#vote for jagan

[mariacallous]

On a stifling April afternoon in Ajmer, in the Indian state of Rajasthan, local politician Shakti Singh Rathore sat down in front of a greenscreen to shoot a short video. He looked nervous. It was his first time being cloned.

Wearing a crisp white shirt and a ceremonial saffron scarf bearing a lotus flower—the logo of the BJP, the country’s ruling party—Rathore pressed his palms together and greeted his audience in Hindi. “Namashkar,” he began. “To all my brothers—”

Before he could continue, the director of the shoot walked into the frame. Divyendra Singh Jadoun, a 31-year-old with a bald head and a thick black beard, told Rathore he was moving around too much on camera. Jadoun was trying to capture enough audio and video data to build an AI deepfake of Rathore that would convince 300,000 potential voters around Ajmer that they’d had a personalized conversation with him—but excess movement would break the algorithm. Jadoun told his subject to look straight into the camera and move only his lips. “Start again,” he said.

Right now, the world’s largest democracy is going to the polls. Close to a billion Indians are eligible to vote as part of the country’s general election, and deepfakes could play a decisive, and potentially divisive, role. India’s political parties have exploited AI to warp reality through cheap audio fakes, propaganda images, and AI parodies. But while the global discourse on deepfakes often focuses on misinformation, disinformation, and other societal harms, many Indian politicians are using the technology for a different purpose: voter outreach.

Across the ideological spectrum, they’re relying on AI to help them navigate the nation’s 22 official languages and thousands of regional dialects, and to deliver personalized messages in farther-flung communities. While the US recently made it illegal to use AI-generated voices for unsolicited calls, in India sanctioned deepfakes have become a $60 million business opportunity. More than 50 million AI-generated voice clone calls were made in the two months leading up to the start of the elections in April—and millions more will be made during voting, one of the country’s largest business messaging operators told WIRED.

Jadoun is the poster boy of this burgeoning industry. His firm, Polymath Synthetic Media Solutions, is one of many deepfake service providers from across India that have emerged to cater to the political class. This election season, Jadoun has delivered five AI campaigns so far, for which his company has been paid a total of $55,000. (He charges significantly less than the big political consultants—125,000 rupees [$1,500] to make a digital avatar, and 60,000 rupees [$720] for an audio clone.) He’s made deepfakes for Prem Singh Tamang, the chief minister of the Himalayan state of Sikkim, and resurrected Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy, an iconic politician who died in a helicopter crash in 2009, to endorse his son Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, currently chief minister of the state of Andhra Pradesh. Jadoun has also created AI-generated propaganda songs for several politicians, including Tamang, a local candidate for parliament, and the chief minister of the western state of Maharashtra. “He is our pride,” ran one song in Hindi about a local politician in Ajmer, with male and female voices set to a peppy tune. “He’s always been impartial.”

While Rathore isn’t up for election this year, he’s one of more than 18 million BJP volunteers tasked with ensuring that the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi maintains its hold on power. In the past, that would have meant spending months crisscrossing Rajasthan, a desert state roughly the size of Italy, to speak with voters individually, reminding them of how they have benefited from various BJP social programs—pensions, free tanks for cooking gas, cash payments for pregnant women. But with the help of Jadoun’s deepfakes, Rathore’s job has gotten a lot easier.

He’ll spend 15 minutes here talking to the camera about some of the key election issues, while Jadoun prompts him with questions. But it doesn’t really matter what he says. All Jadoun needs is Rathore’s voice. Once that’s done, Jadoun will use the data to generate videos and calls that will go directly to voters’ phones. In lieu of a knock at their door or a quick handshake at a rally, they’ll see or hear Rathore address them by name and talk with eerie specificity about the issues that matter most to them and ask them to vote for the BJP. If they ask questions, the AI should respond—in a clear and calm voice that’s almost better than the real Rathore’s rapid drawl. Less tech-savvy voters may not even realize they’ve been talking to a machine. Even Rathore admits he doesn’t know much about AI. But he understands psychology. “Such calls can help with swing voters.”

[morningmantra]

Pawan Kalyan Criticizes Jagan Reddy's Political Use of Religion

Pawan Kalyan criticized Jagan Reddy for using religion for personal gain and pledged support for the Christian community, emphasizing fairness and urging honesty in elections.

Pawan Kalyan, the leader of Jana Sena, criticized Jagan Reddy for using religion for his own benefit. He assured the Christian leaders for support and promised to fight for their rights if they Vote. He expressed concern over the unequal distribution of funds and pledged to address the issues faced by the Christian community. Pawan also urged religious leaders to uphold honesty and truth in the…

[india-times]

Amit Shah To Speak Today, No-Trust Motion Debate Enters Day 2

No-Trust Debate: The Opposition, which has brought the No-Confidence Motion despite lacking in numbers, admitted that it was a method to compel the Prime Minister to speak on Manipur.

New Delhi: Home Minister Amit Shah are likely to speak in parliament today as the debate on the No-Confidence Motion — moved by the Congress against the BJP-led Central government — entered Day 2.

Here are the top 10 updates on this big story

The Opposition, which has brought the No-Confidence Motion despite lacking in numbers, admitted that it was a method to compel Prime Minister Narendra Modi to speak on Manipur, which has dominated the monsoon session of parliament.

Rahul Gandhi, who was reinstated in parliament yesterday, is addressing parliament. Earlier, reports had claimed that the senior Congress leader would start the debate on the no-confidence motion backed by the Opposition bloc INDIA. But when the House met, it was Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi who initiated the debate.

Union Ministers — Amit Shah, Nirmala Sitharaman, Smriti Irani and Jyotiraditya Scindia are expected to speak in Lok Sabha today. Kiren Rijiju, who participated in the debate yesterday, said the Opposition will regret bringing the No-Confidence Motion because it comes at the “wrong time and the wrong manner”, given India’s current stature in the world.

The Prime Minister will reply to the debate on Thursday. He chaired the BJP’s Parliamentary Party meeting yesterday ahead of the big vote. Taking a swipe at the INDIA alliance, the Prime Minister reportedly said that this is not a vote to express distrust in the government, but to see who can trust whom in the opposition. “It’s a test of their own internal trust,” he reportedly said.

In recent weeks, PM Modi has frequently attacked the opposition bloc for calling itself INDIA, accusing the parties, particularly the Congress, of attempting a rebranding to whitewash their past record as the former UPA or United Progressive Alliance.

Gaurav Gogoi said ‘INDIA’ was forced to bring the No-Confidence Motion against the government to break Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “vow of silence” on Manipur. He alleged that a government which talks about “one India” has created “two Manipurs — one living in the hills and the other in the valley”.

Home Minister Amit Shah, during a discussion on the Delhi Services bill on Monday, accused the Opposition of running away from a debate on Manipur. “The question is Manipur situation and what steps the government is taking there, not a show of strength by voting. If you want voting, I dare you to make this bill fall through voting,” Mr Shah said.

The session, which started on July 20, has been continually disrupted by Opposition protests. The opposition contends that in view of the 170-plus deaths, injuries and displacements of thousands of people since the ethnic violence broke out in May, there is nothing more urgent that can demand the Prime Minister’s attention.

The government has argued that after major violence took place in Manipur in 1993 and 1997, no statement was made in the Parliament in one case and in the other, the junior home minister had given a statement.

The Lok Sabha currently has 539 members who will vote in the motion, of which the majority mark will be 270. The BJP alone has 301, while its allies have had 31 more votes. The opposition INDIA alliance has 143 while parties like KCR’s BRS, YS Jagan Reddy’s YSRCP, and Naveen Patnaik’s BJD have a combined strength of 70. YSRCP (22) and BJD (12) are also expected to back the government.

[all-about-news24x7]

Andhra Pradesh: As BJP-TDP warm to alliance, Amit Shah slams Jagan Mohan Reddy govt at  Visakhapatnam rally

Union home minister Amit Shah on Sunday demanded votes and victory for NDA in more than 25 of the 39 seats in Tamil Nadu in the upcoming 2024 Lok Sabha elections. He affirmed that a government under the leadership of Narendra Modi would be formed again at the Centre. The Union home minister made the aforesaid demand while launching Bharatiya Janata Party’s campaign in the state ahead of the 2024…

[tonsuredworld]

Ha CBN gaaru Chepadam, Ladies Gundlu Kottichakapovadama, Na Vote Ayina Jagan Ke, Jagan Wife Bharathi gariki kuda Gundu Mokku Undhi, Adhi Teerchesthundi Jagan Anna Next Kuda CM Ayithe... https://www.instagram.com/p/CpIhO9xgT3z/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[telugutimes04]

YCP MLC Candidates Finalised

Candidates have been announced for a total of 18 seats including 9 from the local body quota, 7 from the MLA quota and two seats from the governor's quota. The Chief Minister has laid emphasis on social justice. In this, Chief Minister Jagan decided by allocating 11 seats to BCs, 4 to OCs, 2 to SCs and one to STs. On this occasion, Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy said, YSRCP is committed to social justice. Ours is not a party that shouts slogans for votes.

[kalyan-gullapalli]

Post # 124

The economics, humanities and politics of "Sarai"...

In February, 2014, the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Bill was passed and Telangana broke away. The resultant state of Andhra now looks like this. :-)

In 2019, state general elections were held in A.P and YSR Congress won hands down. YS Jaganmohan Reddy became Chief Minister and set out to fulfill a unique electoral promise to his vote bank - Prohibition of Liquor in the state of A.P.

The new liquor policy, which includes a 40% reduction in bar licences, exorbitant hike of new license fees, closure of some 40000 illegal outlets, time restrictions and take over of bars by A.P State Beverages Corporation, aims to make Andhra Pradesh alcohol-free by 2024. A.P will then join Gujarat, Bihar, Mizoram, Nagaland and Lakshadweep as states/territories which have successfully implemented liquor prohibition.

But will Jagan be able to make this initiative a success in A.P? Because, this is not the first time such a thing has been tried in Andhra. In 1995, in a strange reversal of roles, Telugu Desam Party won the state elections, crushing Congress, and TDP Chief N T Rama Rao banned the sale of liquor in A.P. In 1995, his son-in-law, N. Chandrababu Naidu, staged a coup-of-sorts, toppled NTR, became Chief Minister and in 1997, reversed the decision.

But what was all that drama back then in 1990s? Therein lies a tale.

First of all, let's understand the economics of Liquor production and sale. Why is the state government so interested in it? It's very simple. Liquor fills the state government's revenue coffers in form of excise duty on its production. The state government also makes money from the issuance of licenses for its sale. Liquor boosts tourism and entertainment industries too.

The A.P state government discovered this golden hen sometime in the 1970s and since then, liquor has become a state policy. In 1970, the excise duty collected from liquor was INR 40 crores, which jumped to INR 800 crores in early 1990s and quantum leaped to INR 12000 crores in 2015. That's big money coming into the state revenue coffers.

In 1983, when NT Rama Rao came to power for the first time, he introduced a particularly aggressive liquor policy called Varuna Vahini (literally meaning Flood of Liquor), which delivered government-manufactured country liquor - Sarai, in Telugu, Arrack in English - to doorsteps, in easily affordable plastic sachets and bottles. He used some of this revenue to subsidise other populist schemes, like Rs 2 per kilo rice scheme.

Andhra Pradesh typically constitutes about 3-5% of sales of major liquor manufacturers like United Breweries and United Spirits. So, they usually have a word or two to say in this regard.

Oh! By the way, liquor contractors make a truck load of money too, which they invest in real estate, films, finance and construction projects, and make donations to cultural and religious institutions, thus strengthening their socio-political clout.

So, net-net, liquor manufacturing and sale is a well-oiled economic engine for any state, especially for Andhra Pradesh.

Now, let's understand the human aspects of state-promoted liquor sales.

I read a report that said, in 1991-92, the average annual income of a family in Andhra was, hold your breath, INR 1840. This was the total family income, for the entire year!

Out of this, the working male spent INR 830 on liquor. So, the man of the house spent 45% of his measly income on Sarai - Arrack. It was the norm. Every man, in every house, did it. And the government promoted it, supported it and benefited from it.

The logic was - the poor man had spent a miserable day, doing a miserable job, for a miserable pay. So it's ok, if he drowns his misery in a drink after sunset. Hmm. The problem was - the miserable man had a family - a wife, who slogged all day to make ends meet and feed her children. And god forbid, if there was an illness in the family, begging was the only way out.

On top of it, any body who has had a drink in their life knows, liquor is ok as a socializing drink. But it doesn't alleviate a man's misery. Infact, it compounds it.

This foul smelling man, in his foul mood, came home at midnight, in stupor, and sparks flew. Domestic violence, physical and mental abuse, were rampant. Suicides, rapes and murders were common.

Net-net, life in a village in Andhra Pradesh, which had a government-promoted arrack shop, was living hell, especially for the women folk. And because Arrack sale filled government coffers, there was an Arrack shop in every village. So life, in pretty much every village in Andhra Pradesh, was living hell for its women folk.

All of this was indicating an impending change. And change happened - in form of a massive, state level, Anti-Arrack movement, led by the women folk of Andhra Pradesh, which resulted in the prohibition of alcohol in the state!

In 1988, the Government of India launched the National Literacy Mission (NLM). In January 1990, the NLM was launched in Nellore district in Andhra Pradesh. The state-organised mass-literacy campaigns led to women getting together and discussing their problems. The awareness brought on by these group discussions resulted in the women discovering that the consumption of locally made, cheap Arrack was the main source of their unsettled domestic life. This awareness resulted in a spontaneous movement in the small village of Dubagunta in Nellore district of Andhra Pradesh.

The rural women of the village, who had no autonomy in any sphere of life, took it in their hands to fight against the production and sale of Arrack. They raided the Arrack shops with broomsticks and chili powder and cowered the owner into shutting the shop.

What started as an agitation in a single village, soon turned into a state-wide movement. In each village, women simply destroyed the ingredients used for the production of liquor. They also started policing the men in their individual households against consuming Arrack.

They then started speaking against the liquor contractors, local bureaucracy, police officials and even the Chief Minister. They started questioning the government on the availability of basic amenities like water, schools etc, which were in a dearth, as opposed to Arrack, which was always easily available. When the government insisted that the excise collected from the production of Arrack was used for welfare programmes, like the subsidy of rice, the women even agreed to contribute a day’s wages to help in the welfare schemes.

For them, it was clear. The cost-benefit equation of government-promoted liquor policies on human indices simply didn't match up to the economics. They put their foot down. Finally, when the movement had gained momentum in three districts, the government had to buckle under the pressure and ban Arrack in the state.

Now, let's go to the politics of the matter. Where there is a people's movement, there will be politics. And political parties.

It was 1994 - the election year in A.P. NT Rama Rao of TDP, the main opposition party, promised his electorate that, if they elected him to power, he would ban all forms of alcohol from the state (Toddy and IMFL - Indian made foreign liquor - were still available.) Ironically, it was his Varuna Vahini programme that was responsible for this situation. But, it was a powerful promise. So, he won a landslide election, came to power, and fulfilled his promise.

In 1995, Andhra Pradesh became alcohol free!

But this situation was shortlived. Within 9 months, NTR's son-in-law, N Chandrababu Naidu, staged a coup against his father-in-law, stating excessive interference of his second wife Parvathy Laxmi, in the party politics. Both NTR and Parvathy Laxmi were ousted from the party.

In 1997, Chandrababu Naidu, repealed the prohibition, stating that the exchequer has lost INR 1200 crores that year in excise revenue, illegal bootlegging had become unstoppable and that he was under pressure from all quarters to repeal the "dry rule." A few hushed and a few not-so-hushed voices say that there was no intent in the first place.

That's why there is some scepticism about Jaganmohan Reddy's latest initiative. Is there political will?

Post Script::

In 2016, 93 year old Dubagunta Rosamma, one of the early Anti-Arrack crusaders passed away, in Nellore.

Inspired by the story Seethamma kadha (the story of Seethamma) taught as part of the adult literacy programme in the night school in her village, the women of Dubagunta, led by Rosamma, destroyed the pots storing Arrack, after giving assurance to the families depending on the trade, thus sparking the first light of what would soon become a state-level agitation.

May this post be a small tribute to her!

[gravalicious]

These two charismatic leaders were clever politicians. Universally, politicians extend themselves to the limits, embracing even impropriety to win. Politics is not a profession of saints. My reliable information was that it was the troubleshooter  Janet Jagan who made the suggestion that their supporters should be told to embrace the elections as a racial issue. They were numerically superior. The idea was swiftly approved though, with some reservations, as this concept excluded blacks. For instance, the deputy leader of the party, Brindley Benn, was black, and so were many members of the party. This could have been counterproductive! The slogan would be Apen Jhaat. Translated from Hindi, it means "vote for your own." Clearly, because it would be to his disadvantage, Burnham appealed to all at a public meeting that danger lurked within this racial division. He'd sooner have voters support him because of his belief and not because of his race. This was interpreted by many to mean that he was less concerned about the damage of racial division than losing the elections. However, Apen Jhaat, that seemingly innocuous gem of an idea, gave birth to the racial disease that prevailed forty-six years later in the year 2001. That conflict had intensified.

Willie James - Crisis-Prone Charismatic Caribbean Leaders (2016)

[morningmantra]

Pavan Kalyan : Not the MLAs.. Jagan should be changed

Pavan Kalyan emphasizes alliance with Telugu Desam for Andhra Pradesh's future, aiming to counter Vaikapa influence. Criticizes Jagan's governance for deterioration and lack of respect for women.

Pavan Kalyan Said he entered into an alliance with Telugu Desam only to build a strong future for five crore people in Andhra Pradesh. That is why he did not want to split the anti-Vaikapa vote.”He entered into an alliance with Telugu Desam only to build a strong future for five crore people in Andhra Pradesh. That is why he did not want to split the anti-Vaikapa vote.” We are establishing the…

[koradanews]

పవన్‌కు ఊహించని షాక్ : జగన్‌ను సీఎం చేయాలన్న రైతు

vote-for-ys-jagan-farmer-gives-shock-to-pawan-kalyan #pawankalyan #janasena #ysjaganmohanreddy #ysrcongressparty #farmer #kurnool #farmershocktopawan #makejagancm #voteforjagan #koradanews

ఏపీలో వచ్చే ఎన్నికల్లో వైసీపీ గెలవాలని ప్రజలు కోరుకుంటున్నారా? జగనే సీఎం కావాలని ఆశిస్తున్నారా? ప్రస్తుత పరిణామాలు చూస్తే ఈ సందేహాలు కలగకమానవు. జనసేన అధినేత పవన్ కళ్యాణ్ సాక్షిగా ఓ రైతు తన మనసులో మాట బయటపెట్టాడు. పవన్‌కు ఆ రైతు ఊహించని షాక్ ఇచ్చాడు. పవన్‌ పక్కనే నిలబడి జగన్‌ను గెలిపించాలని కోరాడు. దీంతో పవన్ సహా అక్కడున్న వారంతా షాక్ తిన్నారు. కర్నూలు జిల్లాలో ఈ ఘటన చోటు చేసుకుంది.

  రాయలసీమ…

[nara-chandrababu-naidu]

Will TDP win 2019 elections in AP?

Considering the current context, Chandrababu Naidu have more chances of forming the government again.

Lets understand the strengths of each party

Congress

AP has been the strongest base for congress since independence and had a considerable percentage of core voter base in the state. But it has lost its credibility after the state bifurcation and are no more in the picture. They have lost in all constituencies in 2014 elections and it will be wonder if they can win double digit seats in 2019.

BJP

The people of AP are anguish on BJP for utterly disregarding the promises made and denying the special status for the state which they have promised and announced in their manifesto. Chandrababu is also successful to some extent in conveying the slow down of development activities due to BJP’s non-cooperation and consistent ignoration of the demands. Any party allying with BJP will have to face the grave consequences of loosing the elections.

YSRCP

YSRCP has a strong voter base in the mass and there are enormous ardent followers of the late YSR who will support YSRCP. They lost election in 2014 with a mere 2% votes. Considering the 5 years of TDP govt incumbency, there will be a dissatiscfaction among the people for what ever the reasons apart from Special Status and other issues affecting the voting percentage of TDP .

Jagan’s padayatra has been successful so far and the anti TDP votes have been accumulating towards YSRCP. He had more chances of winning 2019 elections until Pawan Kalyan came into picture.

JanaSena

Pawan Kalyan has a strong following among the youth. He might not get a majority but can be influential in deciding the CM of the state. I believe he is going to reiterate the role of Chiranjeevi in 2004 elections. Chiranjeevi has splitted the anti-Congress votes among PRP and TDP and Congress has been the major beneficiary out of his political entry. TDP lost in more than 30 constituencies with a mere 2000+ votes which would have won if PRP was in-existent.

Let me give an example. Assume 70% votes have been polled. 30% voted for Congress and 40% for TDP, TDP will win. Now Chiranjeevi has started the party. Same 30% voted for Congress, 15% for PRP, 25% for TDP. Congress wins. The voter base for Congress remains same but Chiranjeevi has splitted the anti-votes of the ruling party.

I believe the same is going to repeat with Pawan Kalyan’s entry. He will definitely split the anti-votes of the ruling party and this time it will favor TDP.

Edit: One of the chances of Jagan winning the elections is to have a back door deal with BJP, go to jail temporarily just before elections on one of the cases he was accused, showcasing BJP and TDP are responsible for his imprisonment, create a sympathy wave among the people and pull the votes.

TDP

Chandrababu Naidu has a great stature among the educated and the urban demography. People believe him for his hardwork and past achievements in bringing reforms in Administration. People were able to observe the Modi’s current Swach Bharath, Digital India programs in 1990s in the name of Janmabhoomi(Clean and Green), E-Seva(Online Govt Services) and bringing administration to the people with Prajala vaddaku Palana.

In his current tenure he was successful in

interlinking Krishna and Godavari

24x7 power supply

Realtime Governance monitoring

Handling Hudhud cyclone

Convincing farmers to voluntarity give 33000 acres of land for the Construction of Capital City which has been the largest land pooling in the history of India

First state in India to start Single Window policy for investments

First Make in India product produced in AP

Stood in top 10 cleanest cities

Completion of Solar Electricity Plant in 4000 acres.

Acheiving 36 Gram Panchayats in top ten 82 villages in India and many more.

People still believe him as the messaih who can get the state out of mess. If he does not ally with any party before the elections and the current politics continues, I strongly believe he has the better chances of winning 2019 elections in AP.

[anarcho-smarmyism]

“In 1967, in the wake of numerous revelations about CIA covert financing, the new head of AFSCME admitted that the union had been heavily funded by the Agency until 1964 through a foundation conduit (see Appendix I). It was revealed that AFSCME's International Affairs Department, which had been responsible for the British Guiana operation, had actually been run by two CIA "aides".

CIA work within Third World unions typically involves a considerable educational effort, the basic premise of which is that all solutions will come to working people under a system of free enterprise, class co-operation and collective bargaining, and by opposing communism in collaboration with management and government, unless, of course, the government, as in this case, is itself "communist". The most promising students, those perhaps marked as future leaders, are singled out to be sent to CIA schools in the United States for further education. The CIA, said The Sunday Times, also "appears to have had a good deal of success in encouraging politicians to break away from Jagan's party and government. Their technique of financing sympathetic figures was to take out heavy insurance policies for them." 

During the 1961 election campaign, the CIA's ongoing program was augmented by ad hoc operations from other American quarters. The US Information Service took the most unusual step of showing its films, depicting the evils of Castroism and communism, on street corners of British Guiana. And the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade brought its traveling road show down and spent a reported $76,000 on electoral propaganda which lived up to the organization's name. 8 One historian has described this as "a questionable activity for a private organization, which the State Department did nothing to discourage". On the other hand, the activities of US government agencies in British Guiana were no less questionable.

Despite the orchestrated campaign directed against him, Jagan was re-elected by a comfortable majority of legislative seats, though with only a plurality of the popular vote.

In October, at his request, Jagan was received at the White House in Washington. He had come to talk about assistance for his development program. President Kennedy and his advisers, however, were interested in determining where Jagan stood on the political spectrum before granting any aid. Oddly, the meeting, as described by Kennedy aide Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. who was present, seemed to be conducted as if the Kennedy men were totally unaware of American destabilization activities in British Guiana.

To Jagan's expressed esteem for the politics of British Labour leader Aneurin Bevan, those in the room "all responded agreeably". To Jagan's professed socialism, Kennedy asserted that "We are not engaged in a crusade to force private enterprise on parts of the world where it is not relevant".But when Jagan, perhaps naively, mentioned his admiration for the scholarly, leftist journal, Monthly Review, it appears that he crossed an ideological line, which silently and effectively sealed his country's fate. "Jagan," wrote Schlesinger later, "was unquestionably some sort of "Marxism."

No economic aid was given to British Guiana while Jagan remained in power, and the Kennedy administration pressured the British to delay granting the country its independence, which had been scheduled to occur within the next year or two. Not until 1966, when Jagan no longer held office, did British Guiana become the independent nation of Guyana.

In February 1962, the CIA helped to organize and finance anti-Jagan protests which used the newly announced budget as a pretext. The resulting strikes, riots and arson were wholly out of proportion to the alleged instigation. A Commonwealth Commission of Enquiry later concluded (perhaps to the discomfort of the British Colonial Office which had appointed it) that:

There is very little doubt that, despite the loud protestations of the trades union leaders to the contrary, political affinities and aspirations played a large part in shaping their policy and formulating their programme of offering resistance to the budget and making a determined effort to change the government in office.

The CIA arranged, as it has on similar occasions, for North American and Latin American labor organizations, with which it had close ties, to support the strikers with messages of solidarity and food, thus enhancing the appearance of a genuine labor struggle. The agency also contrived for previously unheard-of radio stations to go on the air and for newspapers to print false stories about approaching Cuban warships.”

-Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II by William Blum

[todaynewsguru]

BJP talks with Jr NTR, TDP perk Jagan ears, Andhra CM sets out on outreach drive

BJP talks with Jr NTR, TDP perk Jagan ears, Andhra CM sets out on outreach drive

The YS Jagan Mohan Reddy government in Andhra Pradesh has embarked on a massive exercise to reach out to and consolidate the Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), Backward Caste (BC), and the religious minority vote banks. Though the state Assembly elections are still far away in 2024, Reddy’s YSR Congress Party (YSRCP), according to insiders, has undertaken the campaign in anticipation of…

[antoine-roquentin]

Here’s some Real interference in election campaigns

[Slightly abridged version of chapter 18 in William Blum’s Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower; see it for notes]

Philippines, 1950s:

Flagrant manipulation by the CIA of the nation’s political life, featuring stage-managed elections with extensive disinformation campaigns, heavy financing of candidates, writing their speeches, drugging the drinks of one of the opponents of the CIA-supported candidate so he would appear incoherent; plotting the assassination of another candidate. The oblivious New York Times declared that “It is not without reason that the Philippines has been called “democracy’s showcase in Asia”.

Italy, 1948-1970s:

Multifarious campaigns to repeatedly sabotage the electoral chances of the Communist Party and ensure the election of the Christian Democrats, long-favored by Washington.

Lebanon, 1950s:

The CIA provided funds to support the campaigns of President Camille Chamoun and selected parliamentary candidates; other funds were targeted against candidates who had shown less than total enchantment with US interference in Lebanese politics.

Indonesia, 1955:

A million dollars were dispensed by the CIA to a centrist coalition’s electoral campaign in a bid to cut into the support for President Sukarno’s party and the Indonesian Communist Party.

Vietnam, 1955:

The US was instrumental in South Vietnam canceling the elections scheduled to unify North and South because of the certainty that the North Vietnamese communist leader, Ho Chi Minh, would easily win.

British Guiana/Guyana, 1953-64:

For 11 years, two of the oldest democracies in the world, Great Britain and the United States, went to great lengths to prevent Cheddi Jagan – three times the democratically elected leader – from occupying his office. Using a wide variety of tactics – from general strikes and disinformation to terrorism and British legalisms – the US and Britain forced Jagan out of office twice during this period.

Japan, 1958-1970s:

The CIA emptied the US treasury of millions to finance the conservative Liberal Democratic Party in parliamentary elections, “on a seat-by-seat basis”, while doing what it could to weaken and undermine its opposition, the Japanese Socialist Party. The 1961-63 edition of the State Department’s annual Foreign Relations of the United States, published in 1996, includes an unprecedented disclaimer that, because of material left out, a committee of distinguished historians thinks “this published compilation does not constitute a ‘thorough, accurate, and reliable documentary record of major United States foreign policy decisions’” as required by law. The deleted material involved US actions from 1958-1960 in Japan, according to the State Department’s historian.

Nepal, 1959:

By the CIA’s own admission, it carried out an unspecified “covert action” on behalf of B.P. Koirala to help his Nepali Congress Party win the national parliamentary election. It was Nepal’s first national election ever, and the CIA was there to initiate them into the wonderful workings of democracy.

Laos, 1960:

CIA agents stuffed ballot boxes to help a hand-picked strongman, Phoumi Nosavan, set up a pro-American government.

Brazil, 1962:

The CIA and the Agency for International Development expended millions of dollars in federal and state elections in support of candidates opposed to leftist President João Goulart, who won anyway.

Dominican Republic, 1962:

In October 1962, two months before election day, US Ambassador John Bartlow Martin got together with the candidates of the two major parties and handed them a written notice, in Spanish and English, which he had prepared. It read in part: “The loser in the forthcoming election will, as soon as the election result is known, publicly congratulate the winner, publicly recognize him as the President of all the Dominican people, and publicly call upon his own supporters to so recognize him. … Before taking office, the winner will offer Cabinet seats to members of the loser’s party. (They may decline).”

As matters turned out, the winner, Juan Bosch, was ousted in a military coup seven months later, a slap in the face of democracy which neither Martin nor any other American official did anything about.

Guatemala, 1963:

The US overthrew the regime of General Miguel Ydigoras because he was planning to step down in 1964, leaving the door open to an election; an election that Washington feared would be won by the former president, liberal reformer and critic of US foreign policy, Juan José Arévalo. Ydigoras’s replacement made no mention of elections.

Bolivia, 1966:

The CIA bestowed $600,000 upon President René Barrientos and lesser sums to several right-wing parties in a successful effort to influence the outcome of national elections. Gulf Oil contributed two hundred thousand more to Barrientos.

Chile, 1964-70:

Major US interventions into national elections in 1964 and 1970, and congressional elections in the intervening years. Socialist Salvador Allende fell victim in 1964, but won in 1970 despite a multimillion-dollar CIA operation against him. The Agency then orchestrated his downfall in a 1973 military coup.

Portugal, 1974-5:

In the years following the coup in 1974 by military officers who talked like socialists, the CIA revved up its propaganda machine while funneling many millions of dollars to support “moderate” candidates, in particular Mario Soares and his (so-called) Socialist Party. At the same time, the Agency enlisted social-democratic parties of Western Europe to provide further funds and support to Soares. It worked. The Socialist Party became the dominant power.

Australia, 1974-75:

Despite providing considerable support for the opposition, the United States failed to defeat the Labor Party, which was strongly against the US war in Vietnam and CIA meddling in Australia. The CIA then used “legal” methods to unseat the man who won the election, Edward Gough Whitlam.

Jamaica, 1976:

A CIA campaign to defeat social democrat Michael Manley’s bid for reelection, featuring disinformation, arms shipments, labor unrest, economic destabilization, financial support for the opposition, and attempts upon Manley’s life. Despite it all, he was victorious.

Panama, 1984, 1989:

In 1984, the CIA helped finance a highly questionable presidential electoral victory for one of Manuel Noriega’s men. The opposition cried “fraud”, but the new president was welcomed at the White House. By 1989, Noriega was no longer a Washington favorite, so the CIA provided more than $10 million dollars to his electoral opponents.

Nicaragua, 1984, 1990:

In 1984, the United States, trying to discredit the legitimacy of the Sandinista government’s scheduled election, covertly persuaded the leading opposition coalition to not take part. A few days before election day, some other rightist parties on the ballot revealed that US diplomats had been pressing them to drop out of the race as well. The CIA also tried to split the Sandinista leadership by placing phoney full-page ads in neighboring countries. But the Sandinistas won handily in a very fair election monitored by hundreds of international observers.

Six years later, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Washington’s specially created stand-in for the CIA, poured in millions of dollars to defeat Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas in the February elections. NED helped organize the Nicaraguan opposition, UNO, building up the parties and organizations that formed and supported this coalition.

Perhaps most telling of all, the Nicaraguan people were made painfully aware that a victory by the Sandinistas would mean a continuation of the relentlessly devastating war being waged against them by Washington through their proxy army, the Contras.

Haiti, 1987-1988:

After the Duvalier dictatorship came to an end in 1986, the country prepared for its first free elections ever. However, Haiti’s main trade union leader declared that Washington was working to undermine the left. US aid organizations, he said, were encouraging people in the countryside to identify and reject the entire left as “communist”. Meanwhile, the CIA was involved in a range of support for selected candidates until the US Senate Intelligence Committee ordered the Agency to cease its covert electoral action.

Bulgaria, 1990-1991 and Albania, 1991-1992:

With no regard for the fragility of these nascent democracies, the US interfered broadly in their elections and orchestrated the ousting of their elected socialist governments.

Russia, 1996:

For four months (March-June), a group of veteran American political consultants worked secretly in Moscow in support of Boris Yeltsin’s presidential campaign. Boris Yeltsin was being counted on to run with the globalized-free market ball and it was imperative that he cross the goal line. The Americans emphasized sophisticated methods of message development, polling, focus groups, crowd staging, direct-mailing, etc., and advised against public debates with the Communists. Most of all they encouraged the Yeltsin campaign to “go negative” against the Communists, painting frightening pictures of what the Communists would do if they took power, including much civic upheaval and violence, and, of course, a return to the worst of Stalinism. Before the Americans came on board, Yeltsin was favored by only six percent of the electorate. In the first round of voting, he edged the Communists 35 percent to 32, and was victorious in the second round 54 to 40 percent.

Mongolia, 1996:

The National Endowment for Democracy worked for several years with the opposition to the governing Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Party (MPRR, the former Communists) who had won the 1992 election to achieve a very surprising electoral victory. In the six-year period leading up to the 1996 elections, NED spent close to a million dollars in a country with a population of some 2.5 million, the most significant result of which was to unite the opposition into a new coalition, the National Democratic Union. Borrowing from Newt Gingrich’s Contract With America, the NED drafted a “Contract With the Mongolian Voter”, which called for private property rights, a free press and the encouragement of foreign investment. The MPRR had already instituted Western-style economic reforms, which had led to widespread poverty and wiped out much of the communist social safety net. But the new government promised to accelerate the reforms, including the privatization of housing. By 1998 it was reported that the US National Security Agency had set up electronic listening posts in Outer Mongolia to intercept Chinese army communications, and the Mongolian intelligence service was using nomads to gather intelligence in China itself.

Bosnia, 1998:

Effectively an American protectorate, with Carlos Westendorp – the Spanish diplomat appointed to enforce Washington’s offspring: the 1995 Dayton peace accords – as the colonial Governor-General. Before the September elections for a host of offices, Westendorp removed 14 Croatian candidates from the ballot because of alleged biased coverage aired in Bosnia by neighboring Croatia’s state television and politicking by ethnic Croat army soldiers. After the election, Westendorp fired the elected president of the Bosnian Serb Republic, accusing him of creating instability. In this scenario those who appeared to support what the US and other Western powers wished were called “moderates”, and allowed to run for and remain in office. Those who had other thoughts were labeled “hard-liners”, and ran the risk of a different fate. When Westendorp was chosen to assume this position of “high representative” in Bosnia in May 1997, The Guardian of London wrote that “The US secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, praised the choice. But some critics already fear that Mr. Westendorp will prove too lightweight and end up as a cipher in American hands.”

Nicaragua, 2001

Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega was once again a marked man. US State Department officials tried their best to publicly associate him with terrorism, including just after September 11 had taken place, and to shamelessly accuse Sandinista leaders of all manner of violations of human rights, civil rights, and democracy. The US ambassador literally campaigned for Ortega’s opponent, Enrique Bolaños. A senior analyst in Nicaragua for Gallup, the international pollsters, was moved to declare: “Never in my whole life have I seen a sitting ambassador get publicly involved in a sovereign country’s electoral process, nor have I ever heard of it.”

At the close of the campaign, Bolaños announced: “If Ortega comes to power, that would provoke a closing of aid and investment, difficulties with exports, visas and family remittances. I’m not just saying this. The United States says this, too. We cannot close our eyes and risk our well-being and work. Say yes to Nicaragua, say no to terrorism.”

In the end, the Sandinistas lost the election by about ten percentage points after steadily leading in the polls during much of the campaign.

Bolivia, 2002

The American bête noire here was Evo Morales, Amerindian, former member of Congress, socialist, running on an anti-neoliberal, anti-big business, and anti-coca eradication campaign. The US Ambassador declared: “The Bolivian electorate must consider the consequences of choosing leaders somehow connected with drug trafficking and terrorism.” Following September 11, painting Officially Designated Enemies with the terrorist brush was de rigueur US foreign policy rhetoric.

The US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs warned that American aid to the country would be in danger if Mr. Morales was chosen. Then the ambassador and other US officials met with key figures from Bolivia’s main political parties in an effort to shore up support for Morales’s opponent, Sanchez de Lozada. Morales lost the vote.

Slovakia, 2002

To defeat Vladimir Meciar, former prime minister, a man who did not share Washington’s weltanschauung about globalization, the US ambassador explicitly warned the Slovakian people that electing him would hurt their chances of entry into the European Union and NATO. The US ambassador to NATO then arrived and issued his own warning. The National Endowment for Democracy was also on hand to influence the election. Meciar lost.

El Salvador, 2004

Washington’s target in this election was Schafik Handal, candidate of the FMLN, the leftist former guerrilla group. He said he would withdraw El Salvador’s 380 troops from Iraq as well as reviewing other pro-US policies; he would also take another look at the privatizations of Salvadoran industries, and would reinstate diplomatic relations with Cuba. His opponent was Tony Saca of the incumbent Arena Party, a pro-US, pro-free market organization of the extreme right, which in the bloody civil war days had featured death squads and the infamous assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero.

During a February visit to the country, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, met with all the presidential candidates except Handal. He warned of possible repercussions in US-Salvadoran relations if Handal were elected. Three Republican congressmen threatened to block the renewal of annual work visas for some 300,000 Salvadorans in the United States if El Salvador opted for the FMLN. And Congressman Thomas Tancredo of Colorado stated that if the FMLN won, “it could mean a radical change” in US policy on remittances to El Salvador.

Washington’s attitude was exploited by Arena and the generally conservative Salvadoran press, who mounted a scare campaign, and it became widely believed that a Handal victory could result in mass deportations of Salvadorans from the United States and a drop in remittances. Arena won the election with about 57 percent of the vote to some 36 percent for the FMLN.

After the election, the US ambassador declared that Washington’s policies concerning immigration and remittances had nothing to do with any election in El Salvador. There appears to be no record of such a statement being made in public before the election when it might have had a profound positive effect for the FMLN.

Afghanistan, 2004

The US ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, went around putting great pressure on one candidate after another to withdraw from the presidential race so as to insure the victory for Washington’s man, the incumbent, Hamid Karzai in the October election. There was nothing particularly subtle about it. Khalilzad told each one what he wanted and then asked them what they needed. Karzai, a long-time resident in the United States, was described by the Washington Post as “a known and respected figure at the State Department and National Security Council and on Capitol Hill.”

“Our hearts have been broken because we thought we could have beaten Mr. Karzai if this had been a true election,” said Sayed Mustafa Sadat Ophyani, campaign manager for Younis Qanooni, Karzai’s leading rival. “But it is not. Mr. Khalilzad is putting a lot of pressure on us and does not allow us to fight a good election campaign.”.

None of the major candidates actually withdrew from the election, which Karzai won with about 56 percent of the votes.

[joinnoukri]

Pawan Kalyan Trying to Sell Kapu Votes to TDP, Says Andhra Pradesh CM Jagan Reddy

Pawan Kalyan Trying to Sell Kapu Votes to TDP, Says Andhra Pradesh CM Jagan Reddy

आंध्र प्रदेश के मुख्यमंत्री वाईएस जगन मोहन रेड्डी ने शुक्रवार को जन सेना प्रमुख पवन कल्याण पर कापू समुदाय के वोट तेलुगु देशम पार्टी (तेदेपा) के अध्यक्ष एन चंद्रबाबू नायडू को बेचने की कोशिश करने का आरोप लगाया। काकीनाडा जिले के गोलाप्रोलू गांव में आयोजित एक विशेष कार्यक्रम में मुख्यमंत्री ने वाईएसआर कापू नेस्तम के तहत 508.18 करोड़ रुपये की धनराशि जारी की, जिससे राज्य भर में कापू, बलिजा, ओंटारी,…

[znewstech]

Jagan Mohan casts first vote in AP in presidential poll | India News

Jagan Mohan casts first vote in AP in presidential poll | India News

AMARAVATI: Chief Minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy cast the first vote as polling process for the presidential election got underway at 10 am in the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly on Monday. Speaker Tammineni Sitaram was the next to exercise his franchise. Several ministers then cast their votes. The ruling YSR Congress pledged its support to the NDA’s presidential nominee Droupadi Murmu. The…