Category Archives: Populism

Chart

11:54

by UnHerd Staff

credit: Getty

Castile and Leon is a huge landlocked region to the north of Madrid. Yesterday its people went to the polls to elect a new Cortes or regional assembly.

The ruling conservative Peoples Party (PP) called the election early after falling out with their coalition partners, the liberal Citizens party. But while the latter were almost wiped out, the PP made only modest gains. (See here for full results).

Instead, the balance of power will now be held by the Right-wing populist Vox party. Compared to the last election in 2019, Vox increased its vote share from 5.5% to 17.6%. From winning just one seat three years ago, it now holds 13 out of 81.

Thats still a long way behind the second-placed Socialists who now hold 28 seats (a loss of seven), but Vox is now the most obvious coalition partner for the first-placed Peoples Party which has 31 seats (a gain of two).

The significance for the rest of Spain is clear. Yesterdays result confirms a pattern seen in the national polls the conservatives inching forward, the Left dropping back, the centrists collapsing and Right-wing populists poised to make gains. In fact, compared to the polls, Vox somewhat exceeded expectations in Castile and Len.

If this pattern holds until the next general election which needs to be held no later than December next year then Spain faces the previously unthinkable: the return of the radical Right to power.

It should be said that Vox is not as far to the Right as General Franco was. Nor is there any credible scenario in which it ends up ruling Spain alone. By far the likeliest path into national office is as a junior coalition partner to the Peoples Party.

Nevertheless, the fact is that there are no no-go areas for populism in Europe. Both Spain and Portugal, once thought to have been immunised by their history of dictatorship, are clearly susceptible.

See the article here:

In Spain, the Right-wing edges closer to power - UnHerd

John Geddes: The convoy chaos suggests Canadians are just as susceptible to Trump-like forces as Americans. Our real advantages lie in our political system.

Its hard to cling to faith in the orderly temperament of Canadians with streets and bridges blockaded, diesel fumes hanging heavy in the winter air. No matter how the convoy chaos in Ottawa (and beyond) is ultimately resolved, this episode should spell an end to illusions about Canadas supposedly peaceable culture and moderate character insulating our country from the scary side of right-wing populism.

In fact, the notion that theres something in the Canadian disposition that makes us less susceptible than the Americans were to Donald Trump (or the Brits to Brexit, or the French to their far-right presidential contenders) has never been all that convincing. Sure, a big majority of Canadians overall disapproved of Trump, but we should have taken heed when an Ekos Research poll at the outset of his dystopian presidency showed that 57 per cent of Conservative voters in Canada viewed him favourably.

And Canada has its share of the factors that strain social cohesion, including economic anxiety, nativist intolerance, regional resentmentsall exacerbated by the nerve-fraying frustrations of the pandemic. Yet this doesnt mean we should abandon hope that sensible, centrist politics might stand a better chance of prevailing here than in some other democracies. Its just that we should trust less in the mysteries of Canadian identity, and more in the advantages of our political system, and key policies and practices that have flowed from it.

The first factor to keep in mind these days is the outsized clout of sparsely populated states in the U.S. Senate, and hence in Washingtons power dynamic. At the federal level, theres nothing in Canada that parallels the way, say, Vermont elects two senators and so does New York, or Wyoming two and so does California. In Ottawa, the big provinces with the big cities wield legislative power at the federal level commensurate with their large, diverse populations.

But that shouldnt be mistaken for meaning resentment of what Toronto and Ottawa symbolize across much of Canada is less virulent than antagonism toward what New York and Washington represent across vast swaths of the U.S. map. Its just that our Parliament doesnt lend the less populous regions nearly as much legislative leverage. Our system is different, not our psyche.

Or consider the way elections are run. In the U.S., local and state control over the voting process has led to the sort of wildly varying rulebooks that Trump and his allies tried to exploit to sow confusion after he lost the 2020 presidential vote. In the early years after Confederation, Canadian elections were also largely local affairs, and subject to confusion and corruption. That was largely fixed in 1885, when the national election processes we benefit from today were instituted.

Dirty politics, though, persisted. For example, gerrymandering was a long-running scandal in Canada up until a key 1964 reform finally took the key task of mapping of ridings out of the hands of party functionaries, and gave the job to upright independent commissions. In the U.S., constituency boundaries for seats in the House of Representatives remain notoriously subject to being redrawn to favour one party or the other. History shows that Canadians arent inherently more fair-minded. We owe our edge to far-sighted reformers who made the right change when the opportunity arose.

Canadians also shake their heads at the highly politicizedeven polarizednature of U.S. judicial appointments. No serious watcher of Canadas courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada, pretends judges dont bring their own ideologies to the bench. But the Canadian process for picking them remains far less tainted by partisanship than in the U.S., and that must be safeguarded to preserve whats left of public faith in institutional authority.

This is another advantage Canadians shouldnt take for granted. Sean Fine, the Globe and Mails veteran justice reporter, has flagged concerns about Ontarios excellent appointment system becoming more exposed to the preferences of the party in power. As well, the Globe reported a few years ago on the federal Liberal government checking potential judges names through a party database. The eye-glazing details of selection processes will never generate sustained public concern, but we need journalists and independent experts to be vigilant and vocal.

This sort of Canads-U.S. compare-and-contrast exercise leads inevitably to an even more fraught issue. Is Canadian politics less twisted by racism? That question is too big for this piece, but I can point to research from academics like University of Torontos Phil Triadalopoulos, who have shown how Canadas immigration policies, dating back to the reforms of the 1960s, offered an easier path to citizenship and fostered greater democratic participation among new Canadians.

Those engaged newcomers tend to concentrate in Toronto and Vancouver, often in suburbs where party election strategists know they must be competitive to have any hope of prevailing in national elections. In this way, immigration policy loops back to reinforce the way power in Parliament properly reflects population density and diversity. (And it helps that getting rid of gerrymandering meant nobody could redraw the electoral map to erase the ballot-box clout of any inconvenient voters.)

These and other ways Canadas democracy looks healthier, compared with the U.S., dont rest on some underlying Canadian sensibleness, some congenital propensity to moderation. In other words, theres nothing in our national character we can count to make us less likely to gather for an unruly, unreasonable protest, issue blatantly undemocratic demands, and lay siege to the capital. Theres also nothing to stop certain duly elected politicians from actually praising such actions. It turns out Canada and the U.S. have this in common.

When the diesel fumes clear, there will be plenty of agonizing over misguided motivations and uncivil inclinations. Fair enough. But soul-searching is less important that recognizing the strongest elements in how our democracy works, and build on the parts that hold firm even when our sentimental sense of our national character is rudely shaken.

See the original post:

Whats actually standing in the way of right-wing populism in Canada? - Maclean's

Breadcrumb Trail Links

I fear that for far too many of those occupying the streets of downtown Ottawa, it was never about vaccines.

Publishing date:

What happens when the rules and accepted norms of a democratic society are threatened by those who violently reject the safeguards of order and stability? The events of the last several days in downtown Ottawa have provided a disturbing glimpse into such a world, a place where mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

What allegedly began as a protest against cross-border vaccination requirements quickly descended into a shrill and incoherent exercise in public disorder, fuelled by a toxic stew of abusive language and often violent, anti-social behaviour. Some of the leaders tactics bordered on the fantastical, notably the manifesto calling on the Governor General and the Senate to override the democratically elected House of Commons.

Those behind the siege clearly lack even a basic awareness of parliamentary responsible government, likewise the division of federal-provincial powers. The fact that the vast majority of vaccine-related mandates fall under provincial responsibility appears to have escaped them. Then again, those responsible for such heinous acts as desecrating monuments to our war dead and threatening staff at a homeless shelter are unlikely to care about the nuances of the Constitution. Their use of our national flag and the Charter of Rights as props to justify their actions is an insult to the values that underlie both of those symbols. Intimidating citizens living and working in the downtown area makes a mockery of the protesters alleged concern with freedom.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The tactics of the protesters are also part and parcel of a growing and disturbing phenomenon which has come to characterize populism. We like to think of populism as an expression of public will. But populism is a two-sided coin. The dark side of populism is demonstrated by authoritarian tactics aimed at subverting democratic institutions and the rule of law. It is hardly surprising, for example, to hear that Donald Trump has been cheering on the Ottawa siege. This is, after all, the man who sat and watched as his supporters sought to violently overthrow the results of a democratic election. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, another self-described populist, had no hesitation in seeking to demonize Parliament during the Brexit debate. Coercive tactics, including violence, are regular features of populist political movements in France, Italy, Hungary and elsewhere.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Certainly one of the most distressing aspects of recent events in Ottawa is the descent of the Conservative Party, now engaged in a time-honoured tradition of in-fighting. Deposed party leader Erin OToole has no one to blame but himself. He shamelessly courted the right wing of his party while running for leader, then swiftly tacked to the centre during the 2021 federal election, leaving both hard-liners and moderates bewildered and doubtful of his convictions. His position on vaccinations proved wildly out of step with public opinion, geared more towards pacifying the anti-vaccine elements within his own party; likewise his flaccid response to the tactics of the protesters.

The strongest condemnation, however, should be reserved for those MPs, including Ottawa-area MP Pierre Polievre, who make excuses for this occupation because they imagine it serves their own narrow political ends, with no thought for the consequences of this implicit endorsement of mob action. It is particularly shocking that someone like Saskatchewan MP Andrew Scheer has cheered on the siege. This is a man who was once Speaker of the House of Commons, and as such custodian of the rules and conventions which are the foundation of our parliamentary system of responsible government. That such a person could cheer on lawlessness is a stain on democratic society. Other Conservative MPs who spent their time taking selfies with participants in this occupation have shown a shocking and contemptuous lack of civic responsibility.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

I fear that for far too many of those occupying the streets of downtown Ottawa, it was never about vaccines. In the 2008 filmThe Dark Knight, Batman struggles to understand the motives behind The Jokers violent crime spree. Neither money nor power seem to be the reason behind it all. It appears to be nothing more than chaos for its own sake. Batmans wise counsellor, Alfred, supplies the answer:

Some men arent looking for anything logical, like money. They cant be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to see the world burn.

Michael Kaczorowski lives in Ottawa and is a retired senior policy adviser with the federal government.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive daily headline news from Ottawa Citizen, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Ottawa Citizen Headline News will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Visit link:

Kaczorowski: The dark side of populism is at work in the truck protest - Ottawa Citizen

Viewpoint by Jan Servaes *

BRUSSELS (IDN) Military coups d'tat posed the greatest threat to democracies during the Cold War, until about 1990, and were responsible for nearly three out of every four democratic collapses. Democracies in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Thailand, Turkey and Uruguay all died in this way.

Africa seems to be the continent where military coups are still the preferred way to topple a sitting government. It is estimated that there have been at least 100 successful coups in Africa in the past four decades, with more than twice the number of coup attempts. Burkina Faso tops the list with seven coups in less than the past 20 months. Experts say coups are prevalent in Africa due to incompetent leadership and corruption.

Also in Southeast Asia, we commemorated the first 'anniversary' of the coup against Ang San Suu Kyi in Myanmar on February 1. A few years ago, in 2014, the democratically elected Thai government was overthrown by General Prayuth Chan-ocha, who, after rewriting the constitution and rigging the electoral law, is still in power.

However, while coup proofing is typically portrayed as a tactic of dictators, it is also used in democracies. Therefore, since 1990 democracies have mainly died from within: killed by elected autocrats. Like Hugo Chvez in Venezuela, elected leaders have undermined democratic institutions in Cambodia, Georgia, Hungary, Nicaragua, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Ukraine, among others.

In most parts of the world trust in democracy (all-in-all limited, because not applicable to the economic field) is declining. This decline goes hand in hand with a deterioration of the freedom of civil liberties and human rights. Freedom of the press is rapidly shrinking to invisibility in Russia under Putin, and in Xi Jinping's China. And the way Hindu nationalist Modi stirs up tensions between Hindus and Muslims in India is unworthy of "the largest democracy in the world."

Even in the US, that under President Joe Biden is still posing as the world champion of democracy, democracy is under threat according to a detailed and historically sound analysis by Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt: How Democracies Die. They show how elected autocrats in different parts of the world use remarkably similar strategies to undermine democratic institutions.

Though it is premature to argue that military coups are outdated; in general, however, it can be said that since the end of the Cold War, most democracies have slid into authoritarian or autocratic regimes without the presence of boots in the streets.

Democracies slide towards autocracy

Many government attempts to undermine democracy are "legal" in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They can even be portrayed as attempts to improve democracymake the judiciary more efficient, fight corruption or clean up the electoral process.

Newspapers still publish but are bought off or bullied into self-censorship. Citizens continue to criticize the government but are often confronted with tax or other legal problems. This sows public confusion. People don't immediately realize what's going on. Many continue to 'believe' that they live under a democracy.

Now the democratic setback begins at the ballot box

Democratic backlash begins today with elections. The electoral road to collapse is dangerously deceptive. Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that recognizing patterns of democratic breakdown is important. As these patterns become apparent, the steps to degradation become less ambiguous. Knowing how citizens in other democracies have successfully resisted elected autocrats, or why they tragically failed to do so, is essential for those who want to defend democracy today, they contend.

Can Democracy Isolate Extremists and Populists?

An essential test for democracies is whether political leaders, and especially political parties, succeed in isolating popular extremists (including those within their own ranks). Because argue Levitsky and Ziblatt, when fear, expediency or miscalculation drives established parties to bring populists into the mainstream, democracy is in jeopardy.

Once an authoritarian aspiring to power comes to power, democracies face a second critical test: will the autocratic leader undermine or limit democratic institutions?

Institutions alone don't stop autocrats

Institutions alone are not enough to keep elected autocrats in check. Constitutions must be defendedby political parties and organized citizens, but also by democratic standards. Without robust standards, constitutional checks and balances do not serve as the bulwarks of democracy as we envision them. Institutions become political weapons, wielded forcefully by those who control them, against those who don't.

Autocrats Abuse Institutions to kill democracy

This is how elected autocrats undermine democracy: packing and 'arming' the courts and other neutral bodies, buying off or silencing the media and the private sector, and rewriting the rules of politics to tilt the playing field against opponents.

The tragic paradox of the electoral road to authoritarianism is that the killers of democracy use democratic institutionsgradually, subtly and even legallyto kill it (p. 8).

Indicators of authoritarian behavior

The current political climate in Western democracies, especially the United States, is characterized by increasing ideological polarization. What causes or initiates this erosion of democratic institutions? The four main indicators, or behavioural warnings, of authoritarian behaviour outlined by Levitsky and Ziblatt are (1) the rejection, in word or deed, of the democratic rules of the game, (2) the denial of the legitimacy of political opponents, (3) tolerating or encouraging violence, and (4) a willingness to curtail the civil liberties of opponents, including the media.

These four main indicators of authoritarian behaviour can be summarized as follows (on pp. 23-24):

The election of Donald Trump has sparked much debate about the fate of American democracy. Does the election of a figure like Donald Trumpan inexperienced outsider with obvious authoritarian instinctssuggest that democracy in the US is on the decline? Indeed, according to Levitsky and Ziblatt, we should be wary because Trump exemplifies each of the aforementioned characteristics (pp. 65-67).

Was 2016 Trump's rise a turning point?

Until 2016, the American democratic system was able to resist such authoritarian tendencies and exclude overt demagoguery in two ways, both formally and informally.

Until Trump's rise, the gatekeepers of democracy (p. 37), such as political party leaders and bosses, effectively marginalized extremists from their parties on both the left and right sides of the political spectrum.

But Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that democracy cannot survive only through formal political channels. Democrats do have written rules (constitutions) and umpires (the courts). But these work best, and survive longest, in countries where written constitutions follow their own unwritten rules, i.e. are the soft guardrails of democracy (p. 101).

The importance of mutual and institutional tolerance

Two crucial informal norms that the authors emphasize and explain as the robustness of American democracy are (1) mutual tolerance and (2) institutional forbearance.

The first norm refers to recognizing the legitimacy of one's political opponents to fight for power through the democratic process, as long as they play within constitutional rules (p. 102). Mutual tolerance precludes the use, or even encouragement, of threats and violence to prevent political opponents from competing for office.

The second standard is closely related to the rule of law; institutional forbearance means that elected officials cannot take legal action that intentionally favours one group of individuals at the expense of another. For example, the introduction of poll taxes or literacy tests, such as those that took place throughout the US post-Civil War reconstruction South, were generally applied to the entire population, with no reference to race. Southern states, however, passed these laws, knowing that the intended effect would be to disenfranchise African Americans who overwhelmingly voted Democratic, and therefore restored Republican dominance in the South. This example was a violation of institutional forbearance: it was not worthy of the rule of law.

The reversal of these anti-democratic measures through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Levitsky and Ziblatt say, had a polarizing by-product, triggering a partisan realignment between Republicans and Democrats along ideological lines. With the disappearance of conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans after this reshuffle, the common ground between the parties gradually disappeared (p. 169).

What further fuelled this political polarization, which eroded democratic norms, was the emergence of a system of presidential primaries. From 1972, the vast majority of delegates to both the Democratic and Republican conventions would be elected in state-level primaries and caucuses (p. 50). This shift in the political selection process meant that the road to nomination no longer had to go through the party establishment. For the first time, the party's gatekeepers could be bypassed (p. 51). Placing presidential nominations increasingly in the hands of voters eroded the pre-existing peer-review process of candidates and opened the door to political outsiders.

These formal changes, coupled with the rise of social media (p. 56), would unleash a political dynamic, with each party increasingly targeting its ideological base from which a populist candidate like Donald Trump could emerge, independent of the political establishment and with complete disregard for democratic norms. Even, according to Levitsky and Ziblatt, if the Trump presidency failed to break through the 'hard guardrails' or the formal institutions of our constitutional republic, by eroding the informal democratic norms of mutual tolerance and institutional forbearance, "he has increased the likelihood that a future president will (p. 203).

Political lessons

What political lessons can we draw from How Democracies Die, given the institutional erosion of democratic norms? Given our polarized political environment, how can we save democracy from itself?

Use institutions where they exist

Where institutional channels exist, argue Levitsky and Ziblatt, opposition groups should use them (p. 217). Indeed, using extrajudicial means and other political measures to oppose a potential demagogue will only have a series of consequences undesirable for proponents of democracy, namely increasing political polarization and legitimizing the erosion of democracy. Therefore, opposition to authoritarian tendencies in democracy should try to preserve, rather than violate, democratic rules and norms (p. 217).

Take political parties out of the clutches of interest groups

All this implies that the reduction of political polarization requires political parties to escape the clutches of interest groups, as the authors argue (p. 223). However, it fundamentally requires the elimination of political discretion, the foundation on which interest groups lobby not only for special privileges, but also the foundation on which authoritarianism is built. As Levitsky and Ziblatt argue, most "elected autocrats begin by offering prominent political, business, or media figures public positions, favours, perks, or outright bribes in exchange for their support or, at the very least, their quiet neutrality" (pp. 8182). Therefore, the road to authoritarianism can only be prevented if political parties are banned from writing laws and granting privileges intended to favor one interest group at the expense of another.

How to restore democracy?

The Republican Party, meanwhile, has become increasingly aligned with Trump and appears to be uniting around a strategy of actively collaborating with him in its efforts to remove the barriers to American democracy. Given this state of affairs, how can American democracy be restored?

According to Levitsky and Ziblatt, democracy can only be saved by forging broad, pro-democracy coalitions that cross racial, gender, ethnic, religious and socioeconomic boundaries. Their nature and composition allow them to appeal to a wider part of the country and transcend the partisan divide that consumes current politics. This partial elimination of partisan tensions can lead to depolarization, which in turn reinforces democratic norms of mutual tolerance and institutional forbearance.

The lack of a diverse coalition to maintain it could go a long way to explaining why the Republican Party is in such a dysfunctional state. It is predominantly a party of white Christians who are relatively less numerous in society. As long as it maintains this basic makeup, the Republican Party will simply not be able to act as a pro-democracy force in an increasingly diverse society.

Accordingly, the Republican Party should expand its appeal to a more diverse cross-section of the electorate. Only when it becomes a "big tent" party stretching across religious and ethnic lines can the Republican Party resume its function as the centre-right and conservative benchmark of American democracy.

The key is to get American politics to both embody strong democratic standards and ensure effective political representation for all members of a diverse society. Only then will democracy really stand on solid ground.

The book How Democracies Die offers important insights into how autocrats are emerging and provides both warning signs for the US and a potentially hopeful way forward. The book is filled with impressive historical research and analysis. It is profound in its insights, and its conclusions are shocking. Anyone left unimpressed and unaffected deserves what he or she receives," concludes Roger Abrams in The New York Journal of Books.

Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt (2018). How democracies die, B/D/W/Y Broadway Books, New York, 308 pp. (ISBN 978-1-5247-6294-0)

https://crownpublishing.com/archives/feature/democracies-die-steven-levitsky-daniel-ziblatt [IDN-InDepthNews 05 February 2022]

* Jan Servaes was UNESCO-Chair in Communication for Sustainable Social Change at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. He taught international communication in Australia, Belgium, China, Hong Kong, the US, Netherlands and Thailand, in addition to short-term projects at about 120 universities in 55 countries. He is editor of the 2020 Handbook on Communication for Development and Social Change

https://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1007/978-981-10-7035-8

Photo credit: https://thealtworld.com/andrew_korybko/the-moral-dilemma-of-every-color-revolution-coup-democratic-security-movement

IDN is the flagship agency of the Non-profit International Press Syndicate.

Visit us on Facebook and Twitter.

We believe in the free flow of information. Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, except for articles that are republished with permission.

Continue reading here:

Are Democracies Slowly Dying in The Age of Authoritarianism and Populism? - IDN InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

If it was not so serious for the country, there would be something almost amusing about watching Boris Johnsons political career unravel before our eyes. He has spent his life fixated on the goal of becoming prime minister, even daring to see himself as a man of destiny on a par with Sir Winston Churchill. He created a clownish veneer to mask the hollowness of his soul and paucity of his ideas, then trampled on family, friends, party and nation to achieve his ambition. Now he sits a lonely figure in Downing Street, his true character exposed by his contemptuous behaviour, while close allies quit in despair, cabinet ministers distance themselves and Tory MPs demand his departure.

Yet he clings desperately to the premiership, patching up his shattered team of advisers, appointing a communications chief who called him hugely divisive and pretending his focus is on serious issues while obsessing, as always, with himself. This weekend, Johnson reportedly said theyll have to send a Panzer division to drive him out of Downing Street, hoping enough supporters will ignore the stench of his rotting premiership to bail him out of trouble again. So we must suffer this unethical leader for longer, selfishly corroding both his party and political system while Britain faces a barrage of grave domestic and foreign concerns.

Johnson declines to say whether he will quit if becoming the first modern prime minister convicted of law-breaking in office. This would make it interesting when the Tories try to pose again as the party of law and order after disregarding lockdown rules and their drunken disorder in Downing Street. Diehard loyalists defend their leader with ludicrous claims: that he tells the truth, was ambushed by a cake and Partygate was a devious plot by Remainer lawyers. Meanwhile, his wife is targeted by misogynists. One source in a new biography pathetically claims Johnson could have been a great prime minister without her yet it is the prime minister himself taking all the decisions.

There is nothing remotely surprising about these events swirling around Downing Street like a toxic cloud. The warning signs about Johnsons character could not have been clearer if they were hung around his neck in flashing neon lights given his disreputable behaviour in journalism, politics and his private life. He is so self-obsessed, so lacking in morality, simply so nasty behind that jocular exterior, that when cornered in parliament over his failures of leadership on Partygate he lashed out with a lie to smear the opposition leader over a horrendous case of child sex abuse. These words were used by Munira Mirza in her stinging letter of resignation as his policy chief. Sadly she like all the acolytes, aides and fellow-travellers hastily jumping from his side shares responsibility for inflicting this awful prime minister on the country when so obviously wrong for the job.

It seems incredible there are not yet sufficient letters from Tory MPs to force a leadership contest. So the farce drags on with this busted flush of a government. One senior backbencher says it is inevitable Johnson will be removed. Others claim the magic number of 54 letters seeking a no confidence vote will soon be attained. Yet we read reports of a Conservative rebel MP bartering support for a knighthood, showing again the squalid depths of Westminster. So perhaps this diminished prime minister will survive a little longer until the next scandal, smear or sordid assault on decency provokes another flurry of letters from MPs worried about their survival.

The tragedy for the Tories as they slide in the polls is that Johnson reflects a party remoulded in his image. It has become boastful and deceitful, cavalier with cash, contemptuous about societal norms, elitist and entitled, in thrall to cronies, bereft of values, preferring headline-grabbing slogans and stunts to the hard grind of policy. Among its leaders are shallow people painfully out of their depth. There are, however, many good people still in the party, struggling against the tide and despairing over events. But the big question as they ponder their next leader is whether the post-Brexit Tory party can be salvaged or, like the Republicans in the United States, will the legacy of a bad apple leader be a party permanently defiled by his toxic populism?

Clearly any successor would be a very different type of person. And it is foolish to assume certainties in politics; remember talk that the Tories were finished in the far-off days of New Labour before they returned to rule over us under three different prime ministers? Yet any new leader must appeal to the ascendant right to win, the ultra-libertarians who loathe the state and hardcore Brexiteers who complain like communists their dismal creed would work if only given a chance. So is it too much to hope there are enough sensible people lurking in the Tory undergrowth who are tired of the depressing populist games abusing asylum seekers, attacking the BBC, fighting fish wars, launching divisive culture battles, lying about statistics and rounding on judges to cover up their own failures?

Ironically, the last four Conservative prime ministers Sir John Major, David Cameron, Theresa May and even Boris Johnson were all searching for a form of One Nation Conservatism before being blown off course by the nativist right. They interpreted the concept very differently, from the liberal conservatism of Cameron through to the levelling-up agenda of Johnson, but all knew the only path to power was to broaden their partys appeal. Yet their failures, the legacy of giving ground to the hard right, led us to this atrocious prime minister demeaning Westminster and despoiling the nation. As we see Johnson floundering for survival like a fish out of water, I fear it is too late for an injection of common sense to drive out the infection of populism in the Tories. But I hope I am wrong for the countrys sake.

The rest is here:

Boris Johnsons populist influence on the Tories could survive Downing Street scandals, even if he doesnt - iNews

Billionaire investor Ray Dalio said on Thursday that the US appears to be on the path to "some form of civil war."

Dalio based his analysis on historical cases arguing that the combination of financial burdens, such as large deficits, high taxes and inflation, and large wealth and value gaps in a nation "leads to some sort of fighting for control."

"Maybe my views are right and maybe they're wrong," he wrote in a LinkedIn post summarizing excerpts from his book, "Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order.""My goal is simply to pass along what I see for you to consider for yourself."

Dalio is the founder and co-chief investor of Bridgewater Associates, the world's largest hedge fund, with nearly $150 billion in assets under management.

He also argued that the country is witnessing greater amounts of populism and extremism, and outlined what he believes is a path to civil war through the lens of historical examples. A big divide, he said, is the gap between right-wing and left-wing politics, where both "sides" are "unwilling to compromise."

First, he said, extremists become the majority and respecting the rule of law becomes secondary to winning at all costs. Them, he argued, both moderates and the ability to compromise become diluted, leading to civil wars.

"Notably, when that happens at the same time as there are foreign powers that are becoming strong enough to challenge the leading world power that is encountering this civil war dynamic, it is an especially risky period," he added, saying that he thinks the US is currently in this period.

"By most of the measures that I use, the current financial conditions and irreconcilable differences in desires and values are consistent with the ingredients leading to some form of civil war."

Read more from the original source:

Billionaire investor says US seems to be on path to 'civil war' - Business Insider

Breadcrumb Trail Links

After two years of a demoralizing global pandemic: Canadians are highly polarized, deeply divided and just itching to lash out.

Publishing date:

We all have them in our social networks: the old high school classmate who was out cheering on the Freedom Convoy as it passed Friday; the childhood friend who posted pictures of herself crying tears of joy from a highway overpass decked out in Canadian flags; the cousins wife who posted a picture of a transport truck sporting profanities aimed at Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The protest may have ridden a wave of support on its cross-country trek to Ottawa to oppose vaccine mandates in particular and pandemic restrictions in general. But it may have difficulty maintaining its appeal after a weekend during which the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier was desecrated, staff at a local homeless shelter harassed, the memorial statue of Terry Fox dressed up and Ottawa police, city workers and small business owners intimidated by a maskless mob flouting public health rules in the name of freedom.

Some early adopters may be feeling sheepish now, having spoken out in favour of movement where far-right groups felt comfortable displaying Confederate flags, Nazi swastikas and QAnon logos. But others are digging in their heels claiming fake news or that any malfeasance was committed by instigators looking to undermine their cause.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The group behind the blockade of big rigs that has downtown Ottawa paralyzedmay call itself Canadian Unity, but it is having the opposite effect on the public at large.

Social media is being weaponized . Neighbours are turning against each other in virtual community forums where they usually share tips on contractors and seek help finding their lost pets. And many people find themselves torn over whether to unfollow friends and family who have shown their true colours.

All of this, however, is a barometer indicating the state of the Canadian polity 23 months into a demoralizing global pandemic: it is highly polarized, deeply divided and just itching to lash out.

The temptation is strong to turn away, to block our ears to a toxic discourse especially among the vast majority of Canadians who are vaccinated and watching from a distance (with apologies to Ottawa residents who are caught in the middle of this standoff). But we do so at our own peril.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Political leaders must not be too dismissive of this outpouring of outrage and anger outright.

Extremist elements may be magnetically attracted to this cause and its organizers may have far-right leanings. But most Canadians who waved flags on viaducts are not a fringe minority as Trudeau called the demonstrators Monday in an outdoor remote press conference shortly after he announced he had tested positive for COVID-19. There must be a recognition that this event was fuelled by many ordinary Canadians fed up with the fallout from the pandemic and seeking an outlet for their frustrations.

The thrall of populism is as strong and intoxicating as the diesel fumes wafting in the air around Parliament Hill these days. And Canadians are not immune.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The fact is, a growing segment of the increasingly weary population is becoming evermore susceptible to the empty promises of simplistic slogans, the rejection of science, misinformation and distrust of government and institutions. They are being lured down a rabbit hole in incremental steps that could nevertheless have far-reaching consequences for Canadian democracy and society.

Even if Canadians voted in another Liberal minority government only a few short months ago, many did so out of resignation. Trudeau is a target of exasperation and enmity from far beyond the truckers idling their engines to keep warm in Ottawa. He has to be aware of this reality.

So too, should provincial premiers. It may be lost on members of the Freedom Convoy that many of the regulations they oppose were actually introduced by the provinces, but even Franois Legault, who has maintained his popularity despite Quebec having the harshest public health restrictions in the country, should pay heed. With a proposed anti-vax tax that is more of a ploy to placate the vaccinated, Legault risks provoking a similar backlash.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Trudeau ruled out dialogue with the protest organizers. But without giving in to irresponsible demands, he and other political leaders must open a new conversation with disaffected Canadians at their wits end after almost two years.

In turn, Canadians need to stand on guard for democracy. Weve witnessed up close how quickly ugliness can be unleashed when anger, ignorance and apathy get the better of a dispirited population. We must not take our politics for granted or let it degenerate into incivility and disrespect.

This country needs to find an antidote to populism and fast.

ahanes@postmedia.com

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive daily headline news from the Montreal Gazette, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Montreal Gazette Headline News will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

More here:

Hanes: Beware the intoxicating thrall of populism - Montreal Gazette

And just like that, week one of Foxs newest showJesse Watters Primetimeis coming to a close. What have we learned from the hour-long program that billed itself as a platform for exposing scoundrels and celebrating patriots?

In the premiere episode, Jesse Watters, who has spent two decades at Fox, cohosts The Five, and previously had his own weekend show, promised viewers he would use his new program to stand up for regular Americans who have been disrespected for far too long. Sounds familiar, and indeed Watters used the opening monologue to try on his best Tucker Carlson impression, mimicking his more notorious colleagues faux-populist rage toward nameless elites while condemning Wall Street corruption and Americas shamefully mismanaged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ignorant, greedy leaders sold out our factories and pride to the Chinese Communists for unpatriotic profits, Watters said. Sick cyber warriors divided us by race to distract us from the real division: class.

Carlsons show has long dominated Fox Newss ratings, with more than 3 million average viewers on a nightly basis last year and an endless stream of viral clips to prove it, and it seems that Wattersand the networkknow a winning formula when they see it. To borrow a phrase from the NFL analysts, its a copycat league, and Watters show, for now at least, serves up the same Fox Corpapproved right-wing populism that viewers have grown accustomed to during Carlsons reign as the king of cable news. Though, Watters does offer viewers a lighter, more comedic touch than the self-serious host runningthe 8 p.m. hour. Rather than scowling at liberal elites with Tucker Facepinched eyebrows, head cocked to the side, mouth slightly ajarWatters wears a near-constant smirk. Rather than hamming up the righteous indignation, he casually laughs off figures like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, often lazily dropping in barely relevant movie clips mid-monologue to hit punchlines or drive home points for him. Though, Watterss reliance on cheap humor from his production crew might be for the best, given that his droning, one-track voice lacks the range necessary to believably sell fist-slamming-desk rage and conviction. Perhaps sensing his constraints as a solo act, the showrunners at Fox packed the opening week of Watterss show with A-list Trumpworld guests, including Mike Pence, Jeanine Pirro, Dan Bongino, and Eric Trump.

Presentation aside, the similarities between Watters and Carlsons programming are hard to miss, and it is difficult to imagine a world in which the formers show exists without the latter laying the groundwork for it. Like Carlson, a Trinity College alumnus, Watters, also a Trinity grad, is suddenly a champion of the working class who is speaking out against corporate powers and Democratic leaders who he believes have abandoned blue-collar Americans. Carlson even has Watterswho, not too long ago, was Foxs de facto spring break correspondentdiscussing far-right European populism, with the two weighing in on Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbns immigration policies during an episode of The Five this week. Somehow, the pair seem to have developed the same fascination with why female cartoons are now dressing less sexy, a description that Carlson used last week while fuming over the makeovers of M&Ms candy mascots. Watters, presumably after seeing all the attention that Carlson received for speaking out against sexually unappealing animated chocolates, spent a segment of his Wednesday show lamenting Disneys decision to change Minnie Mouses wardrobe. I cant believe Im actually saying this, but Disney is totally changing Minnie Mouse. Disney is putting Minnie Mouse in a pantsuit, said Watters, before asserting that Disney executives must be bored out of their minds and theyre just making it all uncomfortable for the rest of us.

Another cause that Watters jumped on board with this week is the day tradersmaking a fortune or a name for themselves outside the confines of corporate America. This appeared to be a reference to incidents like last years GameStop short squeeze, when small-time traders helped the video game retailers stock surge in an attempt to beat out major financial firms that were attempting to short its stock. At the time, Carlson praised the Reddit guys who rallied around GameStop, saying that they sent a message to Wall Street. Likewise, Watters has made appeals to this demographic of young and very online traders, some of whom have criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosis involvement in the stock market. So while Nancy slow-walks antitrust legislation to break up Big Tech, her family [is] taking advantage and laughing all the way to the bank. They must think were idiots, Watters said during a segment dubbing Pelosi The Wolf of Washington.

Original post:

With Jesse Watters Primetime, Fox Dips Another Toe in the Populist Culture Wars - Vanity Fair

The good thing about the budget is its conservatism. It expects nominal GDP to increase by a relatively low 11.1 percent in 2022-23, well below the 17 percent plus increase in the current fiscal year. Its also rather low if we consider the real GDP growth of 8-8.5 projected in the Economic Survey. The last time nominal growth was around that level was in 2017-18, when it was 11.03 percent, with real GDP growth being 6.8 percent.

That conservatism is also reflected in its expenditure projections. For all the talk about a huge rise in capital expenditure, the governments total capex in the current fiscal year, including from extra-budgetary sources, according to the revised estimates, will be Rs11.05 lakh crore, much lower than the total budgeted capex of Rs 11.37 lakh crore. Moreover, the fine print says that revised estimates for 2021-22 include capital infusion and loans to Air India for settlement of past liabilities, amounting to Rs 51971 crore. So that number too needs to be excluded. Simply put, while the budgetary resources for capex have been increased, capex by public enterprises is lower.

A similar situation is expected to play out in 2022-23 too. While spending on capex from budgetary resources is expected to go up substantially, total budgetary capex, including from the resources of public enterprises, is Rs 12.20 lakh crore, an increase of just 10.4 percent over the revised estimates. Worse, the increase in the total budgeted capex is a mere 7.3 percent of the total budgeted capex for the current fiscal year.

In short, while much was made in the budget speech about higher public capex, perhaps that needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Even so, the silver lining is that the percentage increase in capital expenditure will be higher than that of revenue spending. The increase in total expenditure envisaged in the budget is just 4.6 percent more than the revised estimates. In fact, revenue expenditure, less interest payments, is budgeted to be lower in 2022-23 than in the current year.

How is this feat proposed to be achieved? Outlays under central sector schemes and projects have been slashed, and finance commission grants to states are budgeted to be lower. Theres also some reduction in establishment expenditure. Its very likely, though, that the expenditure will be higher than budgeted in 2022-23.

What the expenditure numbers tell us is that the government isnt buying the argument that consumption needs to be supported further. Subsidies on food and fertiliser have been substantially reduced. The outlay on MGNREGS is the same as in the last budget and substantially lower than in the revised estimates. Perhaps the hope is that as the economy re-opens, growth will provide jobs, which in turn will support consumption.

On the revenue side, gross tax receipts are budgeted at 10.7 percent of GDP, lower by a bit than the current years 10.8 percent.

The problem lies in excise duties, which have been budgeted much lower, because of the cuts in duties on fuel. Leaving out excise duties, the gross tax revenues budgeted for 2022-23 are 9.4 percent of GDP against 9.1 percent this year. Thats not too much of an increase, but then it needs to be seen in the context of the nominal GDP increasing by over 17 percent in the current fiscal against the budgeted rise of only 11.1 percent for 2022-23.

Despite the fiscal deficit for 2022-23 being lower, as a percentage of GDP, at 6.4 percent, compared to the revised estimate of 6.9 percent for the current fiscal year, the budget will still provide an increased stimulus, albeit a small one. Thats because the fiscal deficit in absolute terms is higher by Rs 70,107crore.

Follow this link:

Conservative budget that needs to be commended for resisting populism before elections - Moneycontrol

Breadcrumb Trail Links

Researchers say the pandemic has given conspiracy theorists an opportunity to "make alliances in order to advance their political agendas.

Author of the article:

Some of Quebecs most popular conspiracy theorists have preyed on peoples fears and frustrations during the COVID-19 pandemic to drive their own political agendas, a new study says.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

At the same time, it warns, leaders from different areas where conspiracies are known to take hold including far-right groups, and certain religious and spiritual communities have found common ground during the pandemic and are now more intertwined than before.

Many of these groups are politically on the far right and also influenced by religious beliefs, Martin Geoffroy, the director of the program behind the study, said on Monday.

Whats changed is that, before the pandemic, most of them were in their own little spheres. But the pandemic has offered them an opportunity to make alliances in order to advance their political agendas.

The study was published Monday by the Centre for Expertise and Training on Religious Fundamentalism and Radicalization (CEFIR), which operates out of CEGEP douard-Montpetit in Longueuil. Researchers examined nearly 500 videos published online by some of Quebecs most popular so-called complotistes between November 2020 and January 2021.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Overall, the study suggests those pushing conspiracy theories and misinformation in the province can be divided into two ideological matrices: the far-right and religious or spiritual movements.

Those that fall under the far-right category, it says, include people belonging to nationalist and identitarian groups, as well as the sovereign citizens and survivalism movements. On the religious and spiritual side, the study also identified three main components: the New Age movement, Catholic integralism, and Protestant fundamentalism.

Many of the influencers mentioned in the study were already spreading conspiracy theories and anti-government sentiment before the pandemic. But with people spending more time online and frustrations growing, theyve seen their popularity and influence increase over the last two years.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

For Geoffroy, this was to be expected.

All groups that draw on populism on the far right capitalize on fear, and the pandemic has been a great opportunity structure to create fear, he said.

Times are tough, many people have lost their jobs, then they come with the magical solution to all your problems. Theyll say, The pandemic isnt over? Well end it by overthrowing the government, he added. It wont happen, but they draw on that to further push their agenda.

Geoffroy pointed to this weekends convoy protest in Ottawa as an example.

Though the convoy was promoted as a protest against vaccine mandates for truckers, it has since morphed into a call for all public health measures to be lifted. People with far-right connections and links to white supremacist groups, including several the study focused on, have also participated. Over the weekend, at least one truck flew a Confederate flag and Nazi symbols and slogans were seen in the crowd.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

It was very hard this weekend to know who was representing this movement, Geoffroy said. But basically all of these types of groups were there.

Among the people whose online activity researchers studied was Mario Roy , a former member of right-wing groups Storm Alliance and La Meute whos called on members of the National Assembly to be arrested for high treason over pandemic measures. As well as Franois Amalega Bitondo , an anti-mask protester whos under court order to stay away from Premier Franois Legault.

Also mentioned in the study is Alexis Cossette-Trudel , another key conspiracy theorist in Quebec. Cossette-Trudel, who has a significant online following, has argued the pandemic is a part of a plot by the deep state to undermine former United States president Donald Trump a plan he believes Legault is part of.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

As for the religious side, the study details how a Montreal pastor, who has openly defied health measures, began collaborating with a well-known far-right activist during the pandemic. The report says the pastor has frequently equated health measures with Satanism promoted by atheistic communists seeking to take control of the planet.

The study also looked into the influence of certain Quebecers who identify with the New Age movement, a network of people who generally subscribe to a variety of beliefs about spirituality and natural health. During the pandemic, however, the report says their discourse has become more conspiratorial, often blaming modern medicine for COVID-19 and spreading debunked theories about the dangers of the vaccine.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The illustrate the point, the study quotes one influencer with thousands of followers across her different online platforms.

You have to look at it as a gift when you have an illness. Even if you have a little acute illness like a cold, or like COVID right, the imaginary COVID, she said in November 2020. Its a cleansing illness. An acute illness with what I call cleansing symptoms.

Geoffroy said it can be hard to tell, sometimes, which of these people actually believe what theyre saying and which ones are only doing it for their personal gain. And, he added, he understands how some would like to label conspiracy theorists as unhinged people who are simply spreading nonsense.

But thats exactly what the study warns against doing, he said.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Some of them might be, but most of them are only using conspiracy theories to advance their political agenda, which is a far-right agenda, he said. And people dont always realize that.

jfeith@postmedia.com

All our coronavirus-related news can be found at montrealgazette.com/tag/coronavirus .

For information on vaccines in Quebec, tap here .

Sign up for our email newsletter dedicated to local COVID-19 coverage at montrealgazette.com/coronavirusnews .

Help support our local journalism by subscribing to the Montreal Gazette .

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive daily headline news from the Montreal Gazette, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Montreal Gazette Headline News will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Continued here:

Quebec conspiracy theorists prey on fears and frustrations: study - Montreal Gazette