[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
DENVER — While speaking to the Denver City Council about plans for a yurt at Monarch Montessori of Denver, two young students were targeted by a racist rant from another attendee watching via Zoom.
The two girls attended the council meeting with two fellow students and a group of educators. The goal was to discuss the school’s plans for bringing a yurt to the campus, which would be used for music classes. The other two students intended to speak with councilmembers about making two crosswalks near the school more accessible.
“Last night, we went in with a lot of optimism,” said Mairi McCormick, director of elementary at Monarch Montessori. “What we really wanted was for our students to be able to demonstrate in a public space.”
However, the students’ prepared speeches were stopped abruptly by a racist rant that was broadcast over the council speakers through the meeting’s Zoom call.
Local News
6:47 PM, May 14, 2024
The students’ teacher, Giovanni Breaux, was standing at the podium alongside the girls.
“Obviously, as a Black woman, bringing these young Black students to city council and to have them be so excited, this was something that they were doing for the very first time. To have them be so excited and then to be met with that was atrocious,” Breaux said. “Everyone’s response was their jaw hitting the floor.”
Laura Pretty, executive director of Monarch Montessori, was also at the meeting.
“My understanding is that after that, [city council] stopped the meeting. And then a number of city councilmembers came out with us and we went into a little room. They just showered the girls with love and gave them an opportunity to give their speech in a safer space,” Pretty said. “All of that hate, I actually think, whoever the person who was doing that, if anything, they have further empowered us and our kids.”
The educators who spoke with Denver7 on Tuesday said the students were shaken, but by the time they left the Denver City and County Building, they were inspired to be a force of powerful change in their community.
“I don’t know how else to say it — they were pumped. They were like, “We’re going to go back. I’m going to grow up, I’m going to be a judge. I want to work in government,”” Breaux said, smiling. “All of us had the same reaction when the girls were like that, just showing that feeling of being empowered. We were all like, “Yeah, that’s what Monarch is about.””
FULL INTERVIEW: Students feel inspired despite racist rant at Denver City Council meeting, educators say
Pretty said one of her biggest concerns was that the racist outburst would discourage students from participating in democracy. She wants to ensure all students still advocate for the issues they are passionate about and feel empowered to use their voices.
“The idea that for kids, democracy could be scary, is really upsetting to me,” said Pretty. “I want to make sure that our kids are not afraid to speak. That’s the number one lesson we’re going to take from this. And I think if anything, you know, we’ll certainly be looking at how can we work with city council if we bring kids again to make sure it’s a little safer.”
Breaux said the girls are still wearing the trauma of the racist rant from Monday, but one student said she wants to run for city council one day. Everyone left the meeting determined to secure the yurt for their school and work on improving the accessibility of two crosswalks around it.
“Those girls are feeling now like they can do anything,” Breaux said. “That nothing is going to stop them.”
The Follow Up
What do you want Denver7 to follow up on? Is there a story, topic or issue you want us to revisit? Let us know with the contact form below.
[ad_2]
Colette Bordelon
Source link

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Egon Cholakian, an esteemed intelligence teaching expert who served in the White House during Reagan’s administration and currently specializes in national security, has unveiled results of a 30-year long investigation which uncovered a danger to America and the entire democratic world.
WASHINGTON, April 16, 2024 (Newswire.com)
–
Dr. Cholakian, through a meticulously researched three-hour video, published on his international platform Earth Save Science Collaborative, invites everyone who cares about the future of America and democracy to engage in dialogue and open investigation.
Essential Investigation Results Unveiled:
Dr. Cholakian delves into the heart of global turmoil, questioning who has benefited from the world’s conflicts over the past three decades. Notably, he sheds light on the strategy of how such conflicts are being organized by hidden anti-democratic forces.
As Cholakian aptly puts it, “If we see, hear, or read information that contains models of dissatisfaction, denial, hatred, or disappointment with our country and its people, we must not allow these messages to pass through our critical thinking, and we must consciously stop them… Here, everyone must take responsibility for themselves and for America as a whole.”
In a thought-provoking analysis, Egon Cholakian presents compelling case studies that reveal the tactics employed by disinformation campaigns. These orchestrated efforts aim to sway public opinion, fostering disillusionment with democratic systems.
ALLATRA, a global volunteer movement addressing climate change, becomes a notable case study. Its participants have faced unfair anti-democratic measures against them. Dr. Cholakian explains how such defamatory campaigns inflict significant harm on the very foundation of democracy. He emphasizes that when journalists engage in these campaigns, they unwittingly contribute to a perilous path and democracy’s demise.
Egon Cholakian’s video is a must-watch for those seeking a comprehensive understanding of the current geopolitical landscape, willing to develop their own critical thinking and protect our future. It is a guide to keep our nation safe in this perilous historical moment of time.
For more information, please visit www.EgonReport.org or contact Marina Ovtsynova at info@esscglobal.com.
About Dr. A. Egon Cholakian
National Security Expert, Federal Lobbyist – U.S. Congress and White House. Registered Foreign Agent, U.S. Department of Justice – National Security Division. Member, International Association of Intelligence Educators, United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation and Founding Member, OSINT (Open Source Intelligence) Foundation. Worked with: 4 U.S. Presidents, 3 U.S. National Security Advisors, 1 Central Intelligence Agency Director
Egon Cholakian’s Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/a-egon-cholakian-11256b4
Source: Earth Save Science Collaborative
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
By SHEIKH SAALIQ Associated Press
NEW DELHI (AP) — The world’s largest democratic election could also be one of its most consequential.
With a population of over 1.4 billion people and close to 970 million voters, India’s general election pits Prime Minister Narendra Modi, an avowed Hindu nationalist, against a broad alliance of opposition parties that are struggling to play catch up.
The 73-year-old Modi first swept to power in 2014 on promises of economic development, presenting himself as an outsider cracking down on corruption. Since then, he has fused religion with politics in a formula that has attracted wide support from the country’s majority Hindu population.
India under Modi is a rising global power, but his rule has also been marked by rising unemployment, attacks by Hindu nationalists against minorities, particularly Muslims, and a shrinking space for dissent and free media.
The 6-week-long general election starts on April 19 and results will be announced on June 4. The voters, who comprise over 10% of the world’s population, will elect 543 members for the lower house of Parliament for a five-year term.
The polls will be held in seven phases and ballots cast at more than a million polling stations. Each phase will last a single day with several constituencies across multiple states voting that day. The staggered polling allows the government to deploy tens of thousands of troops to prevent violence and transport election officials and voting machines.
India has a first-past-the-post multiparty electoral system in which the candidate who receives the most votes wins. To secure a majority, a party or coalition must breach the mark of 272 seats.
While voters in the United States and elsewhere use paper ballots, India uses electronic voting machines.
Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party and his main challenger, Rahul Gandhi of the Indian National Congress, represent Parliament’s two largest factions. Several other important regional parties are part of an opposition bloc.
Opposition parties, which have been previously fractured, have united under a front called INDIA, or Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance, to deny Modi a a third straight election victory.
The alliance has fielded a single primary candidate in most constituencies. But it has been roiled by ideological differences and personality clashes, and has not yet decided on its candidate for prime minister.
Most surveys suggest Modi is likely to win comfortably, especially after he opened a Hindu temple in northern Ayodhya city in January, which fulfilled his party’s long-held Hindu nationalist pledge.
Another victory would cement Modi as one of the country’s most popular and important leaders. It would follow a thumping win in 2019, when the BJP clinched an absolute majority by sweeping 303 parliamentary seats. The Congress party managed only 52 seats.
For decades, India has clung doggedly to its democratic convictions, largely due to free elections, an independent judiciary, a thriving media, strong opposition and peaceful transition of power. Some of these credentials have seen a slow erosion under Modi’s 10-year rule, with the polls seen as a test for the country’s democratic values.
Many watchdogs have now categorized India as a “hybrid regime” that is neither a full democracy nor a full autocracy.
The polls will also test the limits of Modi, a populist leader whose rise has seen increasing attacks against religious minorities, mostly Muslims. Critics accuse him of using a Hindu-first platform, endangers the country’s secular roots.
Under Modi, the media, once viewed as vibrant and largely independent, have become more pliant and critical voices muzzled.Courts have largely bent to Modi’s will and given favorable verdicts in crucial cases. Centralization of executive power has strained India’s federalism. And federal agencies have bogged down top opposition leaders in corruption cases, which they deny.
Another key issue is India’s large economy, which is among the fastest growing in the world. It has helped India emerge as a global power and a counterweight to China. But even as India’s growth soars by some measures, the Modi government has struggled to generate enough jobs for young Indians, and instead has relied on welfare programs like free food and housing to woo voters.
The U.N.’s latest Asia-Pacific Human Development Report lists India among the top countries with high income and wealth inequality.
[ad_2]
Associated Press
Source link

[ad_1]
NEW DELHI — An alliance of India’s opposition parties launched its election campaign with a massive rally Sunday that criticized Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government of stifling opponents and undermining democracy ahead of a national election next month.
The “Save Democracy” rally in New Delhi was the first major show of strength by the opposition bloc INDIA. Modi on Sunday also launched a formal campaign for the election to be held over six weeks starting April 19.
Opposition leaders spoke to the flag-waving crowd and criticized Modi’s government for arresting several of their colleagues, including New Delhi’s top elected official Arvind Kejriwal on March 21. The leaders called the arrests undemocratic and accused Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP, of using federal agencies to undermine the opposition.
Kejriwal was arrested by the federal Enforcement Directorate on charges that his party and state ministers had accepted 1 billion rupees ($12 million) in bribes from liquor contractors nearly two years ago. The Aam Aadmi Party, or Common Man’s Party, denied the accusations and said that Kejriwal would remain as New Delhi’s chief minister while the court decides on the next step.
In January, the agency arrested Hemant Soren — until then the chief minister of eastern Jharkhand state — for allegedly facilitating an illegal land sale. Soren’s party denies the charges.
“This battle is to safeguard the nation, democracy, constitution, future of the nation, youth, farmers and women. This battle is for justice and truth,” Deepender Singh Hooda, a lawmaker of the opposition Congress party, told reporters at the rally.
Kejriwal’s arrest is seen as a setback for the opposition bloc that is the main challenger of the BJP in the elections.
The BJP denies targeting the opposition and says law enforcement agencies act independently.
“Narendra Modi wants to strangle democracy and take away the option from the people to choose the government of their choice,” opposition leader Rahul Gandhi from the Congress party, who took part in Sunday’s rally, wrote on X.
Modi kicked off his campaign for a third term from the city of Meerut, some 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of New Delhi.
Modi said the opposition was uneasy because of the administration’s crackdown on corruption. “While Modi’s mantra is to eradicate corruption, their (opposition parties) credo is protect the corrupt,” he said.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
WASHINGTON — As an independent, Christian Miller can’t vote in Pennsylvania’s closed presidential primary in April. He said it wouldn’t matter even if he could.
“You’re not really voting for anything,” said Miller, who left the Democratic Party in 2022. “Every election I’ve ever seen, the candidates have been decided by the time they get to Pennsylvania.”
Pennsylvania is a crucial presidential swing state and the fifth most populous in the country. And yet holding a primary so much later than other states means its voters often have little say in choosing the presidential contenders. It’s the same for voters in much of the rest of the country.
That dynamic is even more pronounced this year with the front-runners for both major parties in overwhelming position to become the presumptive nominees on or not long after Super Tuesday, traditionally the biggest day on the election calendar when 16 states hold contests.
Academics and democracy analysts said the presidential primary system, in which a small percentage of the nation’s voters often determines the candidates, is one of several quirks that make the United States stand out. To some, it raises questions about whether the world’s oldest and most prominent democracy might also be among the least representative.
Voter attitudes might be different if the U.S. were more like many countries in the European Union that give all voters a slate of candidates from different parties and then hold a run-off with the top vote-getters, said Danielle Piatkiewicz, deputy chief operating officer at the Alliance of Democracies Foundation, a Denmark-based think tank.
“You don’t have the frustrations of where it’s an either or system,” she said. “Usually you can find a political party that meets your needs.”
Attention to America’s primary system is especially notable this year, a historic one for elections around the world and as polls have consistently shown a deep lack of enthusiasm for a rematch between Democratic President Joe Biden and his predecessor, Republican Donald Trump.
As Tuesday’s contests near, Biden and Trump appear on their way to securing their parties’ nominations even though just eight states will have awarded delegates through presidential primaries or party caucuses by then.
Paula Stevens, 73, is one of those voters unhappy with the candidate options and frustrated that the contests are likely to be decided by the time she is able to vote on March 19, the date of Ohio’s primary.
Grocery shopping north of Columbus, Stevens said she will pass on this year’s presidential contest. She registered Republican in 2016 specifically to vote against Trump, but can’t support Biden this year.
“There’s no choice,” she said.
Nick Troiano, founding executive director of the group Unite America, said the system also fails to engage independent voters, who are prohibited from voting in presidential primaries in 22 states. That’s 24 million voters who end up “stuck with the party nominees” without selecting them, he said.
He said gerrymandering of congressional and state legislative districts highlights another consequence of independents being excluded from many party primaries.
“The primaries are really the only elections that matter because the districts are so uncompetitive these days,” he said.
More than 80% of congressional districts are decided in the primary because the districts lean so heavily in favor of one party or the other. But a much smaller percentage of voters cast ballots in those races: “So we have a rule of the minority, not the majority,” he said.
It’s yet another aspect of elections in the U.S. that sets the country apart. In most states, a partisan legislature draws the legislative and congressional districts and can do so in a way that ensures it will hold onto, and perhaps expand, its power.
The U.S. is “pretty close to the only democracy in the world” that has the participants of the government controlling the redistricting process and making the rules, said Michael Miller, a political scientist who specializes in democratization at George Washington University. “For a huge swath of our country, it’s still parties picking what’s best for the current party in control.”
What several experts said they find most striking about the U.S. compared to some other democracies is that the right to vote is not enshrined in the Constitution.
The amendments make it illegal to deny specific groups the right to vote, “but there is no provision in the Constitution that gives you the right to vote generally, other than the anti-discrimination provisions,” said Paul Smith, vice president of the Campaign Legal Center.
What is there is “not the same as saying every citizen has the right to vote and to participate in a free and fair electoral process. If I could wave a wand, I would start there,” said Nathan Stock, associate director of the Carter Center’s Conflict Resolution Program. “That lack of a codified right allows for a lot of other mechanisms, voter suppression, all kinds of issues that at this point are fairly unique to American democracy.”
Other concerns include the hyper partisanship prevalent in the country’s politics and the stagnant nature of the government. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index, which ranks 167 countries and territories on measures such as political culture and political participation, lists the U.S. as a flawed democracy in its 2023 report.
The report warned that if Biden faces Trump again in the general election “a country that was once a beacon of democracy is likely to slide deeper into division and disenchantment.”
There is one notable bright spot. Despite hurdles to voting and a selection process for presidential candidates that can exclude much of the country, Miller, of George Washington University, said the actual administration of elections is “exceptional in the United States.”
That is despite years of attacks from Trump, who falsely blames his loss in 2020 on widespread voter fraud and whose drumbeat of election lies has persuaded a majority of Republicans to believe Biden was not elected legitimately.
“Despite the growing distrust of the system because of extreme partisanship, there’s really no evidence of any real fraud occurring,” he said, noting the dedicated professionals running the systems.
“Even well-established democracies have much higher degrees of errors or even some degrees of violence,” he said. “We don’t really have that — so far, anyway.”
____
Associated Press writer Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
TAIPEI, Taiwan — A group of United States Congress members met with Taiwan‘s president Thursday in a show of bipartisan support that’s certain to draw scrutiny from China, which opposes such visits and sees them as a challenge to its claim of sovereignty over the self-governing island.
A visit by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan two years ago resulted in China dispatching warships and military aircraft to all sides of the democratic island, and firing ballistic missiles into the waters nearby.
In a meeting Thursday with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen, Rep. Mike Gallagher, the Republican chair of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, highlighted the bipartisan support for the U.S.-Taiwan partnership, which he described as “stronger and more rock-solid than ever now.”
The U.S., like most countries, doesn’t formally recognize Taiwan as a country but maintains robust informal relations with the island and is bound by its own laws to provide it with the weapons it needs to defend itself.
Gallagher thanked Tsai, who is nearing the end of her second and last term in office, for her leadership in Taiwan and for distinguishing herself “as a leader within the free world.”
Tsai thanked the U.S. for continuing to help Taiwan strengthen its self-defense capabilities.
“Together we are safeguarding freedom and democracy and maintaining regional peace,” she said, adding that she hoped to see more exchanges between the U.S. and Taiwan in a range of domains.
The delegation, led by Gallagher, R-Wis., and Raja Krishnamoorthi, D.-Ill., was expected to be in Taiwan for three days as part of a larger visit to the Indo-Pacific region. Other members include Reps. John Moolenaar, R-Mich.; Dusty Johnson, R-S.D.; and Seth Moulton, D-Mass.
Consisting of some of Congress’ staunchest critics of China, the bipartisan delegation was to meet with other senior Taiwanese leaders and members of civil society to discuss U.S.-Taiwan relations, regional security and trade, among other issues of mutual interest.
Krishnamoorthi said Taiwan is one of the United States’ “closest friends” and a role model for democracy, after Lai Ching-te emerged victorious as Taiwan’s president-elect and vowed to safeguard the island’s de facto independence from China and further align it with other democracies.
“It’s one of the most robust, most vibrant, one of the most exciting democracies in the world,” Krishnamoorthi said. “And this year, when half of the world’s population will be going to the polls to vote, you provided a role model for how elections should be conducted, and for that we salute you on this peaceful transfer of power, and you are an exemplar of democracy.”
Krishnamoorthi is the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party’s ranking Democrat. The committee was formed in 2023 and has held numerous hearings focused on human rights, trade, cyber intrusions and other issues central to the rising tensions between the two superpowers.
Earlier in February, the Commerce Department announced that for the first time in more than two decades, Mexico surpassed China as the leading source of goods imported by the United States. In 2023, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy hosted Taiwan’s president in a rare high-level meeting on U.S. soil.
The shows of support for Taiwan reflect the growing willingness by many in Congress to confront China on a range of issues as economic relations between the two nations deteriorate.
Taiwan has been under “hybrid” pressure from China, especially in the military and economic spheres, Foreign Minister Joseph Wu said at a news conference following the meeting.
The support Taiwan receives from both parties in the U.S. is a bulwark against military conflict with China, Gallagher said.
But, he added, democracies like those in Taiwan and the U.S., while sometimes messy, remain “unbeatable.”
Taiwan was part of the $95-billion aid package that passed the Senate on Feb. 13, but has stalled in the House. That package, which focused on Ukraine and Israel, included $1.9 billion to replenish U.S. weapons provided to Taiwan. Another $3.3 billion would go to build more U.S.-made submarines in support of a security partnership with Australia and the United Kingdom.
___
Freking reported from Washington.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]

My new article, “The Constitutional Case Against Exclusionary Zoning” (coauthored with Josh Braver of the University of Wisconsin) is now available for free download on SSRN. It is also under submission to law reviews. The problem it addresses is, in my view, the most important constitutional property rights issue of our time, and one of the most significant constitutional issues of any kind, given the enormous harm zoning restrictions inflict. That’s an admission against interest, as I have spent much of my career writing about public use and eminent domain.
Here is the abstract:
We argue that exclusionary zoning—the imposition of restrictions on the amount and types of housing that property owners are allowed to build— is unconstitutional because it violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Exclusionary zoning has emerged as a major political and legal issue. A broad cross-ideological array of economists and land-use scholars have concluded that it is responsible for massive housing shortages in many parts of the United States, thereby cutting off millions of people – particularly the poor and minorities—from economic and social opportunities. In the process, it also stymies economic growth and innovation, making the nation as a whole poorer.
Exclusionary zoning is permitted under Euclid v. Ambler Realty, the 1926 Supreme Court decision holding that exclusionary zoning is largely exempt from constitutional challenge under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and by extension also the Takings Clause. Despite the wave of academic and public concern about the issue, so far, no modern in-depth scholarly analysis has advocated overturning or severely limiting Euclid. Nor has any scholar argued that exclusionary zoning should be invalidated under the Takings Clause, more generally.
We contend Euclid should be reversed or strictly limited, and that exclusionary zoning restrictions should generally be considered takings requiring compensation. This conclusion follows from both originalism and a variety of leading living constitution theories. Under originalism, the key insight is that property rights protected by the Takings Clause include not only the right to exclude, but also the right to use property. Exclusionary zoning violates this right because it severely limits what owners can build on their land. Exclusionary zoning is also unconstitutional from the standpoint of a variety of progressive living constitution theories of interpretation, including Ronald Dworkin’s “moral reading,” representation-reinforcement theory, and the emerging “anti-oligarchy” constitutional theory. The article also considers different strategies for overruling or limiting Euclid, and potential synergies between constitutional litigation and political reform of zoning.
The paper is an example of cross-ideological collaboration. Josh Braver is a progressive and a living constitutionalist. I am a libertarian, generally sympathetic to originalism. We started discussing the issue of zoning after taking opposite sides of a debate over judicial review at the University of Wisconsin, sponsored by the Wisconsin chapters of the American Constitution Society and the Federalist Society. Although we differ on many other issues, we found that we agree on this one!
[ad_2]
Ilya Somin
Source link

[ad_1]
Indonesia, one of the world’s largest democracies, and the biggest predominantly Muslim one, is about to get a new leader. It’s a young, vibrant democracy — half of the nation’s 205 million registered voters are under 40. After polls closed on Monday the huge job of counting ballots got under way across the thousands of islands that make up the Indonesian archipelago.
Indonesia’s current Defense Minister, Prabowo Subianto, was ahead in the polls before the vote and had a commanding lead in unofficial results Monday. With about 70% of the ballots counted, the 72-year-old former army general appeared to have captured around 58% of the vote. If he holds that lead, and gets more than 50% in the final tally, he will avoid a runoff with an outright win.
A wealthy former military man with close ties to the current government, this is Subianto’s third bid for the presidency.
Eko Siswono Toyudho/Anadolu/Getty
He’s a controversial figure, having served as a top commander under Indonesia’s former long-time dictator Suharto. Subianto was accused of human rights abuses during that period, and was even barred from entering the U.S. at one point during the 1990s.
In 1998, he was dishonorably dismissed from the army after being linked to the abduction of more than 20 student democracy activists — 13 of whom have never been found.
Ahead of this year’s elections, the former army commander underwent a remarkable makeover, largely via TikTok, which was hugely influential in the campaign.
Subianto used the platform to re-brand himself as a cuddly, cat-loving grandfather — and one who isn’t ashamed to cut some pretty awkward dad-dance moves onstage at rallies.
The new image appears to have won over a decisive number of young Indonesian voters, many of whom may not remember his previous incarnations.
Indonesia has been on something of an economic roll. The relatively small island nation has become a huge and vital supplier of nickel to the electric vehicle industry worldwide. It also produces palm oil, which is used in a wide array of food products.
Indonesia has managed to keep good relations with both China and the U.S., even participating in military exercises with the U.S. and its regional allies while keeping Chinese foreign investment flowing into a whole range of development projects.
Subianto has said he’s committed to remaining on good terms with both superpowers.
But Subianto’s critics warn that, at heart, he is a right-wing populist.
He has always denied wrong-doing linked to his time commanding Indonesian security forces, but he’s also said that Indonesia needs an authoritarian leader, and suggested it would be a good idea to abolish presidential term limits.
Democracy activists warn that Subianto is Indonesia’s next authoritarian strongman just waiting to happen.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
JAKARTA, Indonesia — Millions of Indonesians were choosing a new president Wednesday as the worldâs third-largest democracy aspires to become a global economic powerhouse just over 25 years since emerging from a brutal authoritarian era.
The incumbent Indonesian defense minister, who has been accused of human rights atrocities as an ex-general, and two former governors are vying to succeed the still-widely popular President Joko Widodo.
Widodoâs rise from a riverside slum to his countryâs presidency has showcased the vibrancy of his Southeast Asian nationâs democracy in a region rife with authoritarian regimes.
The voting in a vast archipelago of 17,000 islands sprawled across three time zones, with a population of 270 million, is a logistical nightmare, with white ballot boxes and ballots being brought by donkeys and on foot in some of the more remote locations. Polls open at 7 a.m. local time in each time zone and the first region began voting at 22:00 GMT.
Aside from the presidency, about 20,000 national, provincial and district parliamentary posts would be contested by tens of thousands of candidates. About 10,000 hopefuls from 18 political parties are eyeing the the national parliamentâs 580 seats alone.
The presidency is being contested by Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto and two former provincial governors, Anies Baswedan and Ganjar Pranowo.
Subianto, who is the front-runner based on several independent surveys, has picked Widodoâs eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, as his vice-presidential running mate.
Subianto is the only candidate with links to the 1967-98 Suharto dictatorship, when he was a lieutenant general. A longtime commander in the Kopassus special forces, he was dishonorably discharged in 1998 after Kopassus soldiers kidnapped and tortured political opponents of Suharto, his then-father-in-law.
Of 22 activists kidnapped that year, 13 remain missing. Subianto never faced trial, although several of his men were tried and convicted.
Polls show the 72-year-old Subianto well ahead of his two rivals, though perhaps not with the majority needed to avoid a runoff. While he is the oldest candidate, his running mate is the youngest: 36-year-old Surakarta Mayor Gibran Rakabuming Raka, Widodoâs son.
Raka is below the statutory minimum age of 40 but was allowed to run under an exception created by the Constitutional Court. The court was then headed by Widodoâs brother-in-law, which set off criticism against the president over perceived favoritism.
Subianto has vowed to continue Widodoâs economic development plan in what experts view as an attempt to draw on Widodoâs popularity. But he is strongly opposed by human rights activists, who associate him with torture and disappearances during the final years of the Suharto dictatorship.
Baswedan, the former head of an Islamic university, served as governor of Jakarta until last year. A former Fulbright scholar, Baswedan had been education and culture minister from 2014 to 2016, when Widodo removed him from the Cabinet.
Baswedan opposes Widodoâs signature plan to move Indonesiaâs capital from Jakarta to Nusantara on the island of Borneo, about 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) away, which involves constructing government buildings and housing from scratch.
He said in an interview with The Associated Press last month that democracy in Indonesia is declining, referring to Subiantoâs choice of Widodoâs son as his running mate, and pledged to get it back on track.
âThis means that there is a decline in trust, it means that our democracy is experiencing a decline in quality, it means that many legal rules are being bent,â he said.
Pranowo is the governing party candidate, but does not have the support of Widodo. He was a national legislator for the governing Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle for 10 years before being elected in 2013 for the first of two terms as Central Java governor.
While governor, he refused to allow Israel to participate in the Under-20 FIFA World Cup to be held in his province. FIFA subsequently dropped Indonesia as host of the games, triggering a backlash against Pranowo from soccer fans.
Israel and Indonesia, the worldâs largest Muslim-majority nation, do not have diplomatic ties.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Here are the takeaways from Putin’s sit-down with Carlson.
The main message Putin sought to convey to Americans: There’s no point helping Ukraine with more money and weapons. And Carlson, who has himself previously questioned U.S. support for Ukraine as it seeks to defend its people and its land in the face of Russia’s assault, was all too happy to help deliver that message.
“If you really want to stop fighting, you need to stop supplying weapons. It will be over within a few weeks. That’s it,” Putin claimed, adding that it was up to the U.S. to tell Ukraine to come to the negotiating table.
But that’s not really the full story, as Putin himself made clear in two telling responses to Carlson’s follow-up questions.
First, asked whether Russia had achieved its war aims, Putin said: “No. We haven’t achieved our aims yet because one of them is de-nazification.” The claim that Russia is seeking to “de-nazify” Ukraine is widely seen as code for the removal of the country’s democratically elected (Jewish) president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In a strong indication of what he meant by his comment, Putin said “we have to get rid of those people” who he claimed, without basis, “support” Nazism.
Second, when Carlson asked whether Putin would “be satisfied with the territory that you have now,” the Russian autocrat refused to respond, returning to his point about de-nazification and insisting he hadn’t yet finished answering the previous question. We’ll take that as another no.
[ad_2]
Eva Hartog and Sergey Goryashko
Source link

[ad_1]
BERLIN — At least 150,000 people gathered in front of the German national parliament Saturday afternoon to protest against the far right, the latest in a string of large weekend demonstrations across Germany.
The pro-democracy demonstrations started three weeks ago after the investigative journalists’ group Correctiv published an article saying that right-wing extremists had recently met to discuss deporting millions of immigrants, including some with German citizenship. Some members of the far-right Alternative for Germany party, or AfD, were present at the meeting.
Saturday’s protest drew more participants than organizers expected, despite intermittent rain showers in the German capital. Police said that as of mid-afternoon on Saturday, approximately 150,000 people were in attendance. Similar protests against the far right in other German cities, including the southern city of Freiburg and the western city of Hannover, also drew thousands of attendees on Saturday.
Under the slogan “We are the Firewall” — a reference to the longstanding taboo against collaborating with the far right in German politics — protesters turned the space next to the Bundestag, or national parliament, into a sea of signs, flags and umbrellas.
People traveled from across Germany to attend Saturday’s protest, saying they felt it was important to be there in order to show their opposition to racism and caution against repeating history.
“We absolutely must not allow the stories that we experienced in 1930 or even back in the 1920s to happen again … We must do everything we can to prevent that,” said Jonas Schmidt, who came from the western port city of Bremen. “That’s why I’m here.”
Kathrin Zauter, another protester, called the strong attendance “really encouraging.”
“This encourages everyone and shows that we are more — we are many,” she said.
The AfD was founded as a euroskeptic party in 2013 and first entered the Bundestag in 2017. Recent polling put the party in second place nationally with support above 20%, far above the 10.3% of the vote it won during the last federal election in 2021.
Polls show AfD is the top party in eastern Germany, including in the states of Brandenburg, Saxony and Thuringia, which are scheduled to hold elections this fall.
The demonstration Saturday was the latest in a string of similar gatherings across the country, many of which have drawn far more participants than organizers expected. In both Hamburg and Munich late last month, protests had to be ended early due to safety concerns with packing too many people into small spaces.
Although Germany has seen other protests against the far right in past years, the size and scope of the recent demonstrations — not just in major cities, but also in dozens of smaller cities across the country — are notable.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz praised the protests, writing in a Saturday post on the social media platform X that citizens’ presence at the gatherings is “a strong sign for democracy and our constitution.”
“In small and big cities across the country, citizens are coming together to demonstrate against forgetting, against hate and incitement,” he added.
[ad_2]
Source link

[ad_1]
Voting in the general election is important: That’s been well established. But do you know what else is crucial? Hitting the polling place in the primaries.
Primary elections are coming up fast in Texas, when voters will pick their party’s nominees in races for the state Legislature, Congress and the White House. Early voting doesn’t start until later this month, and Election Day is on March 5, but there’s another majorly important date that you’ll want to mark down in your calendars.
Monday — yes, this coming Monday — is the last day to register to vote if you want to cast a ballot in the upcoming primaries.
It’s also the final day for those who are already registered to update their name or address online if either has changed.
But if heading to the polling place is a challenge, don’t worry: There’s an organization that can help get you there. Rideshare2Vote will deploy someone to pick you up, take you to the polling place and then drop you off back home. For free.
Founder Sarah Kovich explained that there are three ways that folks can schedule their rides: They can download the app, fill out a web form or call 888-977-2250.
“Once they are registered, our job is to schedule and get them a roundtrip ride to vote,” Kovich said.
Here’s the skinny on registering to vote in the upcoming primary.
Election season is here, which means it’s time to check your voter registration status!
🗳️ The last day to register to vote in the upcoming March Primary is Monday, February 5th. Visit https://t.co/2hJyF2kwm0 to check your current status or find a voter registration application. pic.twitter.com/WjAKvAsJfm
— Dallas Democrats (@dallasdemocrats) January 31, 2024
To register to vote in Dallas County, you can download and print an application in English, Spanish or Vietnamese before mailing it in. You can also do it in person by visiting the Dallas County Elections Department at 1520 Round Table Drive in Big D.
If neither of those options work, call 469-627-8683 (VOTE) to request an application by phone or send an email to [email protected]. Another choice: Pick up an application from your local library, tax or other government office.
If you mail in your application, by the way, it will need to have been postmarked by the Monday deadline.
“It is a very powerful experience to go and vote, even if your vote loses.” – Sarah Kovich, Rideshare2Vote
tweet this
Check to see if you’re already registered to vote by visiting the Texas Secretary of State’s website. Sadly, unlike 42 other states, you can’t sign up from the comfort of your computer.
“What we would really like is for there to be online voter registration in Texas so that we can make it as easy as possible for every eligible citizen to be able to register and be able to vote,” Kovich said.
Folks who are renewing their driver’s licenses online may register to vote at the same time; it’s Texas’ only exception to online registration. Kovich pointed out that those signing up for a license at the DMV can check a voter registration box during the process.
Why Should I Vote in the Primaries?
Primary elections allow voters to choose who they want to see represent their party in the general election. For instance, liberals can cast a ballot picking a Democratic challenger to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, such as U.S. Rep. Colin Allred of Dallas, state Sen. Roland Gutierrez of San Antonio or state Rep. Carl Sherman of DeSoto.
The way Kovich sees it, voting in the primaries demonstrates the strength of one’s conviction. It also gets people used to casting a ballot, just like they’ve (ostensibly) built the habit of going to the barber or dentist.
“Research shows that once you show up, you kind of keep showing up,” Kovich said. “And I believe that that’s because it is a very powerful experience to go and vote, even if your vote loses.”
Unfortunately, few would use the adjective “sexy” to describe voting, Kovich said, but it is the way that you can make your voice heard. And that’s empowering in and of itself. Those who want to experience the gratification of helping others participate in democracy can volunteer with Rideshare2Vote.
Not every seat will have challengers in the primary, but there are plenty such races this time around. For example, U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett will be tasked with defeating two other Democrats, and state Rep. Angie Chen Button, a Richardson Republican, will need to beat a conservative opponent.
Oh, yeah, and then there’s the GOP primary for president. NBD.
Kovich urges Texans to get out the vote this election: “People need to make sure that the person that they want on the ballot in November, that they vote for them in the primary.”
[ad_2]
Simone Carter
Source link

[ad_1]
WASHINGTON — The rumors about vote fraud started swirling as the ballots in Taiwan’s closely watched presidential election were tallied on Jan. 13. There were baseless claims that people had fabricated votes and that officials had miscounted and skewed the results.
In a widely shared video, a woman recording votes mistakenly enters one in the column for the wrong candidate. The message was clear: The election could not be trusted. The results were faked.
It could have been Taiwan’s Jan. 6 moment. But it wasn’t.
Worries that China would use disinformation to undermine the integrity of Taiwan’s vote dogged the recent election, a key moment in the young democracy’s development that highlighted tensions with its much larger neighbor.
In repelling disinformation, Chinese and domestic, Taiwan offers an example to other democracies holding elections this year.
This year , more than 50 countries that are home to half the planet’s population are due to hold national elections. From India to Mexico, the U.K. to Russia, the outcomes of the elections will test the strengths of democracies and countries with authoritarian leaders.
In Taiwan, the response to disinformation was swift. Fact-checking groups debunked the rumors, while the Central Election Commission held a news conference to push back on claims of electoral discrepancies. Influencers like @FroggyChiu with more than 600,000 subscribers also put out explainers on YouTube explaining how votes are tallied.
The video showing the election worker miscounting votes had been selectively edited, fact-checkers found. Voters at the voting station spotted the woman’s error and election workers quickly corrected the count, according to MyGoPen, an independent Taiwanese fact-checking chatbot.
It was just one of dozens of videos that fact checkers had to debunk.
“I believe some people genuinely believed this. And when the election results came out, they thought something was up,” said Eve Chiu, the editor-in-chief of Taiwan’s FactCheck Center, a nonprofit journalism organization.
Supporters of the Taiwan People’s Party presidential candidate Ko Wen-je, many of whom are young, had shared the videos widely on TikTok, which were then shared on Facebook. Prior to the election results, many thought there was a chance of a Ko upset in the race given the candidate had drawn a lot of online attention. Taiwan’s FactCheck Center debunked multiple videos of alleged voter fraud, including another one in which voting officials make a human error caught on camera. The source of these videos is unclear.
Notably, Taiwan has resisted calls for tougher laws that would require social media platforms to police their sites; a proposal to institute such rules was withdrawn in 2022 after free speech concerns were raised.
China, which claims Taiwan as its own, targeted the island with a stream of disinformation ahead of its election, according to research from DoubleThink Lab.
Much of it sought to undermine faith in the incumbent Democratic Progressive Party and cast it as belligerent and likely to start a war that Taiwan can’t win. Other narratives targeted U.S. support for Taiwan, arguing that America was an untrustworthy partner only interested in Taiwan’s semiconductor exports that wouldn’t support the island if it came to war with China.
Taiwan has been able to effectively respond to Chinese disinformation in part because of how seriously the threat is perceived there, according to Kenton Thibaut, a senior resident fellow and expert on Chinese disinformation at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. Instead of a piecemeal approach — focusing solely on media literacy, for instance, or relying only on the government to fact-check false rumors — Taiwan adopted a multifaceted approach, what Thibaut called a “whole of society response” that relied on government, independent fact-check groups and even private citizens to call out disinformation and propaganda.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Alexander Tah-Ray Yui, Taipei’s economic and cultural representative to the U.S., said the government has learned it must identify and debunk false information as quickly as possible in order to counter false narratives. Yui is Taiwan’s de facto ambassador to the U.S.
“Find it early, like a tumor or cancer. Cut it before it spreads,” Yui said of foreign disinformation.
Taiwan’s civil society groups like MyGoPen and the Taiwan FactCheck Center, which received $1 million in funding from Google, have focused on raising public awareness through debunking individual rumors that members of the public report.
The island has a strong civil society. Many of the fact-checker groups were founded by dedicated individuals, such as MyGoPen, whose founder Charles Yeh started the chatbot service because he found his relatives would get confused by online rumors. Others like, Taiwan FactCheck Center, are careful to not take government money so as to preserve their independence, said Chiu.
Media literacy on fake news and the digital environment is growing, those on the front lines say, but slowly.
“It’s like in the past when everyone dumped bottles and cans in the garbage and now they sort them, that was done through a period of societal education,” said Chiu. “Everyone needs to slowly develop this awareness, and this needs time.”
In the U.S., government efforts to call out disinformation have themselves become politicized and criticized as government censorship or thought control.
With a population more than 10 times the size of Taiwan and years of growing polarization, the U.S. has deep, internal political and social fault lines that create good conditions for disinformation to take root — and make it harder for the government to push back without being accused of censoring legitimate political views.
In the United States, many of the narratives spread by Russia, for instance, are eagerly adopted by domestic groups that distrust the government. Donald Trump, the former president, and other Republicans have repeatedly made similar claims about the U.S. as those carried by Russian state media, for example.
“We have a dynamic in American politics where if you’re Russia, China or Iran, you don’t have to inject divisive topics, because they’re already here,” said Jim Ludes, a former national defense analyst who now leads the Pell Center for International Relations at Salve Regina University.
“The call is coming from inside the house,” he said, using a popular horror film metaphor.
That dynamic can also be seen in Taiwan. Although Ko, the presidential candidate, said publicly he didn’t believe there was election fraud, legislators from the TPP held a conference Wednesday in which they shared videos of miscounting that had spread online, which had already been debunked, to call for greater adherence to voting regulations.
Though the election passed without a major crisis, the challenge continues to evolve. Chinese efforts at disinformation have become increasingly localized and sophisticated, according to DoubleThink Lab’s post-election analysis.
In one example, a Chinese-run Facebook page called C GaChuDao made a video describing an affair that it said a DPP legislator had with a woman from China. Unlike in years past, where Chinese disinformation was easily recognized and mocked for its use of simplified characters and vocabulary from China, this video featured a man speaking with a Taiwanese accent and in a way that appeared completely local.
“In picking topics, they’d pick something that exists in your society, and then it’s relatively more convincing,” said Wu.
___
Wu reported from Bangkok. Associated Press writer Didi Tang contributed to this report.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
KYIV, Ukraine, January 25, 2024 (Newswire.com)
–
In a crucial effort to support Ukraine’s wounded, the R.T. Weatherman Foundation is proud to announce the successful delivery of over $1.5 million in trauma orthopedic medical supplies to six hospitals across Ukraine. This substantial contribution marks a significant step in aiding both soldiers on the frontlines and civilians affected by the ongoing conflict.
This large-scale donation includes advanced medical equipment and supplies specifically designed for the treatment of complex soft tissue and bone injuries. The aim is to facilitate limb salvage and recovery, offering hope and practical help to those suffering from severe trauma.
The hospitals benefiting from this donation are strategically located in regions where the need is most acute. The R.T. Weatherman Foundation worked closely with local authorities and medical experts to ensure the supplies were distributed efficiently and to the areas where they would make the most impact.
“We are deeply committed to providing tangible support in times of crisis,” said Dr. Meaghan Mobbs, President of the R.T. Weatherman Foundation. “Our mission is to fill critical gaps, and through this donation, we aim to alleviate some of the suffering caused by this conflict. We believe that no effort is too big or small when it comes to saving lives and limbs.”
The R.T. Weatherman Foundation extends its gratitude to partners and the donors whose generous contributions have made this initiative possible. Their ongoing support is crucial in enabling the foundation to respond swiftly and effectively in crisis situations.
“We remain steadfast in our commitment to humanitarian aid,” said Bess Weatherman, co-founder of the R.T. Weatherman Foundation. “And we continue to stand with the people of Ukraine. It is our hope that this contribution will not only provide immediate relief but will also encourage other donors to follow this lead.”
For more information about the R.T. Weatherman Foundation and its initiatives, or to support its efforts, please visit weathermanfoundation.org.
About R.T. Weatherman Foundation:
The R.T. Weatherman Foundation is a non-profit organization which supports the future of democracy, values every life as our own, and meets critical unmet needs.
Source: R.T. Weatherman Foundation
[ad_2]
Source link

[ad_1]
TAIPEI, Taiwan — Lai Ching-te, Taiwan’s president-elect, has vowed to safeguard the island’s de-facto independence from China and further align it with other democracies.
Lai, 64, emerged victorious in the election Saturday on the island of 23 million people that China claims as its own. He is currently vice president with the Democratic Progressive Party, which has rejected China’s sovereignty claims over Taiwan.
As he faced his supporters Saturday night, Lai vowed Taiwan would “continue to walk side by side with democracies from around the world.”
“We are telling the international community that between democracy and authoritarianism, we will stand on the side of democracy,” he said.
Lai has vowed to strengthen the island’s defense and economy, which depends heavily on trade with China. He has also made an effort to soften his earlier stance as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwan independence.”
At the same time, the new president has expressed desire to restart dialogue with China, which has refused to communicate with the island’s leaders in recent years.
“We are ready and willing to engage to show more for the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Peace is priceless and war has no winners,” he said earlier in the week.
His chances of success in talking to China, however, are close to null, analysts say.
“Beijing has repeatedly criticized not just DPP more broadly, but has actually criticized Lai Ching-te by name,” said Wen-Ti Sung, a fellow with U.S. think tank Atlantic Council. “It’s something that Beijing usually only does when they think there’s very little chance of the two sides ever repairing ties.”
Instead, Sung added, China will likely resort to a “maximum pressure campaign,” including military and economic coercion.
As vice president, Lai helped promote Taiwan’s interests internationally.
He stopped in New York and San Francisco on his way to Latin America in August in a move that was criticized by Beijing.
That visit was part of a diplomatic mission to Paraguay, one of a dozen countries that still maintains formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan. Many countries, including the U.S., formally recognize the People’s Republic of China but maintain unofficial ties with Taiwan.
Lai said at the time that it was important to meet foreign counterparts to convey the message that Taiwan “persists in its democracy, human rights and freedom and actively takes part in international affairs.”
U.S. President Joe Biden was asked about the election in Taiwan as he left the White House on Saturday to spend the weekend at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland.
“We do not support independence,” he said.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken congratulated Lai, and also “the Taiwan people for once again demonstrating the strength of their robust democratic system and electoral process.”
U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson said he will be asking the chairs of the relevant House committees to lead a delegation to Taipei following Lai’s inauguration in May.
Lai has pointed to China’s firing of missiles and other military drills in the Taiwan Strait in 1996 as a “defining moment” that drew him into politics.
In an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal in July, he vowed to maintain the status quo, saying that was in the best interests of Taiwan and international community. He also drew a line between Taiwan and Ukraine and the rise of authoritarianism globally “have awakened the international community to the fragility of democracy.”
In that article, he called for a buildup of Taiwan’s military deterrence capabilities, strengthening economic security, forging partnerships with democracies worldwide and “steady and principled cross-strait leadership.”
Lai has held several prominent jobs in addition to vice president, including premier, legislator and mayor of the southern city of Tainan. He originally is a physician and has a master’s in public health from Harvard.
During his and President Tsai Ing-wen’s tenure, Taiwan increased arms acquisitions from the United States, which is bound by its law to provide the island with weapons needed to protect itself.
His running mate is former U.S. envoy Bi-khim Hsiao.
China issued a strong rebuke in 2022 when Lai became the highest-ranking Taiwanese official in decades to visit nearby Japan to attend the funeral of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
___
Adam Schreck reported from Bangkok. Seung Min Kim contributed to this report from Washington.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Press play to listen to this article
Voiced by artificial intelligence.
BERLIN — As the far-right Alternative for Germany continues to rise — and its radicalism becomes increasingly pronounced — a growing chorus of mainstream politicians is asking whether the best way to stop the party is to try to ban it.
The debate kicked off in earnest after Saskia Esken, the co-chief of the ruling Social Democratic Party (SPD), came out earlier this month in favor of discussing a ban — if only, as she put it, to “shake voters” out of their complacency.
Since then, politicians from across the political spectrum have weighed in on whether a legal effort to ban Alternative for Germany (AfD), while possible under German law, would be tactically smart — or only further fuel the party’s rise.
Like so much of German politics, the conversation is colored by the country’s Nazi past. In a society mindful that Adolf Hitler initially gained strength at the ballot box, with the Nazis winning a plurality of votes in federal elections before seizing power, a growing number of political leaders, particularly on the left, view a prohibition of the AfD — a party they view as a dire threat to Germany’s democracy — as an imperative rooted in historical experience.
Others fear the attempt would backfire by allowing the AfD to depict their mainstream opponents as undermining the democratic will of the German people, desperate to ban a party they can’t beat.
Indeed, the AfD appears to be trying to turn the debate to its tactical advantage.
“Calls for the AfD to be banned are completely absurd and expose the anti-democratic attitude of those making these demands,” said Alice Weidel, co-leader of the party, in a written statement to POLITICO. “The repeated calls for a ban show that the other parties have long since run out of substantive arguments against our political proposals.”
The debate is assuming greater urgency in a key year in which the AfD appears set to do better than ever in June’s European Parliament election as well as in three state elections in eastern Germany in September. The party is currently in second place with 23 percent support in national polls; across all the states of the former East Germany, not including Berlin, the AfD is currently leading in polls.
Calls for a party ban grew louder this week following revelations that AfD members attended a secretive meeting of right-wing extremists where a “master plan” for deporting millions of people, including migrants and “unassimilated citizens,” was discussed. The news sent shockwaves across the country, with many drawing parallels to similar plans made by the Nazis. One of the people reportedly in attendance was Roland Hartwig, a former parliamentarian and now a close personal aide to Weidel, the party’s co-leader.
In a post on X, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz suggested it was a matter for the German judiciary.
“Learning from history is not just lip service,” he said. “Democrats must stand together.”
Many of the AfD’s most extreme leaders operate in eastern Germany, where the party is also the most popular. In two of the three states where the AfD will be competing in state elections next year — Thuringia and Saxony — state-level intelligence authorities have labeled local party branches as “secured extremist” — a designation that strengthens legal arguments for a ban.
Germany’s constitution allows for bans of parties that “seek to undermine or abolish the free democratic basic order” — essentially allowing the state to use anti-democratic means to prevent an authoritarian party from corroding democracy from within.
In reality, the legal hurdle for imposing a ban is very high. Germany’s constitutional court has only done it twice: The Socialist Reich Party, an heir to the Nazi party, was banned in 1952, while the Communist Party of Germany was prohibited in 1956.
More recently, in 2017, the court ruled that a neo-Nazi party known as the National Democratic Party (NPD), while meeting the ideological criteria for a prohibition, was too fringe to ban, as it lacked popular support and therefore the power to endanger German democracy.
Given the AfD’s poll numbers, however, an effort to ban it would pose an entirely different dilemma: How would politicians handle the backlash from the party’s many supporters?
Germany’s postwar democracy has arguably never faced a greater test, and politicians — as well as the public — remain divided over how to respond.
Center-right conservatives, who are leading in national polls, tend to view a ban attempt unfavorably.
“Such sham debates are grist to the AfD’s mill,” Friedrich Merz, the leader of the center-right Christian Democratic Union, told the Münchner Merkur newspaper. In response to Esken, the SPD leader who favors exploring a ban, Merz added: “Does the SPD chairwoman seriously believe that you can simply ban a party that reaches 30 percent in the polls? That’s a frightening suppression of reality.”
For the SPD, the stakes in terms of their political survival are much higher. The party has experienced a sharp decline in its popularity, and in two states in Germany’s east it is dangerously close to falling below the 5 percent hurdle needed to win seats in state parliaments.
Even within the SPD — a party whose history of resistance to the Nazis is a source of great internal pride — there is sharp disagreement over whether a ban is a good idea.
“If we ban a party that we don’t like, but which is still leading in the polls, it will lead to even greater solidarity with it,” Carsten Schneider, a social democrat who serves as federal commissioner for eastern Germany, told the Süddeutsche Zeitung. “And even from people who are not AfD sympathizers or voters, the collateral damage would be very high.”
Peter Wilke contributed reporting
[ad_2]
James Angelos
Source link

[ad_1]
TAIPEI — Forget Xi Jinping or Joe Biden for a second. Meet Taiwan’s next President William Lai, upon whom the fate of U.S.-China relations — and global security over the coming few years — is now thrust.
The 64-year-old, currently Taiwan’s vice president, has led the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to a historic third term in power, a first for any party since Taiwan became a democracy in 1996.
For now, the capital of Taipei feels as calm as ever. For Lai, though, the sense of victory will soon be overshadowed by a looming, extended period of uncertainty over Beijing’s next move. Taiwan’s Communist neighbor has laid bare its disapproval of Lai, whom Beijing considers the poster boy of the Taiwanese independence movement.
All eyes are now on how the Chinese leader — who less than two weeks ago warned Taiwan to face up to the “historical inevitability” of being absorbed into his Communist nation — will address the other inevitable conclusion: That the Taiwanese public have cast yet another “no” vote on Beijing.
China has repeatedly lambasted Lai, suggesting that he will be the one bringing war to the island.
As recently as last Thursday, Beijing was trying to talk Taiwanese voters out of electing its nemesis-in-chief into the Baroque-style Presidential Office in Taipei.
“Cross-Strait relations have taken a turn for the worse in the past eight years, from peaceful development to tense confrontation,” China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesman Chen Binhua said, adding that Lai would now be trying to follow an “evil path” toward “military tension and war.”
While Beijing has never been a fan of the DPP, which views China as fundamentally against Taiwan’s interests , the personal disgust for Lai is also remarkable.
Part of that stems from a 2017 remark, in which Lai called himself a “worker for Taiwanese independence,” which has been repeatedly cited by Beijing as proof of his secessionist beliefs.
Without naming names, Chinese President Xi harshly criticized those promoting Taiwan independence in a speech in 2021.
“Secession aimed at Taiwan independence is the greatest obstacle to national reunification and a grave danger to national rejuvenation,” Xi said. “Those who forget their heritage, betray their motherland, and seek to split the country will come to no good end, and will be disdained by the people and sentenced by the court of history.”
Instability is expected to be on the rise over the next four months, until Lai is formally inaugurated on May 20.
No one knows how bad this could get, but Taiwanese officials and foreign diplomats say they don’t expect the situation to be as tense as the aftermath of then-U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to the island in 2022.
Already, days before the election, China sent several spy balloons to monitor Taiwan, according to the Taiwanese defense ministry. On the trade front, China was also stepping up the pressure, announcing a possible move to reintroduce tariffs on some Taiwanese products. Cases of disinformation and electoral manipulation have also been unveiled by Taiwanese authorities.
Those developments, combined, constitute what Taipei calls hybrid warfare — which now risks further escalation given Beijing’s displeasure with the new president.

In a way, he has already.
Speaking at the international press conference last week, Lai said he had no plan to declare independence if elected to the presidency.
DPP insiders say they expect Lai to stick to outgoing Tsai Ing-wen’s approach, without saying things that could be interpreted as unilaterally changing the status quo.
They also point to the fact that Lai chose as vice-presidential pick Bi-khim Hsiao, a close confidante with Tsai and former de facto ambassador to Washington. Hsiao has developed close links with the Biden administration, and will play a key role as a bridge between Lai and the U.S.
The U.S., Japan and Europe are expected to take precedence in Lai’s diplomatic outreach, while relations with China will continue to be negative.
Throughout election rallies across the island, the DPP candidate repeatedly highlighted the Tsai government’s efforts at diversifying away from the trade reliance on China, shifting the focus to the three like-minded allies.

Southeast Asia has been another top destination for these readjusted trade flows, DPP has said.
According to Taiwanese authorities, Taiwan’s exports to China and Hong Kong last year dropped 18.1 percent compared to 2022, the biggest decrease since they started recording this set of statistics in 1982.
In contrast, Taiwanese exports to the U.S. and Europe rose by 1.6 percent and 2.9 percent, respectively, with the trade volumes reaching all-time highs.
However, critics point out that China continues to be Taiwan’s biggest trading partner, with many Taiwanese businesspeople living and working in the mainland.
While vote counting continues, there’s a high chance Lai will be dealing with a divided parliament, the Legislative Yuan.
Before the election, the Kuomintang (KMT) party vowed to form a majority with Taiwan People’s Party in the Yuan, thereby rendering Lai’s administration effectively a minority government.
While that could pose further difficulties for Lai to roll out policies provocative to Beijing, a parliament in opposition also might be a problem when it comes to Taiwan’s much-needed defense spending.
“A divided parliament is very bad news for defense. KMT has proven that they can block defense spending, and the TPP will also try to provide what they call oversight, and make things much more difficult,” said Syaru Shirley Lin, who chairs the Center for Asia-Pacific Resilience and Innovation, a Taipei-based policy think tank.
“Although all three parties said they wanted to boost defense, days leading up to the election … I don’t think that really tells you what’s going to happen in the legislature,” Lin added. “There’s going to be a lot of policy trading.”
[ad_2]