowledge economy, economic activity has tended to concentrate in the major metros, and the Midwest is no exception. In the industrial Heartland from Minneapolis to Indianapolis to Pittsburgh the major metros have largely turned an economic corner. Similarly, the numerous Midwestern university towns, such as Iowa City, Iowa; Madison, Wis.; Ann Arbor, Mich.; and State College, Pa., are thriving.

The same cannot be said of the numerous small and medium-sized industrial communities that typify the Midwest economic landscape. Some have evolved their economies, but many others have not.

These small and medium-sized factory towns have outsized political influence. In Michigan and Wisconsin, for example, more than half of the voting population resides in the smaller and midsize manufacturing communities.

And as the report by Midwestern Democratic strategists Richard Martin, David Wilhelm and Mike Lux documents, in the communities that have seen the most severe manufacturing job loss, the ground is fertile for a nationalist, nostalgic and populist appeal of the kind offered by Donald Trump.

Why is this? Residents of struggling industrial communities are responsive to the messages of leaders who identify with them and against urban elites leaders who promise to bring back the industries that once provided well-paying jobs, and blame trade deals and immigrants for their communitys woes.

And this populist message can come from the left or the right. Both Donald Trump and Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersPressure grows for breakthrough in Biden agenda talks Sanders, Manchin escalate fight over .5T spending bill Sanders blames media for Americans not knowing details of Biden spending plan MORE (I-Vt.) (who did very well in Midwest factory town communities in the 2016 primary, defeating Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonTrump criticizes Justice for restoring McCabe's benefits Biden sends 'best wishes' to Clinton following hospitalization The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Altria - Jan. 6 panel flexes its muscle MORE outright in Michigan) offered a politics of resentment essentially a message that says: you are getting screwed and someone else is getting theirs at your expense.

But rightwing and leftwing populists differ on solutions. Leftwing populists such as Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenMisguided recusal rules lock valuable leaders out of the Pentagon Biden's soft touch with Manchin, Sinema frustrates Democrats Hillicon Valley Presented by LookingGlass Congress makes technology policy moves MORE (D-Mass.) offer policy fixes: for example, taxing the rich to provide free college, health care and a higher minimum wage. Rightwing populists such as Trump play to identity, and trumpet social and cultural issues, with a nod to nationalism and white supremacy, to appeal to voters.

Responsive to these cultural cues, many white, working-class voters have abandoned the Democrats. And no doubt progressive Democrats (particularly those representing districts and states far away from middle America) dont help themselves and alienate Heartland voters further with hardline stances on guns, immigration and abortion.

But the root cause undergirding the embrace of populist messages is the economic condition and deterioration of once-thriving working-class communities.

And many of the Midwests small and medium-sized factory towns are struggling. In 2016 many of these very communities flipped to Donald Trump enough for him to eke out electoral victories in the once solidly Democratic states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

In the 2018 congressional midterm elections and the 2020 presidential election, these struggling factory towns went even Trumpier. Democrats narrowly carried these elections by winning the better-off cities and their suburbs, including some historically Republican-leaning ones.

Now Democrats are ringing the political alarm bells for 2022 and 2024. The report by Democratic strategists warns, in the words of co-author Martin: if things continue to get worse for us in small and midsize working class communities, we can give up any hope of winning the battleground states of the industrial heartland.

The report notes that the Midwest mirrors the nations voting trends, with Democrats gaining votes in recent years in the bigger cities and their suburbs while losing votes in rural areas. But according to the report, the biggest losses came in the small and midsize industrial communities that shed manufacturing jobs (and the good health care that goes with them) during the past eight years. More than 2.6 million fewer Democratic votes in 2020 versus 2012 came from once solidly blue Democratic strongholds such Chippewa Falls, Wis., and Bay City, Mich.

Strategists worry that without the polarizing presence of Trump on the ballot (at least in 2022), suburban moderate Republicans, repelled by Trump, may return to their party. Absent these votes in key Midwest congressional districts, the Democrats' electoral goose may be cooked.

Democrats are right to be concerned. The report makes no recommendations about how to win these voters back. But the agenda for how the Democrats do better can be read between the lines.

There is evidence that when older industrial communities decline, residents are more receptive to polarizing rightwing messages. But there is also compelling evidence that where former Rust Belt communities find new economic footing, the lure of resentful populism wanes as residents grow more optimistic about the future.

This has been the case in the Midwest. Residents of industrial communities that have made the transition to a new economy exhibit different attitudes and voting patterns than those in communities that still struggle. Resurgent industrial communities, such as Pittsburgh, Pa., and Grand Rapids, Mich., as well several smaller Midwest former industrial communities that have turned an economic corner, see powerful trends away from nationalism and nostalgia and towards moderate centrism. This was true in both the 2018 midterm elections and in the November 2020 election results when once solidly Republican counties such as Kent County, Mich., home to newly thriving Grand Rapids, went for both a Democratic governor and President BidenJoe BidenPressure grows for breakthrough in Biden agenda talks State school board leaves national association saying they called parents domestic terrorists Sunday shows preview: Supply chain crisis threaten holiday sales; uncertainty over whether US can sustain nationwide downward trend in COVID-19 cases MORE.

Democrats need to focus less energy on intra-party bickering and more energy on delivering economic opportunities and optimism to the largely white, working-class voters in and around the still-struggling industrial communities of the Midwest. They can begin that effort by refusing to patronize them or to tell them all that is wrong with their communities. It also involves not telling them that they are racists or deplorables for having voted for Donald Trump.

Democrats must stop using language that derides the pride and identity of factory-town denizens like post-industrial, or describing residents hometowns as part of the Rust Belt.

What working-class voters want to hear from Democratic leaders is: We see you. We understand why you are upset with the conditions of your community. You and your community and future success are a national priority. We are here to support and offer resources for you to build your own future.

Only then can Democrats begin to rebuild the blue wall.

John Austin directs the Michigan Economic Center and is a nonresident senior fellow with the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the Brookings Institution.

Visit link:

How Democrats can rebuild their 'blue wall' in the Midwest | TheHill - The Hill

In the trailer for the new seasonof the horror-thriller series that is American politics, the screen goesblack and ominous music begins to play. In bright white letters the first words appear on screen:"They thought he was gone.They thought he was defeated. They said he would never beback but hewas here all along."Then, aftera pause:"SteveBannon is back for revenge!"

For several years, beginning with the2016 campaign, the American and globalnews media was obsessed with Steve Bannon. This was at least somewhat justified: Bannon was considered to be Donald Trump's "brain" and the mastermind behind his unlikely victory over Hillary Clinton. Bannon accomplished this through what many viewed as a "shocking" and "brilliant," if nihilistic, political strategy that leveraged right-wing populism, racismand the subterranean longing for an authoritarian leader.

Before that, Bannon was also executive chairman ofBreitbart News, an influential propaganda outletfor right-wing authoritarians, white supremacists and the so-called alt-right.He rode that success to a role steering Trump's presidential campaign to victory and then to the White House, where he served as Trump's senior strategist for all of seven months. Bannon was purged from the Trump regime after serving as a source for Michael Wolff's book "Fire and Fury," and appeared to be persona non grata with the famously touchy president.

But in the years since then, Bannon has repeatedly demonstrated his loyalty, and has been rewarded for it. Last year,he was charged withwire fraudand money laundering for stealing money from a charity whoseproceeds were supposed to be used to build Trump's misbegottenwall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Trump pardoned him, and apparently all is well between them.

Bannon has been in the news this week: He may be charged with criminal contempt by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol assault, and he hosted an event in Virginia on Wednesday night where attendees reportedly recited the Pledge of Allegiance before a flag used in that insurrection.

It does indeed seem likely thatBannon appears to have played a key role in the events of Jan. 6 and perhaps also in Trump's overarching coup attempt. On a recent episode of his podcast, Bannon admitted to telling Trump, prior to that date, "You need to kill this [Biden] administration in its crib."

Bannon has also made repeated use of the technique known as stochastic terrorism to encourage right-wing violence, while disclaiming personal responsibility. AsHuffPost reports, he recently told his listeners of his "War Room" podcast:"We need to get ready now.We control the country. We've got to start acting like it. And one way we're going to act like it, we're not going to have 4,000 [shock troops] ready to go, we're going to have 20,000 ready to go."

Bannon has said these "shock troops" would be used to destroy the federal government from within in a second Trump administration, as a way of tearing down what he calls "the administrative state," an anti-government euphemism that also includes multiracial democracy.

Political scientists, historiansand others have shown that such rhetoric is used by Republicansand their allies (and by too many "moderate" or corporate-sponsoredDemocrats) to justifyattacks on the very idea of government itself, in large part because they perceive it as serving the interests of Black and brown people and others deemed to be "undeserving."

Bannon's use of violent language about "shock troops" in a military context, this meansheavily armed, fast-moving elite soldiersused to break through enemy defenses is not necessarily hyperbole or metaphor. Rather, it should be seen aspart of alarger embrace of political violence and other terrorism by the Republican fascist movement.

Bannon has reportedly described himself as a"Leninist,"and makes no apologies for his belief that the existing social and political order must be destroyed before it can be rebuilt according to hisreactionary, revanchist, neofascist and racist authoritarian vision.

Bannon has said that in a second Trump term he wants to seeTrump's "enemies," such as Dr. Anthony Fauci and FBI Director Chris Wray, decapitated, withtheir heads mounted on stakes. Again, it's a mistake to consider this a joke.Business Insider reports:

"Second term kicks off with firing Wray, firing Fauci," Bannon responded, in comments which werereported on Thursday by Media Matters.

"I'd actually like to go back to the old times of Tudor England, I'd put the heads on pikes, right, I'd put them at the two corners of the White House as a warning to federal bureaucrats. You either get with the program or you're gone time to stop playing games. Blow it all up, put [Trump aide] Ric Grenell today as the interim head of the FBI, that'll light them up, right."

Bannon has also praised the white supremacist fantasy novel "The Camp of the Saints,"which imagines a violent crusade againstMuslims and nonwhite people who are supposedly "invading" Western Europe and other "white" countries. Aspublic opinion polls have shown, these "white genocide" fantasies are increasingly credible toRepublicans and Trump supporters, and play a key role inwhy Republicans are willing tosupport right-wing terrorism and other political violence as seen on Jan. 6.

Oscar-winning documentary filmmaker Errol Morris spent many hours with Steve Bannon while making his 2018 film "American Dharma." Morris told me at the time that what he felt in Bannon, at "the deep center of it all," was "the desire to destroy stuff, the desire to wipe everything out without any kind of constructive program."

If Donald Trump manages to rig the 2024 presidential election or even wins it legitimately, unlikely as that seems he will indulge in many forms of vengeance and destruction. Whether or not Bannon rejoins Trumpin an official capacity, he will be at his side, urging him onward.

Who else might return in a second Trump regime? Perhaps criminal and traitor Michael Flynn, in charge of the CIA, the Department of Defense, the NSA or some other key elementof the country's national security state. Perhaps Sidney Powell, Jeffrey Clark or Rudy Giuliani, incontrol of the Department of Justice. The Supreme Court and the larger federal judiciary has largelybeen captured already byright-wing Christian theocrats.

Most or all of the U.S. government would become an appendage ofTrump's malignant narcissism and other pathologies, shapedto his ultimate goal of being America's first dictator for life.

In a new interview with Politico, former National Security Council member Fiona Hill, who testified during Trump's first impeachment proceedings,offers this warning.

I feel like we're at a really critical and very dangerous inflection point in our society, and if Trump this is not on an ideological basis, this is just purely on an observational basis based on the larger international historical context if he makes a successful return to the presidency in 2024, democracy's done.

The American people have been warned, again and again. They need to vote, organize, mobilize, engage in corporeal politics includingstrikes anddirect action and raise upcivil society and other pro-democracy groups and organizations. They mustforce Joe Biden and the Democratic Party to act with the "urgency of now" in the battle against the Republican-fascist movement. Theymust act as though their lives, and the future of their country and democracy, depend on the choices they make now because they do.

View original post here:

Steve Bannon's second act: He's back, and he wants to bring down the curtain on democracy - Salon

Protesting seems to be in vogue in the world. Cubans are protesting their deteriorating infrastructure, Peruvians are rising up against electoral fraud, Haitis protests culminated in the murder of their president.

Targeted disinformation is complicating the wave of instability and creating a new form of populism where, absent a popular demagogue, attention is hyper focused on distrust and conspiracy theories. Thats the case in Colombia, where social media usage is among the highest globally.

Since April 28, thousands have marched in Colombia in protest of their government. Complaints have ranged from a (now-withdrawn) tax overhaul, to police brutality, systemic and endemic corruption, the extra-judicial killings of community activists, fracking and renewed demands by the U.S Government to fumigate vast swathes of coca plantations with glyphosate (Round-Up).

Violent factions have wreaked havoc during the protests and reduced Bogots much lauded transportation infrastructure to rubble. The June 26 assassination attempt against President Ivn Duque proved to a majority of Colombians that criminal factions, from frontline vandals financed by crowd funding, to urban militias, pushed Colombia to the brinkbut not over.

The complaints of the self-professed strike committee, however, ignore the progress Colombia has made, including the Nobel prize-winning peace agreement with FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) in 2016, which has indirectly made Bogot safer than cities like Detroit or New Orleans.

A comparative look at Colombias sophisticated system, where proportional representationis required in the Senate, reveals stunning discrepancies. The World Health Organization in 2020 ranked Colombian healthcare system 22nd out of 191 countries, beating those of many developed and richer nations including Canada. The lower threshold for income tax is two million pesos monthly (approximately US$557), well above the average Colombian salary. The literacy rate is 95% reflecting a robust education system. And a quick calculation places Bogots homeless rate below 1%; for context, that of Seattle in 2020, was 1.65%.

The administration of Colombian President Ivan Duque, defined by the World Bank as democratic center, was one of the first to create a pandemic relief package for the education sector. While the first edition didnt adequately address the challenges of distance learning, it was certainly one of the fastest pandemic responses of a world leader. The U.S. did not follow suit until December of 2020.

Recently 548 people in the Cali region were reported missing, allegedly at the hands of the police. According to the Deputy Attorney General Martha Yaneth Mancera, most of the reports were false. The majority were found immediately, reported twice, or away on vacation. Of the remaining 91 names on the list, none had any known family. I have a hard time believing that 91 people dont have one friend, mother, brother, wife or anybody who can confirm they are missing, she stated during a news conference.

Who could be behind this false information?

In an interview with the respected Colombian journalist Mara Isabel Rueda, vice-president Marta Luca Ramrez believes that the countrys democracy was the target of a coordinated strategy, financed, planned and well-supported by social media, in order to create chaos, destruction, all acts which have endangered the lives of millions of Colombians.

It is no secret that narco-terrorists and other illegal armed groups receive backing by Venezuelas Nicols Maduro and regime strongman who has been denounced as an illegitimate leader by over 50 countries. Maduros leading foreign policy objective towards Colombia is maintaining the porous border as safe passage for the Marxist ELN and FARC dissidents. Colombian president Duque stated at the UN General Assembly: My government has irrefutable and conclusive proof that corroborates the support of the dictatorship for criminal and narco-terrorist groups that operate in Venezuela to try and attack Colombia.

It is also clear that Colombia has multiple enemies making use of soft cyberwarfare with impunity, to destroy Colombias democracy and preserve their own anonymity. Such disinformation and populism are a toxic duo, comprising a terrifying new global threat affecting us all.

To support an ally such as Colombia, whose democracy has been refined through the crucible of years of conflict, the most effective tool is communication through human presence. As part of its anti-drug interventions in Colombia, the U.S. should encourage initiatives to identify and call out online misinformation by supporting non-governmental organizations and professional outlets that can build a frontline in the battle between truth and falsehoods. And its time for us all to pay attention.

Visit link:

Op-Ed: Colombia's falling prey to populism and nobody's paying attention. - The City Paper Bogot

Conservative Party leader Erin O'Toole speaks at the Westin hotel after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called an early election, in Ottawa, on Aug. 15, 2021.

LARS HAGBERG/Reuters

When suburban voters side with people who live downtown, as they did in the past two federal elections, Liberals win government. When they side with their country cousins, as they did in 2011, Conservatives win. The platform that the Tories released Monday is designed to make 2011 happen again.

Conservative Leader Erin OToole and his advisers have crafted a dense mix of measures that might best be described as thoughtful populism. Some of those measures, such as allowing foreign telecoms to compete with Canadian providers for your cellphone business, are long overdue. Some of them, such as the one-month GST holiday, are gimmicks.

But all of them aim to attract suburban voters, especially those who are less economically secure, while painting the Liberals as the party of fat-cat Corporate Canada. Will it work? Well soon see.

Story continues below advertisement

The first thing that the Conservatives want you to know is that their plan is serious 83 pages as a PDF, with tiny type but also with many pictures of Mr. OToole, who is looking very fit these days.

Tax credits underpin Conservative plan to spur hiring, growth

The second thing they want you to know is that the Tories are anti-big business. The manifesto is chock full of promises to stand up to Corporate Canada by targeting uncompetitive practices, to make foreign tech companies pay their fair share of taxes, to go after wealthy tax evaders and big corporations, to close tax loopholes for rich, big corporations and those with connections in Ottawa, to stop kowtowing to the wealthy, big U.S. tech companies, and large multinationals, and to stand up for those who dont have a voice.

They would even amend the Labour Code to make it easier for unions to organize, especially against large employers with a history of anti-labour activity.

Third, Canadas Conservatives are anti-downtown. We cant just have a recovery for the downtowns of a few big cities. ... We cant just have a recovery for downtown Toronto. ... Too many politicians and journalists who live in our big cities ignore, dont understand or simply dont care about what is happening outside the major urban areas. And so on.

Canadian federal election 2021: Latest updates and essential reading ahead of Sept. 20 vote

The plan has a distinct bias against well-educated, affluent families with progressive views, and a distinct bias toward people who are less economically secure and more socially conservative. So as well as promising many billions of dollars to create jobs, the Conservatives plan to scrap the Liberals $10-a-day child-care program, which advantages those who can already afford child care, and send the money directly to parents, to use as they wish. People who work nights and rely on unconventional child care sources would appreciate that.

In related news, the Conservatives would counter wokeness on campus by ensuring that public postsecondary institutions accommodate the range of perspectives that make up Canada through a commitment to free speech and academic freedom. And CBC News would be subjected to a not-very-friendly review to ensure it no longer competes with private Canadian broadcasters and digital providers.

Fourth, Canadas Conservatives are tough. They plan harsher penalties for interference with an infrastructure facility or a public transportation system. The Tories are betting suburban voters dont approve of blockades by Indigenous and environmental protesters.

Story continues below advertisement

They plan to be tough on China. They want tariffs on products from countries like China that emit high levels of carbon. They want to reduce dependence on trade from China. They would strengthen alliances to combat Chinas growing authoritarianism, regional influence, and military expansionism.

But they would encourage students from Hong Kong to come to Canada, and are generally favourable to robust immigration. A new program would permit direct private sponsorship of persecuted religious and sexual minorities.

There is plenty in the plan for core supporters, such as lifting the ban on tanker traffic off B.Cs north coast, and improving the tax treatment of family farms.

But Mr. OToole has angered many core supporters by committing his party to pricing carbon, with revenue going into personal low carbon savings accounts that people could draw from to buy cool green things, such as e-bikes. Suburban voters care about climate change.

Over all, the plan is comprehensive, detailed and uncosted. (The Parliamentary Budget Officer is reviewing the document.) But in one sense, the numbers dont matter as much as the intent: to shore up the Conservatives Western and rural base, while attracting suburban voters who work at Walmart.

Now its up to Mr. OToole to sell it.

Story continues below advertisement

Know what is happening in the halls of power with the days top political headlines and commentary as selected by Globe editors (subscribers only). Sign up today.

Go here to see the original:

Erin O'Toole's Conservatives target suburban voters in election platform of thoughtful populism - The Globe and Mail

Representational image. Elections, Princeton Professor Mller explains in his new book 'Democracy Rules', dont automatically make a democracy.

A few years before he joined the Nazi Party, political theorist Carl Schmitt wrote about why he believed that liberal democracy was an oxymoron. The liberals, in his definition, were keen on incorporating all points of view, which only led to endless discussion and compromise.

In a democratic state, on the other hand, the task is to identify allies and opponents and be hard-headed about making decisions. The influence of his argument still prevails, with shades of majoritarianism and rule by executive decree.

Thats not how everyone sees it. Democracy and its discontents have been the subject of a vast number of books, especially in the recent past. How similar is our concept of it from the Athenians, how participatory should it be, how much equality should it guarantee: these and more have been covered at length.

Now, Jan-WernerMller, author of the earlier What is Populism?, adds another volume to the shelf. In Democracy Rules, Mller, a professor of politics at Princeton, continues his argument by asserting that democracy is about freedom and equality for all. Populism has to be kept in check for it to prevail.

His definition of populists is the one in common parlance today. That is, not those who genuinely engage with peoples aspirations to challenge power structures, but those who claim to be the voice of the people for their own ends.

As he says in his earlier book, this is inherently hostile to the mechanisms and, ultimately, the values commonly associated with constitutionalism: constraints on the will of the majority, checks and balances, protections for minorities, and even fundamental rights.

He emphasises a current sense of crisis because of the actions of several regimes, in which he includes those of Orbn, Erdoan, Kaczyski, Modi, and Bolsonaro. The family resemblances arise because of a shared authoritarian-populist art of governance.

Once populists assert that only they can represent the people, writes Mller, they can also claim that all other contenders are illegitimate. Thus, civil society protests are labelled as having nothing to do with the real people, and activists are portrayed as tools of external agents.

An example is Turkeys 2013 Gezi Park protests which, an Erdoan adviser explained, was the doing of Lufthansa. The German airline allegedly feared increased competition from Turkish Airlines after the opening of Istanbuls new airport. Imagine that.

The point is that in a society of free and equal citizens, differences are not going to magically disappear. They need to be assessed, managed, and incorporated. Mller is also clear that elections dont automatically make a democracy: It depends on how exactly they are understood and on what happens before and, especially, after votes for representatives are cast.

What, then, are the characteristics of a desired democracy? For Mller, two stand out: losing and uncertainty.

The assumption that a losing party is irrelevant because it has been rejected by the majority doesnt wash in a democracy. For a start, such parties can force the winners into concessions, either during an election campaign, or as a result of a strong showing at the polls, or because of later circumstances.

This is the art of turning a loss into a demonstration of integrity. A loyal opposition shows a commitment to democracy, a key contrast with the ancient Athenian type of rule.

Of course, the other side of the coin is all-important. A governing party must recognise the oppositions special role and engage with it. Ideally there is a running discussion between majority and minority, in parliament and beyond, with arguments circling in an ongoing (yet also contained) political conflict. Losers should remain at liberty to make their case; they are not excluded or systematically disadvantaged (as they are under the rule of authoritarian populists).

The uncertainty aspect is to do with the notion that political outcomes such as election results have to be undetermined at the start. The alternatives: North Korea, where official candidates literally receive 100 percent of the vote; or other dictatorships such as Azerbaijan, where election results were accidentally released on an iPhone app the day before the vote in 2013.

Uncertainty also respects the possibility that people sometimes change their minds. A functioning democracy protects members of a one-time majority who might want to shift their ground. These could be legislators or citizens. Mllers case is that elections are based on a census, but they are not like a census: a dynamic political process might lead citizens to prioritise aspects of their identity in surprising ways.

How should one safeguard these principles and political rights to speak and assemble freely? Importantly, what he calls hard borders must be protected, such as not denying the standing of particular citizens as free and equal members of the polity.

Mller highlights democracys critical infrastructure, by which he means associations, political parties, and the media. Its not just about the ballot box; these are sites for the continuous formation of opinions and political judgments in society at large: anybody can have a say, at more or less any time.

As Habermas put it, this is a public sphere which can be a space for wild cacophonies. Thats a good thing, feels Mller: multiple voices clash, opinions get tweaked and fine-tuned; people pick up cues as to what they should think, even if they cant spend hours on the finer details of policy. In his timely metaphor, its like a mass Zoom meeting, with some people talking at us, unsure whether anyone is listening, others off in group chats on the side, and some engaged in private one-on-one exchanges.

Mller suggests ways to prevent the decay of democratic norms and institutions, so vividly highlighted by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in their earlier How Democracies Die. Democracy isnt free, he writes, and we could consider asking citizens themselves to maintain it. Candidates, for example, could be supported by schemes such as Seattles democracy vouchers funded by property taxes, through which citizens contribute to electoral campaigns.

It hardly bears repeating that both misinformation and disinformation have become easier to spread. A system of legitimate checks apart, one solution is to allow an even greater diversification of media outlets and public funding of non-profit media groups. The media should also be allowed to report within a frame of values they pursue as long as that frame is transparently acknowledged.

Mullers book doesnt dig deep into the reasons legitimate or not -- for the acceptance of populists in the first place. And it offers few pointers on what to do about bad-faith actors, who now seem to be everywhere.

Nevertheless, he offers reasons for hope. For a start, the ranks of those disappointed by democracy, but not ready to ditch it, include millennials, who have been suspected of caring less about democracy than they should.

Despite dismaying polarisation, what politics has created, politics can undo. The underlying message throughout is that democracy thrives when theres more: more discussion, more participation, more media, more parties, and more arenas for disagreement.

More here:

How democracy is about losing and uncertainty - Moneycontrol.com

The debate centers on what lessons to draw from Donald Trump, who talked like a populist but governed with the exception of trade policy more like a Reaganite. The divide doesnt quite fall along pro- and anti-Trump lines. The pro-Trump former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley, for example, has emerged as a leading champion of traditional free-market policies in opposition to other pro-Trumpers like Vance and Hawley. The battle is likely to play out in the 2024 presidential primary, and shape the future of Republican politics long after Trump exits stage left.

The emergence of the new economic counterculture is loosely connected to the two-year-old think tank, American Compass, whose founder, the Harvard-trained lawyer and former Bain consultant Oren Cass, routinely derides his adversaries as market fundamentalists peddling stale pieties from the 1980s. Cass left the free-market Manhattan Institute in 2019 to launch American Compass, the first right-of-center think tank dedicated to pushing the government to get more, rather than less, involved in national economic policy in order to help advance a certain set of social and cultural goals a view Cass and his ilk have termed common good capitalism. The groups mission: To restore an economic consensus that emphasizes the importance of family, community, and industry to the nations liberty and prosperity.

Oren Cass at a conference in New Orleans in 2017. | Stephen McCarthy/Collision/Sportsfile via Flickr

In order to become the party of the working class, Cass has argued, the GOP must abandon its doctrinaire attachment to free-market principles in favor of traditionally Democratic causes like organized labor, the minimum wage and an industrial policy in which the government boosts particular industries over others. He also favors a stricter immigration policy with an eye toward migrants impact on the wages of American workers, arguments echoed by Vance and Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

Its a very different set of things to put together and support, certainly from Republicans, Cass told me recently, describing his position as in all respects antithetical to the Chamber of Commerce view.

Cass critics say he is merely a more intellectual version of the crass political opportunists looking to capitalize on the Trump legacy. Why else would the 2012 Romney campaign adviser turn his back on the free-market principles he once championed? Why else would the populist agitators of the previous decade, including the Tea Party darling Marco Rubio and his chief of staff, the former Heritage Action enfant terrible Michael Needham, shift their focus from restraining government and controlling spending to finding new ways for the feds to meddle in the economy, or the onetime Trump critic Vance transform himself into an avatar of populist economics?

A lot of people have tried to assign meaning to the Trump phenomenon, and a lot of that meaning is self-serving, says Michael Strain, director of economic policy at the American Enterprise Institute. President Trump did not expose some deep problem in American society that requires a rethinking of the economic system, Strain adds, arguing that the 2008 financial crisis and the recession that followed led to the sorts of populist uprisings around the globe that have historically followed economic cataclysms.

Others, including the political scientist Richard Hanania, say Cass is drawing the wrong lessons from Trumps political success, which Hanania believes had more to do with culture than economics. In an essay published after the 2020 election and titled, unsubtly, The National Populist Illusion, Hanania called out Cass and Rubio by name, arguing that attitudes toward issues like political correctness and immigration were more closely linked to Trump votes than economic status.

Hedge funds, private equity firms and venture capitalists, many of them longtime Republican donors, have been on the receiving end of many of Cass barbs, and the titans of industry, broadly speaking, argue that Cass has no more business charting the countrys economic policy than any other Ivy League consultant. See last months nasty Twitter tangle between Cass and the hedge fund billionaire Clifford Asness, a top GOP donor, that began when Cass argued that Asness firm hasnt been good at delivering results for its own investors. Describing American Compass as a blood and soil organization, Asness urged his followers to familiarize themselves with Cass work: Its every populist piece of utter nonsense all in one place. Very convenient, he wrote.

Twitter battles notwithstanding, Cass cites as his chief intellectual adversaries Haley, the former U.N. ambassador, as well as the outgoing Pennsylvania senator Pat Toomey, who has been a leading voice on economic policy, and the members of the Wall Street Journal editorial board.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley is, along with Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, one of the leading opponents of the emerging movement of Republican economic populism. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Toomey delivered a speech last year titled In Defense of Capitalism that took aim not at the old threat that comes from the left but rather at the hyphenated capitalism trending on the right. When I look at this and I look at where this is coming from, he said in the speech, it strikes me as maybe the most serious threat to economic freedom and prosperity in a long time, because its coming from our allies. It is meant to be a dagger thrust into the heart of the traditional center-right consensus that maximizing economic growth is all about.

Haley, a likely 2024 presidential candidate, made the debate the subject of her own remarks at the conservative Hudson Institute last February and later in a Wall Street Journal op-ed slamming those who are pushing a watered-down or hyphenated capitalism.

Other 2024 prospects among them, Mike Pompeo, Ron DeSantis, Ted Cruz and Rick Scott havent yet staked out strong positions on the GOPs intraparty economics debate, but they will inevitably need to do so. The one thing on which both groups agree is that an economic brawl on the right is likely to play out in the next Republican primary. Cass predicts a fight for the future of right of center between his allies, like Rubio and Hawley, and those he describes as pre-Trump, including Haley.

Just as Trump disrupted the political consensus on China, the outcome of this debate is likely to shape the consensus economic views of a party in tumult. One of the practical questions stemming from this debate is how voters respond to the rhetoric of a watered-down capitalism, and whether it produces results electorally. Opponents argue it might be good short-term politics, but that voters ultimately punish politicians who preside over periods of economic contraction precisely what those like Toomey say the populists are likely to produce.

Those of us who think as I do need to constantly remind people that capitalism serves the common good, Toomey said in an interview. This whole notion of common-good capitalism betrays the flawed premise on which its based, which is that capitalism somehow does not serve the common good.

View original post here:

A Big Policy Fight Is Brewing on the Right. And Its Not All About Trump. - POLITICO

ORBETELLO, Italy On Friday, the first day that Italians needed to present a nationwide health passport for access to indoor dining, museums, gyms, theaters and a wide range of social activities, Margherita Catenuto, 18, from Sicily, proudly showed a bar code at the Capitoline Museum in Rome certifying that she was vaccinated.

Its like showing you have a conscience, said Ms. Catenuto as she walked in. You do it for yourself, and you do it for others. Its very sensible.

Similar measures to stem the coronavirus pandemic have prompted large protests in France and bitterly split Americans between cities that will require vaccine passes, like New York, and entire parts of the country that consider even masks an affront to their rights. But Italians have mostly greeted their new Green Pass with widespread acceptance and, after some compromises, near political consensus.

After a long populist period that prized anti-establishment fervor and viral propaganda over pragmatism and expertise, Italians are suddenly enjoying a high season of rationality.

For things to get better, get vaccinated and respect the rules, Prime Minister Mario Draghi, the most unapologetically establishment prime minister in Europe, told reporters on Friday before Parliaments summer recess.

On Friday, signs outside movie theaters reminded patrons to bring their Green Passes proof of a vaccination, a negative test swab taken in recent days or proof of a past virus infection which they can download or print out. Restaurant workers checked certificates along with temperatures and reservations. Tourists can provide proof of vaccination with a vaccine accepted by European Medicines Agency.

Do you have a Green Pass, a hostess at an Orbetello sushi restaurant asked Laura Novelli as she showed up for lunch with a friend. She didnt, nor did she have a negative swab test result or proof that she had recovered from Covid. I didnt even think about it, the 26-year-old waitress told the hostess who turned her away with a shrug.

The notion that Italy under Mr. Draghi is doing reasonable things to help bring Italy out of the pandemic and into recovery has translated into broad support for what is now Europes most expansive measure in countering the spread of the Delta variant.

A recent poll published in Italys largest newspaper, Corriere della Sera, showed that 66 percent of Italians support the Green Pass, and populist leaders who once cast doubt on vaccines have largely gotten with the program.

Having a reasonable leader helps, but I think Italians were reasonable in this crisis from the very beginning, said Ferruccio De Bortoli, a columnist and former editor of the newspaper. He added that this goes against the myth of irrational Italians.

On Thursday night, the government announced that starting in September, the pass will also be required for schoolteachers, school administrators and university students. Teachers who dont get the pass wont be allowed into school. After five absences, teachers will stop receiving salaries.

Mr. Draghi has called returning to in-school learning a fundamental objective.

In September the pass will also be required to board ferries and buses traveling between more than two regions and on planes and high-speed trains. People who enter restricted areas without the pass, and business owners who let them in, face a fine of up to 1,000 euros more than $1,180. A business that violates the rule can be closed for one to 10 days.

Aug. 6, 2021, 7:54 p.m. ET

That did not stop the hostess at the sushi restaurant, who said the pass was wreaking havoc on reservations and business on its first day, from offering to look the other way for two teenage boys who did not have certifications. They declined and stepped back onto the street.

I like to travel and wherever you go you need this freaking pass, said one of the teenagers, Giovanni Galatolo, 18. Im getting vaccinated on Tuesday.

The government argues that the pass will increase economic activity, not least by allowing more of normal life to resume. For example, seating capacity on the national high-speed train network will be increased from 50 percent to 80 percent, meaning more business travel and economic activity.

But it is also clearly intended to push Italians like Mr. Galatolo to get vaccinated.

Mr. Draghi, whose government consists of a grand coalition of parties, has exhibited a flair for putting populist politicians who traffic in spreading unreasonable doubts in their place. That includes Matteo Salvini, the leader of the nationalist League party and once the most powerful politician in Italy, who has struggled for relevance under the plain-spoken Mr. Draghi.

Mr. Salvini has staked out an ambiguous, have-it-both-ways position on the vaccine. One day he dips back into the populism that once made him Italys most popular politician, saying that those opposed to vaccinations should be listened to, that vaccines are useless for young people, and that the Green Pass should not be required to enter restaurants and bars. The next he declares support for Mr. Draghi and his policies.

Last month, when he suggested that a broader Green Pass would deprive half of Italians of their right to life, Mr. Draghi would have none of it.

The appeal to not getting vaccinated is an appeal to die, Mr. Draghi said in response to Mr. Salvinis remarks. You dont get a vaccine, you get sick, you die. The refusal to get vaccinated, he added, would make people die.

Understand the State of Vaccine Mandates in the U.S.

The next morning, Mr. Salvini got vaccinated.

Mr. Salvini said he had already booked his vaccination, and that he did it not based on what Mr. Draghi said but as a free choice and not because someone imposed it on me.

But its now clear who is calling the shots, especially since the pro-business base of Mr. Salvinis own party supports Mr. Draghi in the hopes of getting the economy moving again.

Mr. Draghi has obviously robbed populism of its voice, said Sergio Fabbrini, a professor of politics and international relations and dean of the Political Science Department at Luiss, a university in Rome.

The Green Pass is by no means a panacea to the pandemic, and there are still major hurdles for the government to overcome. Younger Italians have proved more resistant to getting vaccinated, but some Italian regions have mobilized inoculation campaigns at their beaches, nightclubs and bars. In Sicily officials offered vaccines in ice cream shops and pizzerias.

More troubling, especially given the awful toll of the virus on older Italians during the first waves of the pandemic, is that about 11 percent of Italians over the age of 60 are still not vaccinated.

Sporadic protests by anti-vaccination activists, who were encouraged during the anti-establishment political campaigns of Five Star and the League, have broken out.

While the government considers about 7 to 8 percent of Italians as strongly opposed to vaccines, it sees an equal percentage as reachable, but they just havent gotten around to it or dont see the point. The Green Pass, they argue, has already prompted a spike in vaccination bookings, and the government is confident a broader use of the pass will prompt even more inoculations.

Ms. Novelli, who was turned away from the sushi restaurant for not having a Green Pass, said she wasnt ideologically opposed to inoculation, but had hesitated for fear of missing work with side effects from a fever. She said she understood the rationale of the pass, and said if it became necessary to work, Ill have to do it, but she said she wouldnt get vaccinated just to eat in a sushi restaurant.

I did, said her friend Laura Cretu, who had recently been vaccinated and added that she also needed it to go to university classes in September. Without the Green Pass, she said, you cant do anything.

Reporting was contributed by Emma Bubola in Rome, Gaia Pianigiani in Siena and Elisabetta Povoledo in Pallanza, Italy.

Read the original:

Italians (Mostly) Embrace a Green Pass to Prove Vaccination on Its First Day - The New York Times

Puducherry awash with posters, portraying CM as the hero of films Sarpatta Parambarai and Kabali, ahead of his birthday on Wednesday

For those accustomed to the poster mania that surfaces in the city during the run-up to the birthday celebrations of N. Rangasamy, who turns 71 on Wednesday in his record fourth stint as Puducherry Chief Minister, the appearance of a reference to filmmaker Pa. Ranjiths OTT release Sarpatta Parambarai this year was a no-brainer.

Sure enough, one of the posters features Mr. Rangasamy in a boxing ring in the place of the hero of the film, played by Arya, alongside his mentor and inspiration, K. Kamaraj, former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.

Over the years, more so when he occupied the Chief Ministers chair, leaders and cadres of the AINRC, a party he founded, have gone to great lengths to display their loyalty in the form of huge banners, cut-outs and hoardings.

In the past, the wall-life version of the man they call Makkal Mudhalvar has featured him in the league of Barack Obama, Roger Federer (a nod to Mr. Rangasamys routine of playing a set or two at the Gorimedu grounds) or in the avatar of films such as Baahubali and Kabali. This time, the larger-than-life avatars also include that of Krishna in the iconic moment in the Kurukshetra battleground from the Mahabharata. In fact, over-zealous loyalists have not spared the Bay of Bengal either putting up posters on wooden pillars off-shore.

Citizens are hardly amused at the scale of hero worship and the attendant disfigurement of public spaces in flagrant violation of the Puducherry Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 2000.

As a responsible Chief Minister, as I am sure he is, we expect him to honour the ban on posters, said Sunaina Mandeen, a resident of Kurussukuppam.

The minimum thing required in any society is implementation of the rule of law. Whether it is disfigurement of public spaces or implementing the ban on plastic, the will has to come right from the top, she said.

Puducherry Municipality officials say that the rules had been framed granting exemptions with clearance from the civic body but concede that violations are common.

Any move from our side to crack down on the violations can potentially trigger a law and order issue. From the perspective of finding a sustainable solution, we are mooting an all-party meeting to sensitise stakeholders on the issue and evolve a consensus on voluntarily ending this practice that mars the dignity and the beauty of the city, an official said.

Observers say it will be amiss to dismiss the phenomena as a product of astroturfing as the veteran is one of the few to enjoy a cult status among followers, especially in the Thattanchavady-Indira Nagar belt.This celebration overdrive is disconnected from the image of simplicity and austerity around Mr. Rangasamys demeanour and lifestyle, said V. Selvam, social scientist.

The very fact that he enjoys such popularity and stature also bestows on him a special responsibility to set an example for his followers. Given the circumstances of the pandemic and a tottering local economy, we would have expected him to instruct his followers to scale back celebrations, he said.

Meanwhile, AINRC Secretary N.S.J. Jayabal on Monday issued an appeal to followers to not to visit Mr. Rangasamys house on his birthday as he would not be in town. The appeal was made to prevent crowding in view of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Read more here:

Rangasamy remains Puducherrys poster boy of competitive populism - The Hindu