#2022 up assembly elections

[simply-ivanka]

Why the GOP Is Winning Over Minorities

The Democrats have nothing to offer but grievance, victimhood and welfare.

Josh Williams -- Wall Street Journal

On Election Day, Donald Trump revealed the new coalition underpinning the modern Republican Party. As a proud black elected Republican, I believe today’s GOP represents people like me better than the Democrats ever have.

My early life could be considered an “authentic” experience as a black man in America. I was once a homeless high-school dropout. As a young adult, I endured a devastating workplace accident that left me disabled. At 30, I pulled myself up and enrolled in college, determined to rewrite my story. Within the next seven years I became a practicing attorney and, in 2022, the first black Republican elected to the Ohio House of Representatives in 50 years.

I understand the needs and concerns of my community, because for many years I lived them. All the Democratic Party ever offered me was grievance, victimhood and welfare. What any American—black or otherwise—wants is the opportunity to work hard and achieve his dreams. The Republican agenda champions economic prosperity, energy independence, border security and community safety. Opportunity lives within the modern GOP, and last Tuesday people of color agreed in record numbers.

To understand why the Democratic Party has failed, just look at how its agenda has affected my hometown of Toledo. Toledoans are very proud of our Jeep plant, the backbone of our local economy. Unfortunately, it has been crippled by big government. New regulations and mandates have led to assembly-line shutdowns and thousands of layoffs. Decades of unfair trade practices and an oppressive tax code leave Toledo and cities like it in decline.

For our gritty town, the Jeep plant has been a leg up for generations. This work has been passed down from fathers and mothers to sons and daughters for longer than I’ve been alive. Without it, many people who grew up like me are simply left with one less option to succeed.

When I walk into the barber shop, people are talking about Jeep jobs, inflation and crime, not identity politics. They ask questions about border security and the cost of living, not culture wars. The average American who looks like me simply isn’t concerned with the fake issues being peddled by the Democratic Party and the elites who set its agenda.

My message to Washington after the election is simple: Stop pandering to us. Treat us like adults. Treat us like Americans.

Whether you love Mr. Trump or loathe him, you can’t accuse him of inauthenticity. Minority communities not only can handle that approach—we appreciate it, and we will vote for it.

Mr. Trump’s Republican Party is where I belong. It’s where my friends, neighbors and pastors belong. The voters have spoken loud and clear that his GOP is the party of the people. All of us.

Mr. Williams represents the 44th Ohio House District, which includes much of the Toledo area.

[foreverlogical]

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers signed new legislative districts into law on Monday to replace gerrymandered Republican maps that the new liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down in December. If the court signs off on the new maps, Wisconsin would finally get much fairer districts after more than a decade of tilted maps that have locked Democrats out of power in this longtime swing state.

Evers had recently proposed these maps to the court in the hopes that the justices would select them, but in a surprise, the Republican-run legislature passed them last week before the court could act. The court is still likely to review these new maps to ensure they comply with the criteria it laid down for any remedial plans, including that they be politically neutral.

As illustrated in the graphic at the top of this story, Joe Biden would have won an 18-15 majority of seats in the state Senate, while Donald Trump would have carried a 50-49 majority of state Assembly districts. (Click here and here for interactive versions with partisan and demographic data from Dave's Redistricting App.) The now-invalid Republican maps, by contrast, gave Trump an 22-11 edge in the Senate and a 64-35 advantage in the Assembly.

Because only half of the seats in the Senate will be up for election in November, Democrats would likely have to wait until the 2026 elections before they could flip the upper chamber. However, the new maps would give them a chance to take back the Assembly this fall.

Republicans may have opted for Evers' proposals because they are slightly more favorable to the GOP compared to other plans that were under consideration by the court. Nonetheless, Evers' maps are still much fairer than the current GOP gerrymanders, which let Republicans win a veto-proof two-thirds supermajority in the Senate in 2022 and nearly hit that mark in the Assembly despite Democrats winning most statewide races that same year.

[tomorrowusa]

Illinois is very strongly in favor of reproductive freedom. It's a major destination for people from red states in the region who are seeking reproductive healthcare.

Some Republican-run jurisdictions in red states have made it a crime to assist women to leave those states for the purpose of getting an abortion. The Illinois legislature has responded to that by making it illegal for any Illinois authorities to cooperate with investigators from red states seeking to prosecute their states' residents for getting abortions in Illinois or assisting them in arranging to help them get abortions.

Authorities in Illinois would not be allowed to aid another state’s investigation of people coming to Illinois to seek abortions or other reproductive health care under a bill that cleared the General Assembly Thursday. House Bill 5239, which needs only a signature from Gov. J.B. Pritzker to become law, also gives individuals the right to sue for civil damages if their information is improperly disclosed.

Gov. Pritzker is certain to sign the bill into law.

There's also help for teens who need family planning services.

Further, it gives minors the right to apply for public aid to obtain family planning services without the consent of their parents. And it gives the state exclusive authority to define and regulate “lawful health care activity,” prohibiting local units of government from exercising similar authority. The bill is one of several responses Illinois lawmakers have passed in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 that overturned Roe v. Wade. It came in response to legislative efforts in other states to ban or severely limit access to abortion services.

These measures became necessary after the Republican US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

While the focus this year is mostly on national politics, Illinois reminds us that there is much the states can do on their own.

Find out who is running for state legislature in your districts. If you're represented by MAGA Republicans then contact your state or county Democratic Party organization and ask how you can help elect Democrats to represent you.

Find Your Legislators Look your legislators up by address or use your current location.

[contemplatingoutlander]

"Far from being exceptional in American history, gun-control regulations are the default. If 'Bruen' was designed to nullify the constitutional basis for many gun laws, it ought to fail."

--Robert J. Spitzer, political science professor emeritus at SUNY Cortland

Robert J. Spitzer, professor emeritus at SUNY Cortland outlines the early--and plentiful--history of gun regulation laws in early American history. Consequently, Clarence Thomas's 2022 Bruen decision might not be the disaster for gun control that some people have thought. Below are some excerpts from the article.

In the summer of 1619, the leaders of the fledgling Jamestown colony came together as the first general assembly to enact “just Laws for the happy guiding and governing of the people there inhabiting.” Consisting of the governor, Sir George Yeardley; his four councillors; and 22 elected “burgesses,” or representatives, the group approved more than 30 measures. Among them was the nation’s first gun law:

"That no man do sell or give any Indians any piece, shot, or powder, or any other arms offensive or defensive, upon pain of being held a traitor to the colony and of being hanged as soon as the fact is proved, without all redemption."

After that early example of gun control came many more laws placing restrictions on the ownership and use of firearms. If guns have always been part of American society, so have gun laws. This fact might come as a surprise to some gun-rights advocates, who seem to believe that America’s past was one of unregulated gun ownership. That view received a big assist in 2022, when the Supreme Court declared in "New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen" that the constitutionality of modern gun laws depends on whether they are ��consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” In other words, the constitutional standard for any modern gun law boils down to whether you can find a good precedent for it back in the 1700s or 1800s. The advocates’ assumption is that such precedents are few and far between, but thanks to the work of researchers and the digitization of archival material, thousands of old gun laws, of every imaginable variety, are now available for reference. Far from being exceptional in American history, gun-control regulations are the default. If "Bruen" was designed to nullify the constitutional basis for many gun laws, it ought to fail. [...] Throughout this long period in the history of the republic, up until the beginning of the 20th century, gun laws placed conditions or restrictions on weapons access for a wide variety of citizens—in particular, indentured servants, vagrants, non-Protestants, those who refused to swear an oath of loyalty to the government, felons, foreigners, minors, and those under the influence of alcohol. Numerous laws regulated hunting practices, as well as firearms’ carry, use, storage, and transportation; regulated the manufacture, inspection, storage, and sale of firearms; imposed gun licensing; and restricted dangerous or unusual weapons. Despite the Thomas opinion’s claim that “the historical record yields relatively few 18th- and 19th-century ‘sensitive places’ where weapons were altogether prohibited,” some local authorities outlawed the discharge of firearms in or near towns, buildings, or roads, as well as after dark, on Sundays, at public gatherings, and in cemeteries. In some jurisdictions, any use of a firearm that wasted gunpowder was also an offense. [...] In the post-revolutionary 1800s, as rising violent crime led more people to arm themselves, a total of 42 states (plus the District of Columbia) enacted laws against concealed carry. Three more did so in the early 1900s, so that the total included almost every state in the Union. As many states from the 1700s to 1900s also enacted some form of weapons-licensing law. That’s not all. Over that same period, at least 22 states restricted any gun carrying, including of long guns. Moreover, across the entire period, three-quarters of the states had laws either against “brandishing”—waving a gun around in a menacing or threatening manner—or merely having a weapon on display in public. [...] In addition, even though for much of its history America was an agrarian country...its lawmakers and enforcers were inventive and determined about ensuring public safety. When they perceived a threat to that order from firearms, they passed laws to restrict or prevent them. And back then, by and large, no court struck those laws down. That is what is truly consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. So if we accept the originalist premise of "Bruen," the actual result should be to render a broad array of gun regulations constitutional. [color emphasis added]

[yougottabetheguy]

So French politics is a total mess right now.

But we need a tiny bit of backstory to fully understand why.

In 1944, France took back its' territories from invading armies. The 4th Republic was declared when De Gaulle stepped down as commander-in-chief-in-exile.

The 4th Republic tried to be parliamentary, but also incentivised coalitions, which constantly broke down. So there were massive political instabilities which came to a head in the Algerian war of independence in 1958. French soldiers, living in Algeria, threatened to invade the mainland if the head of government didn't give up peace talks with the Algerian rebels. So De Gaulle, the man who brought freedom back to France and fended off American imperialism post-WWII, was called on to solve the crisis.

He decided to form a new semi-presidential republic, that wouldn't be bogged down by giving excessive power to the elected assembly.

The President is directly elected for 5 years, and so is the lower house (Assembly). To be eligible to be president, you must have the support of at least 500 mayors or regional councillors over the entire country. (Yes, that does mean that the French people are asked to vote at least 5 times every 5 years: mayoral, regional, legislative (lower house), presidential, and European). The upper house, the Senate, is voted in indirectly by all representatives (mayors, councillors, Assembly members).

Phew.

But also, the Assembly can overturn the Presidency by a simple majority vote. And the President can, at any time, dissolve the Assembly.

This means, that since the legislative and presidential elections are very close to each other, that the presidential party/coalition has always had a majority in the Assembly, except for a few occasions. (I think Mitterrand didn't have one)

It's a presidential republic because the President has strong executive power, and can pass executive bills without the Assembly's approval: so called Article 49§3. Article 49§3 is meant to break parliamentary deadlock on critical issues, like national budgets, by forcing the Assembly to take action. The Assembly can overturn the President and block the bill by simple majority of registered Assembly members, not just those who turn up to the vote. So it is a political gamble. Mr Macron has used this to bully his party in the past: "Vote for my controversial retirement pension reform or vote me out and lose your seat."

But also, Mr Macron is a scheming, conniving bastard. He used the rise of the far right to his political gain: in 2017, he presented himself as a centrist. He was young, smart, an economist, hot, and had a wife with intrigue (they met when she was his French teacher in high school). And he won out against the far right. His party was founded in 2015, so no-one knew what to do with him.

But then, over the years, we slowly realised that he was financially liberal, socially centrist, and morally bankrupt. He was accused of putting his friends in power and generally being money grubbing. But his international appeal was pretty good.

So then he won again in 2022: hoping that the left wouldn't form a coalition (they did), that he could hold down the centre parties (he couldn't), and the far right wouldn't become larger (it did). But he still managed to get a slim majority. Thus heavy use of 49§3 to align his party.

All in all, the left were/are furious. Twice now, they did the political good deed of voting for the candidate they didn't really like to block the one they hate from getting in. So tensions were high.

Now in 2024, the far right win big in the European Elections. They get a sizeable share of french votes (mostly from low turnout by other parties). Macron decides to dissolve the Assembly 2 (?) days later.

Huh?? Why?? What?? Tf do we do now??

So now we have a legislative election in a month that no one saw coming. Everyone scrambles. The left form a coalition in 2 weeks, their manifesto cobbled together by sleepless nights. The right, once composed of 2-3 parties, has split, the vast majority of the traditional right now have joined the far right. The centre is gutted, save for Macron's party, who's effectively subsumed their voter demographic.

The legislative elections have a 2 round system: everyone votes for who they actually want in round 1 and settles in round 2.

It's chaos.

After round one, the left have a 30% hold on the country, the centre have 20%, and the far right have 35%.

Everyone realises that the far right have a real chance at winning a majority. Le Pen pushes her electorate as hard as she can: she doesn't just want to be the biggest party and get to form the government, she wants a majority and overturn the President.

The left choose to pull out of places that they aren't going to win to avoid diluting the vote. Days before the 2nd round, Macron has said nothing similar. A few days before, his message is simple: "We're not going to do anything. We won't pull out of races we might not win." It's a kick in the teeth for the left.

The end of the second round looks like this:

Purple is the left coalition, yellow is Macron, blue is traditional right, brown is far right.

With 182 seats, the left have the most, and should form the next government. Not by law, but by convention.

Macron has 168 seats, the far right have 143.

The majority is 289 seats. No one is close, but a coalition would work.

Unfortunately, that's a problem: since no government in the past 60 years has had to form a coalition, no one knows how, and aren't amenable to it in the first place.

But the left are ecstatic. They struggled so hard to unite, they defied all odds to challenge Macron, and now they have the institutional (but not legal) right to name a Prime Minister (head of the lower house).

This all happened before the Olympics. So Macron declares that there must be political unity during the Olympics. So everyone agrees and keeps quiet for a while.

Side note, Mr Macron has called himself the "God of Time" in private meetings, since he believes that he can dictate when things happen, putting off decisions and important meeting by leveraging the might of french bureaucracy at them. But that kind of tactic wears thin very quickly.

After the Olympics, and the fiasco that was, politics can start again. The left, after an awful lot of arguing and trial and error, name Lucie Castets as Prime Minister. She's smart, female, and merely socialist (as opposed to communist). The far right immediately oppose her, declaring that they would vote to overturn her as soon as she is sworn in. "Blah blah blah not strong not good too extreme".

So they try again. And again. Until Macron, who is the person who swears in the Prime Minister, invites potential candidates from different parties to his office. So now, somehow, Macron, who didn't win the majority of seats, is choosing the PM. He invites Hollande, Sarkozy, Mélenchon, Duflot, Cazeneuve, Bertrand, Castets to try and find a leader who might not be immediately overturned.

The left insist that any extreme right candidate will be overturned. The far right insist that any candidate with an inkling of leftism will be overturned. Macron's party stays quiet.

So we arrive at today: Michel Barnier is our new PM. He's right wing. He voted against decriminalising gays in the 80s.

His inauguration speech had catchphrases like: "Access to public services, security in daily life, and immigration control". He promises to establish a "German-style" cabinet, made up of ministers from all parties. But we'll see how that goes.

So...yeah...I love how the left got the most seats of all parties and is now completely out of government.

Macron _could_ have formed a left alliance and chosen to uphold french dignity. He _could_ have chosen an ex-centrist PM. He _could_ have chosen compromise, but instead bent the knee to the right because they're more vocal.

Maybe I'll update this as time goes by. Maybe I'll be too depressed to do so.

[mariacallous]

It's even more grotesque because Mar Galcerán has been an activist and official working on inclusiveness and disability policy for a while now in Spain.

For decades she battled to ensure that people with intellectual disabilities were part of the conversation. The extent of the progress she had made, however, was laid bare recently when Mar Galcerán became Spain’s first parliamentarian with Down’s syndrome.

“It’s unprecedented,” the 45-year-old told the Guardian. “Society is starting to see that people with Down’s syndrome have a lot to contribute. But it’s a very long road.”

Her feat has been decades in the making. When Galcerán was 18 years old, she joined the conservative People’s party (PP) after being attracted to what she described as its embrace of tradition.

Slowly she worked her way up the party apparatus. Her commitment paid off last May when she was added as the 20th name on the list of candidates the PP was fielding in Valencia’s regional elections.

News that Galcerán had obtained a seat in the regional parliament came soon after. “Welcome Mar,” the region’s PP leader, Carlos Mazón, wrote on social media. “Great news for politics, overcoming barriers.”

The achievement catapults Galcerán to the top of the ranks of the handful of people with Down’s syndrome who have crashed through barriers to enter the world of politics. In 2020, Éléonore Laloux became the first person with the genetic disorder in France to be elected to public office, as a city council member in the northern town of Arras, while Ireland’s Fintan Bray was hailed for making history after he was elected to a political position in the country in 2022.

In Spain, Galcerán’s path into politics was blazed by Ángela Bachiller, who in 2013 became Spain’s first city councillor with Down’s syndrome in the northern city of Valladolid.

Galcerán may be the first in Europe, however, to join a regional or national parliament, according to Spain’s Down’s syndrome federation.

“We haven’t heard of anyone else,” said Agustín Matía Amor of Down España. “It’s a huge step forward and an example of real inclusion.”

He was quick to point out that the achievement was also a reflection of the decades Galcerán had spent working to advance the status of people with Down’s syndrome in Spain. For more than 20 years Galcerán had worked as a civil servant in Valencia, most recently helping to carve out inclusive policy, adding to the four years she spent at the helm of Asindown, a Valencian organisation dedicated to helping families with children that have Down’s syndrome.

“It’s both great news and a recognition of her work and the many initiatives she was involved in,” said Matía Amor. “It’s a good example of what is possible.”

While Galcerán’s September swearing in was hailed by Spanish media, she said the reaction online had been mixed. “You find all sorts on social media,” she said. “There are people who support me. But there are also others who think I’m not capable. But these are people who don’t know me or my background.”

As she gets acquainted with her new role, she described it as a tremendous responsibility. “I want to learn how to do it well, for Valencianos, and more importantly, for those of us who have different abilities.”

Ultimately she hoped her presence in the regional parliament would help to dismantle the many prejudices that continue to linger in society, particularly when it comes to people with Down’s syndrome. “I want people to see me as a person, not just for my disability.”

[abigailspinach]

“How often in 100 days do you get to change the trajectory of the world? How often in 100 days do you get to do something that’s going to impact generations to come?” Walz asked. “And how often in the world do you make that bastard wake up afterwards and know that a Black woman kicked his a**, sent him on the road?”

The line was well received on the call and almost immediately grabbed headlines. For many Democrats, at least, the online virality – with apologies to Biden’s “Dark Brandon” meme – was the kind they have pined for over the past few years.

Walz also has a personal story befitting the zeitgeist – a family history, as he discussed last month, of infertility troubles, with his wife of three decades, Gwen, which allows him to speak with some authority against opponents or skeptics of in vitro fertilization, or IVF.

“My oldest daughter’s name is Hope. That’s because my wife and I spent seven years trying to get pregnant, needed fertility treatments, things like IVF – things (MAGA Republicans) would ban,” Walz told Harris supporters. “These guys are the anti-freedoms.”

And to draw a bright, cheeky line under his own childhood experience, Walz – not for the last time – recounted that he “grew up in a small town: 400 people, 24 kids in the class, 12 cousins.”

Prior to Congress, Walz was a high school teacher and football coach and served in the Army National Guard. Over more than a decade in Congress, he assembled a fairly centrist voting record. As a first-time campaigner, he opposed a ban on same-sex marriage and supported abortion rights. And once in Congress, he balanced that out with comparatively more conservative positions on gun rights, which resulted in scoring a National Rifle Association endorsement. Walz has since fallen out of favor with the gun lobby over his support for gun safety actions as governor.

“I think he was a solid Democratic member of the House with a few twists - focus on ag, farmers, rural areas,” said Democratic strategist Jeff Blodgett, a longtime aide to the late Sen. Paul Wellstone. “I think that he wanted to protect rifles and things of that nature as a rural congressman.”

Walz ran for governor in 2018, emerging victorious by a double-digit margin. He won reelection in 2022 with 52 percent of the vote. As governor Walz had to grapple with divided government and slim majorities in the state Legislature. But in 2022, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (as the state’s Democratic Party is known) won control of both the state House and Senate giving Walz’s party a slim “trifecta” of legislative control.

That allowed Walz to sign into law a raft of expansive social welfare programs such as free lunch for public school students, expansive access to Medicaid, increased protections that allow workers to unionize and expanded medical and family paid family leave.

Through the trifecta, Minnesota Democrats were also able to codify abortion rights into law, increase transgender rights protections, pass a marijuana legalization bill and install new gun safety laws. Progressives hailed the work as an example of all that Democrats could achieve. Former President Barack Obama wrote in a tweet praising the most recent legislative session that it was a “reminder that elections have consequences.”

Walz touted the trifecta’s work in a combative 2023 State of the State address.

“There’s nowhere quite like Minnesota right now,” he told the audience of lawmakers. “Together, we’re not just showing the people of Minnesota what we’re capable of in delivering on our promises. We’re showing the entire American people just how much promise is contained in that progressive vision held by so many people.”

“As governor, he’s embraced the idea that it’s really important to invest in people and infrastructure to grow the economy,” Blodgett said. “And to do it in a way that really helps people in the middle and down below. To me, it’s just a huge focus on economic issues that are kitchen table issues that people care about.”

When speculation began about who Harris would pick as a running mate, Walz started out as the darkest of dark horses. He did get support from a few members of Congress such as Minnesota Rep. Angie Craig and Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, as well as encouragement from labor unions. In the end, Walz’s background as a governor experienced in working with Democrats and Republicans and his roots in rural Minnesota made him an appealing choice for Harris.

Walz was also a surprise to Republicans.

“Tim Walz doesn’t even register on the fear-o-meter,” Minnesota Republican strategist Kevin Poindexter said before the announcement, adding that Republicans had been more worried about Harris picking either Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly or Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. “Him joining the ticket as VP does not bring anything.”

Democratic strategist Raghu Devaguptapu, a former Democratic Governors Association political director, characterized Walz as a “real steady hand” more than anything else as a governor.

“He’s not the most charismatic guy, but he’s a steady hand. He’s really thoughtful, very likeable. He’s done a really nice job of building a broad coalition of support. … That’s the center of strength around Tim Walz,” Devaguptapu said.

[newstfionline]

Saturday, October 12, 2024

Florida counts cost of Hurricane Milton (Reuters) Florida on Friday was clearing downed trees and power lines and mopping up flooded neighborhoods after Hurricane Milton roared through leaving at least 16 people dead. While Milton did not trigger the catastrophic surge of seawater that was feared in Florida, the clean-up operation could take many weeks or months for some people. "It opens your eyes to what Mother Nature can do," said Chase Pierce, 25 of west St. Petersburg, who, with his girlfriend, saw transformers blow up, sparks fly and a power line fall in the back yard. The fifth-most-intense Atlantic hurricane on record, Milton could cost insurers alone up to $100 billion, analysts say.

The staggering price you’re paying for America’s nuclear makeover (NYT) The U.S. military says America’s nuclear arsenal is outdated and unable to keep up with our adversaries’ modern weapons. To replace it, the country is in the midst of a once-in-a-generation overhaul that could exceed $1.7 trillion. The spending spree, which the government began planning in 2010, is underway in at least 23 states—nearly 50 if you include subcontractors. Along with 12 new nuclear subs, the military is paying for a new fleet of bomber jets, land-based missiles and thermonuclear warheads. Tally all that spending, and the bill comes to almost $57 billion a year, or $108,000 per minute for three decades. If you don’t live where the submarines are welded or the missile silos are dug, there’s a good chance you wouldn’t know it’s happening. But each day, more than 110,000 scientists, military personnel and private contractors with high-level security clearances are scanning into facilities, putting on safety gear and piecing together a modern arsenal for a volatile new nuclear age. The money is already flowing, assembling weapons everyone hopes will never be used.

Pandering for votes (Bloomberg) Pandering for votes is standard practice in election campaigns. But the tax-policy proposals on offer during this presidential contest are setting new standards for shamelessness. The purest example of this bipartisan trait is a plan to exempt tips from income tax. Donald Trump raised the idea in June, then Kamala Harris joined him when she entered the race. Both made their pitch in Nevada, a battleground state, where about 5% of workers get some income from tips (the national average is 2%). President Joe Biden won there by 34,000 votes in 2020, so winning over some of its 350,000 hospitality workers could make the difference. Setting the electoral arithmetic aside, the idea makes no sense. Tipped workers are usually low-paid. Many would get little or no benefit because their earnings fall below IRS thresholds for tax liability. Trump also says he would end US income taxes on Americans living in other countries (though of course he can’t do that on his own since Congress would have to pass a law).

One killed as protests over high cost of living in Martinique turn violent (AP) Protests over the high cost of living in the French Caribbean island of Martinique turned violent late Wednesday, with at least one person killed as demonstrators set fire to a police station, cars and road barricades as they clashed with officers. It was one of the most violent nights yet since protests began more than a month ago, with the government issuing a statement asserting that no police officers used their weapons and that the killing was under investigation. Videos posted on social media showed protesters looting grocery stores and other businesses as they threw rocks and bottles at police, who responded with tear gas.

Migration through Darien Gap increased in September, led by Venezuelans after the election (AP) The number of migrants crossing the Darien Gap—a rugged jungle passage between Colombia and Panama—increased sharply in September, according to Panamanian government data. Venezuelans have led mass migration through the Darien since 2022, and make up much of the increase since that country’s recent controversial presidential election. More than half a million migrants, a record number, crossed the Darien in 2023. More than 65% of them were Venezuelan.

France plans to tax big business and the rich, while slashing public spending (Politico) France’s new government is laser-focused on budget cuts. Michel Barnier’s government published draft legislation last night outlining its plans to address France’s “colossal” debt issue. The main points? First, €19.4 billion in tax increases, with a focus on “exceptional” taxes on “the profits of large companies” and tax hikes on the “wealthiest” French households. Second, the spending cuts—totaling €41.3 billion overall—will cut 2,200 government jobs, shrink France’s foreign aid budget, and eliminate various tax credits. The new budget will hopefully help the country work its way out of the E.U. excessive deficit procedure it’s currently facing. Because of the Barnier government’s precarious situation—it’s made up of a patchwork coalition of centrists and right-wingers—the government might need to invoke a constitutional mechanism to get the budget passed. That maneuver would allow the government to shove through the budget without even a vote from Parliament unless lawmakers are able to scrape together a vote of no confidence within 48 hours. Maybe we’ll see another new French government sooner than expected.

September Was Deadly Month for Russian Troops in Ukraine, U.S. Says (NYT) September was the bloodiest month of the war for Russian forces in Ukraine, U.S. officials said, with the costly offensive in the east bringing the number of Russia’s dead and wounded to more than 600,000 troops since the war started. U.S. officials attribute the high number of Russian casualties to what they describe as a grinding war of attrition, with each side trying to exhaust the other by inflicting maximum losses, hoping to break the enemy’s capacity and will to continue. Russian troops have made steady but incremental gains in recent months in the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, U.S. officials said. It is a style of warfare that Russians have likened to being put into a meat grinder, with commanding officers seemingly willing to send many thousands of infantry soldiers to die. According to U.S. assessments, Russian casualties in the war so far number as many as 615,000—115,000 Russians killed and 500,000 wounded. Ukrainian officials have zealously guarded their casualty figures, even from the Americans, but a U.S. official estimated that Ukraine had suffered a bit more than half of Russia’s casualties, or more than 57,500 killed and 250,000 wounded.

Airstrikes in Beirut Kill at Least 22 and Level a Building, Lebanese Officials Say (NYT) Israeli airstrikes hit two buildings in a densely populated area of central Beirut on Thursday, Lebanon said, in what appeared to be the deadliest attack in the Lebanese capital in more than a year of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah. The strikes killed at least 22 people and wounded at least 117 others, Lebanese officials said. Lebanon’s state-run news agency reported that one of the strikes had targeted an eight-story building in the Ras el-Nabaa neighborhood, while the other had leveled a four-story building in the Basta neighborhood. Videos verified by The New York Times showed that the building in Basta had been destroyed and adjacent buildings had been damaged. Two plumes of thick, acrid smoke could be seen rising above the city skyline. The strikes came hours after United Nations officials said that Israeli forces had fired on U.N. peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, wounding two and touching off international criticism of the Israeli military’s offensive against Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group.

Israel steps up its battles with the United Nations (Washington Post) Israel firing on UN peacekeepers is only the latest flash point between Israel and the world’s most important international organization. A General Assembly resolution last month called on Israel to dismantle illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, a withdrawal that would be unthinkable to Israel’s far-right government. Separate cases for genocide and war crimes against Israel and Israeli officials are running through the International Court of Justice, the U.N.’s top court, and the International Criminal Court. Meanwhile, in Israeli discourse, the United Nations is a frequent target of scorn, seen as a biased instrument of myriad member states angry at Israel over its occupation of Palestinian territories. When he addressed the General Assembly in New York in September, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the international body a “swamp of antisemitic bile.” Earlier this month, the country’s foreign minister, Israel Katz, declared the U.N. Secretary General António Guterres “persona non grata,” barring him from entering Israel after the latter made a statement condemning the “broadening” nature of the conflict in the Middle East without specifically decrying Iran’s rocket barrage.

‘Relentless’ Israeli Attacks on Gaza Medical Workers Are War Crime, U.N. Panel Says (NYT) United Nations investigators on Thursday accused Israel of engaging in “relentless and deliberate attacks” on health care facilities, medical workers and wounded civilians in the Gaza Strip and said the actions amounted to war crimes and extermination, a crime against humanity. A U.N. report said the Israelis had imposed “collective punishment” on Palestinians in retaliation for the Oct. 7 attacks Hamas militants led on Israel a year ago from Gaza. The Israeli siege that followed, it said, has prevented hospitals from receiving food, fuel, water and medical supplies, and has also limited the number of patients allowed to leave Gaza for treatment. Navi Pillay, the former U.N. high commissioner for human rights, said, “Israel has perpetrated a concerted policy to destroy Gaza’s health care system as part of a broader assault on Gaza, committing war crimes and the crime against humanity of extermination with relentless and deliberate attacks on medical personnel and facilities.”

After a 2-year investigation, South African president won’t be charged over $580K hidden in a couch (AP) South African President Cyril Ramaphosa won’t face criminal charges over a hidden cash scandal that was revealed more than two years ago and led to an investigation by a special police unit, prosecutors said Thursday. A former national security chief laid a criminal complaint against Ramaphosa in June 2022, accusing him of kidnapping, bribery and other crimes in relation to the theft of $580,000 in U.S. banknotes that was stashed in a couch at the president’s ranch. The former security boss, Arthur Fraser, alleged that Ramaphosa had been keeping the cash hidden in furniture at his ranch to evade South Africa’s foreign currency laws when it was stolen. Instead of reporting the theft, Ramaphosa tried to cover it up by having members of his presidential protection unit track down the thieves, kidnap them and then bribe them to keep quiet about the existence of the money, Fraser said in the affidavit filed with police. The theft happened at Ramaphosa’s game farm in rural northern South Africa in early 2020 and had been kept quiet until Fraser’s allegations. It forced Ramaphosa to admit the theft took place and threw his presidency into turmoil.

Weeds (MIT Technology Review) Weeds are winning again, with herbicide-resistant strains emerging from 273 weed species, developing resistances to any of 168 different herbicides. Water hemp, for instance, grows an inch per day or more, and is now resistant to seven classes of herbicides. That’s quite bad, as season-long water hemp can cut soybean yields by 44 percent and cut corn yields by 15 percent.

[crystalis]

"China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has released quite the explosive report on the US's National Endowment for Democracy (NED), explaining how under the cover of "promoting democracy", it has "long engaged in subverting state power in other countries, meddling in other countries’ internal affairs, inciting division and confrontation, misleading public opinion, and conducting ideological infiltration".

In short, it's subverting democracy, the exact contrary of what it says it's doing...

This is the link to the report:

The NED has long been infamous for doing this kind of stuff but there are a few things in the report that are really explosive:

1) Meddling on an enormous scale in Ukraine

The report claims that the NED "provided $65 million to the Ukrainian opposition during the 2004 Orange Revolution". They also write that "during the 2013-2014 Euromaidan, NED financed the Mass Media Institute to spread inflammatory information. NED also spent tens of millions of dollars in the use of such social media platforms as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and Instagram to spread disinformation, heighten ethnic tensions in Ukraine, and stir up ethnic antagonism in eastern Ukraine."

2) "Taking Mexico as a major target country for infiltration"

As the report details, the NED has financially supported numerous organizations like "Mexicans Against Corruption and Impunity (MCCI) and the Mexican Institute for Competitiveness (IMCO), and obstructed the electricity reform in Mexico". They also write that "in 2021, the Mexican government sent a note to the US government condemning NED’s funding of anti-government organizations in Mexico as 'an act of interventionism' 'promoting a coup.'"

3) Interference in Serbia's elections

They write that "in April 2022 and December 2023, Serbia held its presidential, National Assembly and local elections. NED interfered in the entire election process, and went all out to root for pro-US opposition candidates in the run-up to the elections. In May 2023, after two consecutive shooting incidents in Serbia, NED-sponsored human rights groups and pro-US opposition organizations staged mass demonstrations to demand the resignation of the Serbian government."

4) Instigating the recent protests in Georgia against the government for its foreign agents bill

They write that the "NED funded the establishment of three local NGO groupings in Georgia at the beginning of the 21st century to organize demonstrations in capital Tbilisi. In May 2024, NED rallied support for and instigated protests in Georgia against the foreign agents bill."

5) Supporting "Taiwan independence" separatist forces

They write that the NED co-hosted events with Taiwan's separatist Democratic Progressive Party, "tried to mobilize 'democratic forces' to open up the 'frontline of democratic struggle in the East' and hype up the false narrative of 'Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow'".

Needless to say, all of this is a complete violation of the UN Charter: they violate both the principle of sovereign equality that guarantees each state's right to freely choose and develop its own political, social, economic, and cultural systems; as well as the principle of non-intervention in the domestic matters of other states. And I'm not even mentioning the violation of the victim states' domestic jurisdictions..."

[learnwithmearticles]

France Election

The French 2024 election saw an amazing turnout from voters who ended up keeping the far-right out of the majority in the National Assembly.

This is not a landslide victory, but it does prove promising for the future if we can maintain this success.

French Parties

France has three main parties, here referred to as the ‘left’, ‘centrist’, and ‘right’ for convenience.

The left is primarily the New Popular Front (NFP). Their goals include limiting inflation on staple food items, increasing the minimum wage, and increasing public sector salaries and welfare benefits. They also aim to end the 2023 French pension reform law, which raised the retirement age to 64 and required someone to have worked at least 43 years. 

The center, or Les Centristes, is that which President Emmanuel Macron considers himself part of. Their goal is finding a compromise between socialism and capitalism, supporting a competitive economy as well as social welfare, and developing public transit and cleaner energy. Macron has praised the pursuit of decarbonized energy and vied for incentive policies supporting electric energy. He is harshly criticized for economic-related policies, such as heavy tax breaks for the richest citizens, the pension reform law, and putting his personal success above the French people.

The right are called the National Rally or, until 2018, the National Front. It is the most strongly xenophobic, and its goals include vilifying the European Union, increasing control and regulation of immigration, and feigning support for queer people while opposing same-sex marriage.

Election Results

The election saw the left win 182 seats in the National Assembly, while centrists won 163 and the right won 143, with smaller political factions making up the remainder. An absolute majority would be at 289 seats, so in the years to come we will likely see a lot of contention around the proposals, debating, and passing of laws.

This does mean the next Prime Minister will likely be elected -by Macron- from the politically left. This will be difficult, as many of Macron’s affiliates view leaders from the left as too extreme.

Popular veteran of left-wing politics, Jean-Luc Mélanchon, is an unlikely candidate due to how divisive he has been considered, despite coming in third in the 2022 presidential election. Marine Tondelier is another possible candidate, and currently the National Secretary of the Green Party. There is also François Ruffin, particularly known for disagreeing with Mélanchon based on views of what democracy should be. These are only a few of the people Macron has to consider to eventually fill the position.

Another important change is illuminated by the events surrounding the Pension Reform Bill. When Macron pushed it through, two no-confidence motions came from the National Assembly. If either had passed, Macron would have been forced to make major changes to the government, such as completely replacing his government appointments. While neither passed, one was only nine votes from the majority. With even more seats held by those who don’t align with Macron, we can expect potential future motions like this to be more successful. 

In other sectors, we might see large change with the left now rising in numbers in the National Assembly. Before the election, an interview with Sarah Legrain from the NPF indicated a belief in the National Assembly’s responsibility towards arts and culture. This responsibility includes not only improving access to the arts, but working towards an economy in which arts and culture can thrive.

Will conditions improve for people in France due to this election? With how recent it is, we can’t be sure. The fallout of this hectic decision from Macron to hold the reelection is yet to be fully realized. However, we can see specific examples of how the left might focus their attention in places like the economy, culture, and welfare.

Macron’s second and final term will end in 2027. With the hopeful turnout of this election, we can hope that French voters remain united and able to push their country further towards progress when the next election comes.

What Can This Mean for US elections?

Key information we can take from this is in the example of the French politicians. Between the first and second round of voting, more than 200 left-leaning candidates withdrew to avoid risking a split vote.

Similarly, many voters in the U.S. are having to deal with the dilemma of voting for the “least bad” options over voting for the “best” option. Third-party candidates, as discussed before on this page, are extremely unlikely to win a primary presidential election. Their popularity is in a middle ground because they are known enough to raise hopes of big changes, but not enough to stand against the two disproportionately powerful U.S. parties.

Additional Resources

1. Macron Energy Views

2. National Rally Views

3. Election Results

4. Events of the Pension Reform Bill

5. Potential Prime Ministers

6. Sarah Legrain Interview

[voskhozhdeniye]

“Courts usually aren’t allowed to hold someone in jail before evidence has been presented and they’ve had a chance to defend themselves,” explained Spokesman Marlon Kautz for the Atlanta Solidarity Fund, which operates out of Atlanta and pays bail for protesters. “But there’s a loophole: the court can demand a cash bail payment, and if the defendant can’t afford it they’re jailed indefinitely.” “Bail funds close this loophole in the cash bail system by leveling the playing field: they ensure that anyone—regardless of how poor or marginalized they are—can access the resources to make bail,” Kautz continued. “SB63 exposes that the loophole is not an accident, it’s the intended purpose of the bail system. Police, prosecutors, and politicians want a bail system which allows them to punish their political enemies, poor people, and people of color without trial.” The bill adds thirty additional charges that are ineligible for unsecured judicial releases, popularly known as signature bonds. The list includes charges commonly associated with protesting, like unlawful assembly and obstruction of a law enforcement officer, and street racing, like reckless stunt driving and promoting drag races. Additionally, the bill only allows elected and appointed judges to set bond in Georgia. Currently, unelected and unappointed judges may serve in vacant positions to help courts provide speedier bond hearings. The changes expanding cash bail were not unexpected based on previous iterations, but the last-minute addition to the final language of the bill significantly hindering the ability of individuals and organizations to pay bail on behalf of jailed people in the state came as a surprise. That addition to the bill did not appear in the state’s online legislation management system until sometime between late Wednesday evening and early Thursday morning.  “No more than three cash bonds maybe posted per year by any individual, corporation, organization, charity, nonprofit corporation, or group in any jurisdiction,” the bill now reads.  This change will severely impact the operational ability of bail funds in the state of Georgia like the Atlanta Solidarity Fund. To continue paying bail for arrested individuals, Georgia bail funds would need to register as professional bail bondsman with the respective sheriffs in each county they intend to operate, which requires fingerprinting and a full background check conducted by the respective sheriffs and the FBI. Registered bail bondsman organizations are still unable to pay more than three cash bonds per year, they must instead go to a third party company to attain a surety bond. Existing Georgia law also prohibits professional bondsmen from recommending defense attorneys to clients seeking bond. Pairing defendants with attorneys is another common function of the Atlanta Solidarity Fund. Violating this provision will constitute a misdemeanor in Georgia.

The use of bail funds gained new prominence in the wake of the 2020 George Floyd Protest, with new funds popping up in cities all around the country to help free the hundreds of protesters arrested that summer. In response, various state legislatures began introducing legislation aimed at curtailing the success of those organizations.  On Wednesday, Tennessee lawmakers introduced a bill outright prohibiting courts from accepting cash bails paid on behalf of defendants by charitable bail organizations. Kentucky legislators passed HB 5 in January, prohibiting charitable bail organizations from posting bonds of $5,000 or greater. Texas Governor Greg Abbot signed a law in November requiring charitable bail organizations to register with county clerks and provide monthly updates listing each defendant the fund paid bail for in the prior month. A 2022 law passed in Indiana requires charitable bail funds to pay a $300 certification fee every two years, and prohibits those organizations from posting bond for individuals accused of violent crimes or those facing felony charges with a previous violent crime conviction. The Bail Project sued the state of Indiana in federal court over its bail law, but lost the case in both the district and appeals court. “The purpose of these laws restricting and regulating community bail funds is clearly to suppress organizing and reject the expression of community solidarity,” said Pilar Weiss Director of Community Justice Exchange, which hosts the National Bail Fund Network. “These laws have nothing to do with safety or justice and are an open attack on mutual aid and community care. As criminalization of community solidarity increases, we’re seeing an increase in attacks like this whose aim is to block and reduce any routes to freedom.”

[enbycrip]

There’s some pretty fucking scary shit coming out from Netpol about how the various UK Police forces are using the particularly fascist police powers the Tories have given them.

So as usual I’m fucking bothering my MP because I’m too fucking ill and disabled to go out to protest most of the time but I can usually manage to write something faintly coherent.

Here’s my letter if you’d like a template to alter to write to yours:

Dear (my MP)

I am one of your constituents and, as I have written to you about previously, I am deeply and seriously concerned about the lack of transparency about the powers now possessed by UK police forces following the introduction of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022.

Last year the Joint Committee on Human Rights heard evidence about how often police powers were already used to limit or restrict protests under existing legislation and how there is no routine collection of data about when and how these powers are used. The JCHR recommended the creation of a publicly accessible central database, containing details about how, when and in what circumstances the police impose restrictions on rights to freedom of assembly.

This sensible and proportionate recommendation to safeguard the most basic human rights of the uk population has subsequently been ignored. Research by campaigners from Netpol shows continuing difficulties in obtaining even the most basic data from the police under freedom of information legislation. The Metropolitan Police uses these powers more than any other force. The recent and incredibly damning review by Baroness Casey on the culture and standards of behaviour within the Met raises numerous concerns about whether officers in London can be trusted to use these incredibly wide-ranging powers fairly and proportionately.

Despite the absolute essential nature of freedom of assembly and freedom to protest to the functioning of democracy, there is little or no openness or transparency on the way police are using their powers. There is a very serious need for the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) to immediately set up a publicly accessible central database, and, if the police are unwilling to do so, for a Bill to be introduced to compel them to do so.

Please

- read Netpol's briefing explaining why this is important, which you can find at https://netpol.org/police-powers-transparency

- Write to the NPCC to require them to set up a publicly accessible database.

- Introduce questions in Parliament at PM's Question Time regarding the police's lack of cooperation with human rights bodies requesting such vital information.

- Attend, if you are available, the forthcoming online briefing for parliamentarians on this issue on Thursday 27 April at 3.30pm.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Many thanks,

(Me)

You can use https://www.writetothem.com to email your MP.

[tomorrowusa]

In last year's off-off year election, Democrats flipped the House of Delegates – the lower chamber of the Virginia legislature and held on to the Virginia Senate. This was contrary to the predictions of various pundits. ProTip: When you vote, you win.

One result of the Democratic takeover of the House of Delegates was the election of Virginia's first ever African American speaker of that chamber.

The Virginia General Assembly unanimously elected Democrat Don Scott as house speaker on Wednesday, making him the first Black speaker in the Virginia House of Delegates' history. Del. Scott approached the podium to cheers and a standing ovation as he took the oath of office and began his term as the leader of the House. "My first immediate emotion is just gratitude. I'm very grateful," said Scott, tearing up as he thanked his 88 year old mother and his wife, watching from the gallery. "The historic nature of this moment is not lost on me," he told the House. "I pray that it is a proud moment for all of us, as we nominate Delegate Don Scott as our next speaker of the house," said Del. Luke E. Torian in his nomination speech. "Over 400 years ago, people who looked like Delegate Scott gave their sweat blood and tears to build this Capitol," Del. Torian elaborated. "And I would say that is probably only right and fitting and appropriate that 400 years later, a person of color, an African American, whose ancestors helped to build this capital now stands to help lead this House of Delegates."

2023 was supposed to be a good year for Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin (AKA: Trumpkin) but the voters decided otherwise.

Early in 2022, Scott took on Gov. Glenn Youngkin after the Republican set up a "tipline" for Virginians to anonymously report educators for teaching so-called "divisive concepts" like Critical Race Theory. "What I've seen from his day one activities is not someone who is a man of faith, not a Christian, but someone who wants to divide the Commonwealth," Scott proclaimed to the Virginia House of Delegates, amid boos and jeers from the Republican side of the aisle. Scott took it in stride. "I know the truth hurts. I don't want to make you cry, like saying 'critical race theory,' because I know it hurts your feelings."

Youngkin is term limited and can't run in 2025. Hopefully there will soon be a Democratic trifecta in the Old Dominion state.

For now: Congratulations to Speaker Scott! 🎊

[helshades]

Hello, I would like to know what will happen tomorrow if the motion is voted negative? and in this case will there be strikes in paris? and also are the blockades in the universities useful, or are the gatherings more effective?

Well, there is a fair chance it won't be adopted anyhow, since the number of right-wing M.P.s willing to sign in their name is likely to be insufficient to garner the required 287 votes.

You see, the historical major party on the Right—roughly speaking, it corresponds to the English Tories or the Republicans in the U.S.—which was founded by national monument General de Gaulle (the French Churchill, though I'd argue a lot less conservative in the end than Sir Winston was), barely survived the last presidential election: from nearly a quarter of the votes back in 2017, it dropped to a shocking 4.78% in 2022. The few people who stayed are basically fossils willing to be faithful to le parti du Général, whereas the ones that fled left spread between Macron's camp and Marine Le Pen's Rassemblement National.

To put it succinctly, the Republicans (the name of the party since the very Atlantist former President Nicolas Sarkozy changed it from U.M.P.) are dead afraid they'd lose what they managed to scrap up during the legislative elections of 2022, which designated députés for each constituency, for a total of 577 members or Parliament in the National Assembly. For decades, the Republicans had collected a vast amount of seats; during the previous legislature, they had 112 of them. Since last year, they only got 61.

Should the motion de censure be adopted this time (it's not the first one this session, but the rest were rejected, chiefly because of L.R.), the government will fall: the Republicans will have to run for office again, when their popularity is at an all-time low as they've appeared to compromise and pactise with the government. Indeed, even though they're officially part of the opposition, they've consistently voted in favour of the presidential majority—and their electors have noticed, and not necessarily appreciated.

In a superb, very droll, but also very fiendish move, the leader of the far-right parliamentary group in the Assembly made an official announcement to promise the Republicans that in case they voted the motion (this time it's being proffered by the very benign, very moderate centrists at the L.I.O.T. group so that everyone could vote it, as the Left wouldn't vote any motion concocted by the R.N.), the R.N. would not run candidates against any of L.R.'s own in the upcoming legislative elections...

Since the crowds that have been rioting for three days and counting keep clamouring for M.P.s to vote the motion to destitute the government, I reckon the uprising will only intensify should it fail to pass nonetheless. As for the strikes, people have been on strike since January. On Tuesday 7th March, they broke a record for the number of protesters in the streets (3.5 million across the country), but most of all, workers have been striking in all sectors with their best efforts—the problem being the sheer state of everybody's finances after two disastrous lockdowns during Covid, plus an aggravating number of ill-advised governmental decisions.

This is no secret, though, the one thing that ever could bend a government, the one true democracy, is the strike. At this scale, we're talking general, unlimited striking, to paralyse a country's infrastructures and industry, and therefore its economy. In France, that represents about 2 billion euros per day. That means cutting supply for shareholders and industry captains, the great capitalists who alone have the power to tell Macron to back off and retire his own bill.

So the real question is, will people be able to prolong and extend the strike, when Macron is evidently determined to letting things go till they rot and the strikers can't hold it any longer. It's also possible that people rioting too close for the personal comfort of wealthy folk in the nicer neighbourhoods may prompt some to ask for appeasement and compromise. By the way, did you know Emmanuel Macron will welcome King Charles in the palace of Versailles next Monday? I do hope some people can take a hint.

[xtruss]

8 Flagrant Ways The U.S-Backed Corrupt Caretaker Government In Pakistan Is Subverting The Election! Pakistan’s Corrupt $$$ Military-Backed Caretaker Government Has Gone To Extreme Lengths To Undermine The Opposition Party’s (PTI) Shot At The Polls.

— Ryan Grim | February 7, 2024 | The Intercept

Pakistani residents walk under flags depicting candidates from different political parties ahead of the upcoming general election in Lahore, Pakistan, on Feb. 7, 2024. Photo: Rebecca Conway/Getty Images

As Pakistan Prepares to determine its next government in a general election on Thursday, concerns are intensifying about electoral irregularities. A growing body of evidence points to election manipulation and political interference by the Pakistani military.

Pakistan was supposed to go to polls last year. The country’s constitution has five-year terms for both the national and provincial assemblies as well as for the post of the prime minister. When the former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s government was toppled in a parliamentary coup backed by the Pakistani military and the U.S. State Department in 2022, it was only in its fourth year.

Since then, the Pakistani military has ruled from the shadows, trying to delay the inevitable elections while at the same time trying to ensure that the massively popular Khan and his party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, or PTI, do not come back to power.

Inside Pakistan, the media is completely muzzled. Outside Pakistan, the upcoming elections are being called the “least credible in the country’s historyOpens in a new tab,” and “more like a coronationOpens in a new tab,” where the military is understood merely to be choosing a new civilian face for its rule. While the U.S. State Department has consistently said that it has not made a determinationOpens in a new tab about the fairness of Pakistani elections, the events leading up to the elections have not gone unnoticed in Congress.

“Threats to free and fair elections anywhere [are] concerning. In light of recent events in Pakistan and the upcoming election, let’s be clear: promoting stability, democracy, and human rights around the globe is paramount to maintaining our values worldwide,” posted Republican Rep. Nathaniel MoranOpens in a new tab on Twitter.

“There can’t be free and fair elections when one of the opposition parties has been criminalized,” posted Democratic Rep. Ilhan OmarOpens in a new tab, echoing Moran’s sentiments from across the political aisle.

The publicly visible instances of election rigging — visible, that is, to all but the Biden administration — are too numerous to articulate in a single article. What follows are the most egregious.

Banning the Leading Party’s Symbol

On a Pakistani ballot paper, each political party has an electoral symbol. Candidates in each of Pakistan’s hundreds of constituencies have their party symbols next to their names, a critical guide for the substantial portion of the electorate who can’t read. PTI candidates were stopped from using their unified electoral symbolOpens in a new tab — a cricket bat — by the court, based on a technicality no other party was subjected to. This means each PTI candidate is assigned a random symbol and has to run an individual campaign.

With the loss of its bat, PTI was converted from a formidable political party to a loose group of individuals with no legal affiliation overnight, effectively disenfranchising millions of citizens who placed their trust in PTI as a political entity. The move has been severely criticized as a “huge blow to fundamental rightsOpens in a new tab” by the Pakistani legal fraternity and civil society.

The implications of this go even further. If, by some miracle, PTI candidates overcome all the obstacles and win a majority in the Parliament, the technically unaffiliated candidates would be missing key legal protections and could be vulnerable to bribes and coercion by the military.

Shutting Down the Internet 🛜

The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority is now chaired by a retired generalOpens in a new tab. The chair of the PTA has the ability to shut down the whole country’s internet or specific websites on a moment’s notice. He has shut down social media and the internet every timeOpens in a new tab Khan’s PTI held an election-related event Opens in a new tabonline in the past few months, affecting more than 100 million users.

The Pakistani media has already expressed concernsOpens in a new tab that the internet might be shut down on election day to discourage people from voting. Lending credibility to those concerns, a top minister on Tuesday hinted at the possibility of an internet shutdown on election day, alarming human rights organizations including Amnesty International and prompting them to write an open letter and put out a statementOpens in a new tab.

“Amnesty International, along with several other human rights organizations, call on Pakistani authorities to guarantee uninterrupted access to the internet and digital communication platforms for everyone across the country,” the statement read.

Banning and Jailing the Leading Candidate

The charges against ousted prime minister Khan range from incoherent to absurd. He was charged with “exposing state secrets” for publicly discussing the contents of the secret cable that The Intercept reported on last year. He was slapped with a seven-year sentence for what the Supreme Court said was an invalid marriage. And he got 14 years for supposedly keeping state gifts without filing the proper paperwork or compensating the state, though all evidence suggests that he did so.

Three major court decisions in quick succession just before the elections has been seen inside Pakistan as a message from the Pakistani military establishment. The message is intended not only for the voters, but also for the candidates, signaling the influence and control wielded by the military.

Hacking the Election Management System

Just two days ago, a local electoral official complained in a letter circulated to the Election Commission of Pakistan that key software used in managing elections was behaving oddly. In the letter, the official cites specific issues with the software and claims that data related to its staff was erased. “This weakness of [the] system has created many issues and also raises [a] question mark on the reliability and validity of the tool/software. This shows that either the [election management system] is [an] utter failure or there is a someone else [sic] that controls and manages the system behind the veil,” he wrote in the document leaked onlineOpens in a new tab.

The election management system was built by the National Database and Registration Authority, a government department that is usually headed by a civilian but since last year has been run by a generalOpens in a new tab in the military. NADRA is the primary custodian of all of Pakistan’s data — from population and demographic data to voter rolls — and is supposed to play a key role in conducting elections along with the Election Commission of Pakistan. As long as the Pakistani military has direct control of NADRA, it controls all the systems used to administer elections and transmit their results.

Secret Pakistan Document Undermines Espionage Case Against Imran Khan! The former prime minister is charged with compromising Pakistan’s secret communications, but a document leaked to The Intercept says that didn’t happen. Ryan Grim, Murtaza Hussain, December 18 2023. Imran Khan, Pakistan’s former prime minister, during an interview in Lahore, Pakistan, on June 2, 2023. Photo: Betsy Joles/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Terrorist Violence

Last week, 10 PTI activists were killedOpens in a new tab in a bomb blast at an election rally in the Balochistan province. The same week, a PTI candidateOpens in a new tab and a senior leaderOpens in a new tab were shot dead in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province in separate incidents. In Karachi, a PTI candidate’s car was shot at. According to a statement from the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, there have been “no less than 24 reported instances” this year in which armed groups have attacked political parties in Pakistan ahead of the elections.

At least one of these deadly attacks was claimed by ISKPOpens in a new tab, the Afghan chapter of the Islamic State, which has never specifically targeted the PTI in the past.

Police Raids

When the elections were announced, there were several reports that unknown people and masked government officials were snatching the nomination papersOpens in a new tab of PTI candidates as soon as they would go to file them, thereby preventing them from filing to run before the deadline. Of the candidates who did manage to file, those who were not arrested faced frequent police raids on their homes.

During one raid at a political candidate’s home, an American police officerOpens in a new tab who happened to be vacationing in Pakistan was also arrested. He was subsequently released following intervention by the U.S. Embassy. In another police raid on a political activist’s house, the activist’s father suffered a heart attackOpens in a new tab and died.

Virtually every notable PTI member’s house has been raided and ransackedOpens in a new tab. In addition, PTI rallies and meetings have also been violently shut downOpens in a new tab by the police and scores of workers have been arrested. In one constituency in northern Pakistan, there were reports of police shootingOpens in a new tab at a PTI rally. On Tuesday, the last day of campaigning, almost everyOpens in a new tab PTI rally was attacked by police. In a video that went viral on social media, a PTI candidate, Zartaj Gul Wazir, is seen sitting on the road, cryingOpens in a new tab, after a police attack on her rally. In other areas that have not been so violent, comical social media videosOpens in a new tab of police chasing PTI activists through the streets have emerged.

In PTI strongholds, there are even reports of police ticketing people in unusually high numbers and confiscating their identification cards, which won’t be returned until after the election, meaning that they will be unable to vote.

Abducting Candidates and Their Families

There are reports of PTI candidates being abducted by unknown men and returning home only after announcing their withdrawal from the race. Most notably, a female PTI candidate, Iffat Tahira Soomro, was abducted and forced to step downOpens in a new tab under duress. She was the second candidate in the constituency to step down. PTI has now pitched a third candidateOpens in a new tab for the same seat.

In another incident, a PTI candidate’s elderly father was picked up from his house to pressure him into leaving the party. After four days, the father died in police custodyOpens in a new tab.

The U.N. Commission on Human Rights deplored these incidents in their statement on Tuesday. “We are disturbed by the pattern of harassment, arrests and prolonged detentions of leaders of the Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf (PTI) party and their supporters which has continued during the election period,” the statement read.

Voter Suppression

PTI has been counting on high voter turnout to counter the efforts to manipulate the elections. But by reducing the number of polling stations in key constituencies, the government is effectively suppressing votes in those areas.

There are polling stations that used to have a few thousand voters assigned to them but will now have tens of thousands of voters. One polling station in Lahore that used to have only 8,000 constituents has ballooned to 29,000Opens in a new tab, including thousands of young and first-time voters from all over Lahore. In some constituencies in Karachi, so many people have been assigned to each polling station that with a 50 percent turnout (roughly the total turnout for the last election), each voter will get only one minute and 13 secondsOpens in a new tab to vote.

Can PTI Still Win?

Despite the gloomy verdict, a sense of hope persists among many in Pakistan. Nothing illustrates this contradiction more than two women, Yasmin Rashid and Aliya Hamza Malik, who are contesting elections from jail. These two political prisoners, running their campaigns from incarceration and against all odds, have become symbolic figures representing resistance against military interference in Pakistani democracy.

“The Brazen Electoral Rigging, Persecution Of Political Leaders, And Sham Court Trials Have Substantially Increased The Stakes.”

“The election in Pakistan is going to be a referendum against the establishment – a local euphemism for Pakistan Army – and its associated partners,” says Hussain Nadim, an analyst and former policy specialist working with the Pakistani government. “This is why despite all efforts by the establishment otherwise, we can forecast a historic turnout in the elections. The brazen electoral rigging, persecution of political leaders, and sham court trials have substantially increased the stakes,” he added.

In the week leading up to the elections, Khan has been sentenced to a cumulativeOpens in a new tab 31 yearsOpens in a new tab in prison. His political party confronts the imminent risk of outright prohibition, with his motley crew of candidates on the run, evading authorities, attempting to canvass for votes clandestinelyOpens in a new tab (and even using Opens in a new tabartificial intelligence).

Yet, PTI has resisted calls to boycott the election. The goal, they say, is to win in such dramatic and runaway fashion that even all of the above can’t steal it.

[mariacallous]

After a period of relative quiescence, everyone has started talking about fascism again. This is, in part, due to the threat of a second term for Donald Trump, which has reactivated a highly polemical “fascism debate” in the United States. But there are plenty of other actual or quasi-fascists elsewhere. The Italian prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, is the leader of a genuine neo-fascist party. In Latin America, Argentina’s Javier Milei has picked up where Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro left off. And, in India, Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party was reelected in June, albeit with a much-reduced majority.

By contrast, much less has been said about anti-fascism. Most commentators and journalists—and even many academics—seem to have accepted that anti-fascism belongs to the 20th century. Which is a little strange. If fascism is real, why not its opposite? And what happened to all of those historical memories of fighting fascism, above all in Europe, but also further afield?

Fortunately, we still have France, the only country that continues to talk about anti-fascism in a consistent and meaningful way across the political spectrum—and one of the few places where this talk translates into a hard electoral reality.

The explanation for this anomaly lies in the concept of the so-called front républicain (republican front). This refers to any coalition or alliance that is designed to keep the far-right from power.

In the late 1880s and 1890s, the front républicain included those who were opposed to the rise of Boulangism, a militarist far-right movement, and those who defended the cause of Alfred Dreyfus, whose false conviction was one of the great republican causes at the time. The clash between an insurgent far-right and the massed republican forces of the moderate right, the center, and the left was subsequently repeated time and again.

There were echoes of the front républicain in the 1936 Popular Front, although this was in a more obviously left-wing key. The same logic was invoked in the 1950s, at the time of Poujadism, and again in the 1980s, when Jean-Marie Le Pen’s Front National began to make its first electoral breakthroughs.

By this time, the front républicain had taken on a clearly electoral dimension. The aim was to ensure that the best-placed candidates from “republican” parties would win in the second-round of an election. This involved strategic désistements (withdrawals) by weaker “republican” candidates, followed by tactical voting.

The most famous recent iteration of the front républicain is usually also considered to be its last hurrah. In 2002, Jean-Marie Le Pen squeezed past the socialist candidate, Lionel Jospin, in the first round of the presidential election. This was the first time that any far-right candidate had come so close to power, and it was a profound shock.

In response, the entire political class called on the French to vote for the center-right candidate, Jacques Chirac, in the second round. It worked spectacularly: Chirac was elected with more than 82 percent of the vote on a turnout of almost 80 percent. Left-wing voters massively supported a right-wing candidate in order to save the French Republic.

But, as we now know, Jean-Marie Le Pen’s success was only the beginning. Since then, his daughter Marine Le Pen has climbed ever higher in the polls. She qualified for the second round of the presidential elections in 2017 and 2022, when she received 41 percent of the vote. Le Pen’s party, too, has gone from strength to strength. Now rebaptized as the Rassemblement National, it has gradually developed its local and regional presence—and, in 2022, it made a major breakthrough when it won 89 seats in the National Assembly.

For most analysts, the success of Marine Le Pen and the Rassemblement National was easily explained by the atrophy of the front républicain. After 2002, fewer and fewer left-wing voters felt inclined to block the far-right, and a significant minority of right-wing voters embraced it. With each new election, the remnants of a century-old French anti-fascist tradition seemed to fall away. Indeed, many of the most pessimistic result forecasts of the 2024 elections were based on the assumption that it was essentially dead.

Imagine the surprise, then, when the results of the second round were announced on Sunday night. Despite increasing its seats and vote share, the far-right flopped compared to the polls. It was soon clear that voters had done everything they could to stop the Rassemblement National from winning a majority.

All of a sudden, the front républicain was back, and the phrase was plastered across the French mainstream media. Commentators and pollsters scrambled to explain themselves. For those with long memories, it felt as if the spirit of 2002 had been resurrected from the grave.

The simplest way to explain this remarkable revival of anti-fascism is to invoke something that all historians of modern France will recognize: the fear of disorder and social collapse. Modern French history is littered with regime changes, protests, revolutions, and civil wars. The constitutional settlement of the Fifth Republic, born in 1958 during the Algerian War, was specifically designed to ensure stability, and it survived the momentous protests of 1968 and the economic crisis of deindustrialization unscathed.

Still today, voters are scared of the consequences of bringing a far-right party to national power. They fear that a victory for Marine Le Pen or her prime-minister-in-waiting, Jordan Bardella, would unleash violence and instability across the country. On the three occasions when they have realistically faced this prospect—2017, 2022 and 2024—they have pulled back. Each time, they have invoked the front républicain as a defense mechanism.

But there was more to the 2024 elections than simply a kneejerk reaction to the threat of disorder. For the first time since the early 2000s, anti-fascism was imbued with a positive quality. People invested hope in the left-wing alliance, known as the Nouveau Front Populaire. They saw anti-fascism as the basis on which to build a fairer society, with more public spending, a higher minimum wage, a wealth tax, and a reversal of Macron’s pension reforms.

This process was especially striking amongst young people, some of whom were not even born in 2002. Theirs is not the same anti-fascism as those aged 50 or older, who remember the rise of Jean-Marie Le Pen and the Front National. Young activists still talk about “fascism” and “racism,” just like the elders from whom they have learnt their history, but they are doing more than replaying the political battles of the past. They know that they are only one front in a global anti-fascist universe that stretches from the Trump trials to the smooth authoritarianism of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán.

The campaigning of young anti-fascists has been made all the more intense by the fact that the Rassemblement National has succeeded in mobilizing a significant proportion of young people. The struggle to contain the far-right in France is not an intergenerational clash between youthful liberals and reactionary boomers. If anything, old people are the least likely to vote for Marine Le Pen and her acolytes. In fact, young people are fighting for the political soul of their own generation.

The most obvious symbol of this fight is Bardella himself. He is only 28 years old, and his meteoric rise has not passed unnoticed. Some voters in the 2024 elections even asked where the “Bardella” voting slip was when they arrived at the polling booth. They wanted to vote for him, even though he was not on the ballot.

Yet his youthful persona—and his facility with Tiktok—drew a committed response. During and after the elections, French social media was filled with a cascade of anti-fascist memes and counter-videos. Young people, often people of color, lampooned Bardella’s campaign tactics and press conferences. They pilloried his party and the—sometimes very inexperienced—candidates who ran for election, calling them out for their racism, homophobia, bigotry, or plain stupidity.

It helps that some of the emerging figures on the French left are also young. Clémence Guetté, of La France Insoumise, is 33. Marine Tondelier, the current leader of the main Greens party, is 37. And Raphaël Glucksmann, who led the center-left to second place in the 2024 European elections, is 44. They are all politicians who have cut their teeth in a political landscape where the far-right is a fixture, not an anomaly.

It is impossible to say whether this youthful French anti-fascism has a future. In his “letter to the French” after the elections, Macron referred to the front républicain, but it is not clear that he or his allies intend to adhere to it. In particular, the proposal to form a governing coalition without some or all of the left—which several members of Macron’s party have endorsed—would run counter to the spirit of the election results. Meanwhile, the RN is waiting patiently for its next opportunity to show off its electoral strength.

Nevertheless, the recent electoral cycle in France is a reminder that today’s anti-fascism is no longer beholden to the 1930s or 1990s. It has a life of its own—and a whole new generation of foot soldiers ready to go to war against their oldest enemy.