Skip to main content

Democracy 2024

 

Democracy 2024          Gerry OShea

This year, 2024, is being justifiably hailed as the year of elections. Almost half the world’s population lives in countries that will be voting this year. It should be a global watershed affirming human rights and the rule of law, but a closer look provides only limited reason for celebration.

Consider some of the results to date. In India, in the largest election held in human history, Narendra Modi, the Hindu strongman, won re-election but by a surprisingly reduced majority. The legitimacy of the election is not being questioned, but with some political opponents and journalists locked up because of their opinions, Modi’s ideas on democracy are questionable.

In March, thousands of Russians gathered in Moscow’s Red Square to celebrate Vladimir Putin’s reelection. Three Kremlin-approved losing candidates showed up to give credibility to the charade - Putin allegedly got 86% of the votes cast.

Behind this tightly controlled scene lay a grim reality. Putin’s chief political opponent, Alexey Navalny, died a month earlier in a prison north of the Arctic Circle. No independent commentator doubted that Putin’s hand was marked with the Russian hero’s blood.

In Venezuela, President Nicolas Maduro, the authoritarian who has been in power since 2013, declared himself the winner of the summer elections there. Independent observers cried foul, and Washington has rejected the “official” results. Outside election experts claim that Maduro lost to opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez by over 30 percentage points—a landslide by any standards.

Democracy protesters in Caracas are being jailed and maltreated. To stay in power, Maduro’s clicking heel will try to crush all opposition with guns and truncheons.

Donald Trump had nothing to say about the blatant election thievery in Venezuela. However, he praised the alleged reduction in crime achieved in that country by shifting the “horrible” criminals in Caracas to American cities where they supposedly continue their depraved behavior.

Back in 2000, speaking to an audience in Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, President Bill Clinton assured his listeners that “In the knowledge economy, economic innovation and political empowerment, whether anyone likes it or not, will inevitably go hand in hand.” In other words, opening the door to all aspects of trade and commerce would inevitably lead to a free discussion about artistic and legal matters.

President Clinton’s views were directed especially at the Chinese, who enthusiastically followed policies that allowed them to compete in all facets of international trade. This project continues to yield massive economic benefits for Peking. They compete successfully in world markets against the European Union and the United States.

However, the inevitable liberalization that Bill Clinton foresaw has not happened. Instead, the Chinese have designed what has become known as the Great Firewall of China. We are talking about Big Brother controlling all internet communication.

This involves an elaborate system of blocks and filters that prevent internet users in China from accessing particular words and phrases. For instance, they have successfully obliterated the word Tiananmen, where the major democratic revolt took place on June 4th, 1989—dates that, according to the current all-powerful government in Peking,  have no significance anymore. The cries for freedom that were heard in Tiananmen Square just never happened. Move on!

Those words and many others relating to freedom of thought don’t exist on the internet in China, so there is nothing for the citizens to commemorate or evaluate because the Tiananmen revolt for freedom has been obliterated. Don’t try to research the heroic happenings in Tiananmen in any library in China.

Hong Kong used to enjoy a high level of artistic freedom, with plenty of room for differing opinions on the social and political issues confronting every city. That day is gone, and Peking now makes all the decisions.

Taiwan, with a population of 24 million, has a recent history of political parties and fair elections. The island's leaders are mostly committed to maintaining their independence, and they have enhanced their defense spending in recent years. President Biden promised them his full support, but it is far from clear that Washington would get involved when the inevitable Peking invasion of the island takes place in the next few years.

Where does America fit in this maelstrom of ideas and  anti-democratic practices evident in China, Russia and other committed totalitarian regimes? It is hard to believe, but an important segment of the American political spectrum is vocally committed to promoting these far-right ideas here.

The American MAGA movement is inherently anti-democratic, propounding the conviction that Washington democracy is degenerate, their elections illegitimate, and their civilization is dying. The movement’s leaders, headed by Donald Trump, are determined to pump nihilistic ideas into their followers’ minds, including convincing them that nothing they see in democratic politics is true.

Given that both Russian and Chinese actors now blend in so easily with the MAGA messaging operation, it is hardly surprising that the United States government finds it extremely difficult to respond adequately to the new interlinked autocratic propaganda network.

MAGA leaders, firmly in control of the Republican Party, refuse to accept the legitimate results of the last presidential election. Every court rejected Mr. Trump’s claims of voting chicanery. Amazingly, one of the two main political parties in the United States supports this ridiculous assertion that the election system that declared Joe Biden’s victory was undemocratic in November 2019.

Mr. Trump is again the Republican nominee. He is already asserting that the democratic election system is inherently corrupt, but it will be ok if, as some polls predict, he wins in November.

The future of democracy in the United States is in real peril.

Gerry OShea blogs at wemustbetalking.com

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Changing Ireland

  A Changing Ireland         Gerry OShea “ You talk to me of nationality, language, religion ,” Stephen Dedalus declared in Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. “I shall try to fly by those nets.” In response, one of his nationalist friends asked Stephen the bottom-line question “ Are you Irish at all?” According to the most recent Irish census that question is answered in the affirmative by no less than 23% of citizens who identify as non-white Irish. The number of Irish citizens born abroad, increased in 2022 and now accounts for 12% of the population. The biggest non-native groups come from Poland and the UK followed by India, Romania, Lithuania, and Brazil. In 2021, the year preceding the census, over 89,000 people moved to live in Ireland, with India and Brazil leading the way. How do the people feel about the big infusion of foreigners into the country? A 2020 Economic and Social Research Institute study revealed a gap between the public and private perceptions and a

Child Rearing in Ireland in the 20th Century

 Child Rearing in 20th Century Ireland       Gerry OShea  It is a truism accepted in most cultures that children thrive in a supportive family and in a community where they feel valued and encouraged. The old Irish adage “mol an oige agus tiocfaidh se” (praise young people and they will blossom) contains  important wisdom from the ancient Celts. However, for most of the 20th century in Ireland, this advice in Shakespeare’s words  was “more honored in the breach than in the observance.” There were two important considerations that underpinned Irish child-rearing practices throughout most of the last century. First, contraceptives were not available until late in the 1980’s mainly because of opposition by the Catholic Church, so big families were an important feature of Irish life. Think of parents in a crowded house rearing eight or ten kids and obliged to maintain order in the family. Anyone who stepped out of line would likely be slapped or otherwise physically reprimanded. According

Reflections of an Immigrant

  Reflections of an Immigrant             Gerry OShea I came to America on a student visa in the summer of 1968. I travelled with a college friend, Ignatius Coffey, who hails from Labasheeda in County Clare. We were attending University College Dublin (UCD) after completing a second year studying the Arts curriculum. As evening students we were making our way by working in various jobs because our parents could not afford to cover our living expenses. So, we arrived in New York on the last day of May with very few dollars in the back pocket wondering if this new country would give us a break. I had uncles and aunts in New York who were a big help in providing meals and subsistence. A first cousin’s husband, who worked in Woolworth’s warehouse in Harlem and who was one of about six shop stewards in the Teamsters Union there, found us a job in his place, despite the line of American students knocking at the door. The pay was good and we worked every hour of overtime that we could