Archive for May, 2017

Commencement Speech by No. 2 Senate Republican Canceled After Students Protest – NBCNews.com

WASHINGTON A commencement address by the No. 2 Senate Republican was canceled Friday after opposition from students at the historically black university where he was scheduled to speak.

The cancellation of Sen. John Cornyn's planned Saturday address at Texas Southern University came just days after Education Secretary Betsy DeVos was booed and heckled as she delivered a commencement speech at a different historically black university, Bethune-Cookman University in Florida.

Students at Texas Southern University in Houston had circulated a petition demanding the Texas senator be withdrawn as a commencement speaker, citing various stances he has taken. These included his confirmation votes in favor of DeVos and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, his opposition to funding for so-called sanctuary cities that protect immigrants and his support for photo IDs for voting. The petition also cited Cornyn's low rating by the NAACP.

"Having a politician such as him speak at our institution is an insult to the students, to TSU, and to all (historically black colleges and universities)," said the petition on the change.org site. "This is our graduation. We have the right to decide if we want to refuse to sit and listen to the words of a politician who chooses to use his political power in ways that continually harm marginalized and oppressed people."

Senator John Cornyn of Texas walks to the Senate chamber on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Feb. 27, 2014. J. Scott Applewhite / AP

The university released a statement saying that, "Every consideration is made to ensure that our students' graduation day is a celebratory occasion and one they will remember positively for years to come. We asked Sen. Cornyn to instead visit with our students again at a future date in order to keep the focus on graduates and their families. We, along with Sen. Cornyn, agree that the primary focus of commencement should be a celebration of academic achievement."

Cornyn's spokesman said, "Sen. Cornyn was honored to be invited to address TSU's graduates, but he respects the administration's decision and looks forward to continuing to engage with the university in the future."

The development comes amid a nationwide debate over free speech on college campuses, in the wake of two high-profile incidents at Berkeley where planned speeches by conservatives ended up getting canceled amid fears of violent student protests.

More:
Commencement Speech by No. 2 Senate Republican Canceled After Students Protest - NBCNews.com

Yes, India is a democracy but it’s not really a republic – Times of India (blog)

Our constitution opens with the words that India is both a republic and a democracy. We are making an important claim: is it true?

Republic is a Roman word. A republican state is one in which power rests with the citizens. Democracy is a Greek word. It means a state in which leaders are chosen from among the general population, and not the aristocracy. Republic and democracy dont mean the same thing, and even democracy has many interpretations. Athenian democracy was actually a psephocracy. For instance, in Athens all (adult male) citizens were equal and therefore leaders and jurors were chosen by lot, meaning by turn. Socrates had total contempt for this democracy and throughout Platos works his refrain is: In a storm, would you choose a ships captain by lot?

After the Middle Ages, Europe was inspired by Greece in art, philosophy and science and culture, but by Rome in government. In the US constitution, the word democracy in fact does not appear, though republic does. Many of Americas founding fathers were classicists who favoured Rome. The Federalist Papers, which is Americas version of our Constituent Assembly debates, were written by figures like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison under the pseudonym Publius, referencing a Roman who helped set up the republic. A story, probably apocryphal, tells of Benjamin Franklin exiting the constitutional convention of 1787. A man in the crowd asks him what sort of government America has been given. Franklin replies: A republic, if you can keep it.

Republics are not easy to keep because we are naturally attracted to the heroic saviour who will sort out our problems with his genius. The historian Livy tells us that Rome was a republic for some four centuries. It was, like democracy, different from the republic we know. Suffrage was even more restricted than in Athens, and Rome had an aristocracy (the Senate is a Roman institution) and slavery and colonialism, but it did not bow to one man. The heroic saviour Julius Caesar ended the republic.

The UK is a democracy but not a republic, because executive power flows from a monarch. The resistance to this structure is referred to as republicanism. What about India?

It is obvious that we are a democracy, because our leaders are chosen by voters. But are we a republic? Does real power rest with the citizens of India? The outside observer will notice that this is not the case. The interest of the state and its organs is put above the interest of Indias people. There is a background to this: Nehru inherited an aggressively expansionist imperial state with tentative borders. Its relationship with the citizen focused on taxation and law and order. This continued after 1947. Even today, where the state feels threatened by citizens demanding rights, it will not hesitate to put them down with lethal force.

This story was reported on October 1, 2016: Four people were left dead and as many as 40 were injured after police opened fire on a protest this morning, according to sources in the Chirudih village near Hazaribagh in Jharkhand. Residents have been protesting the acquisition of land by the National Thermal Power Corporation for their coal mines.

This, the murder of citizens by the state, is actually a regular occurrence in India, in the adivasi belt, the northeast and Kashmir. It is not a national issue because the killed are not like us. Also, their resistance hinders our development and our version of nationalism. We refer to their questioning of our consensus as anti-national behaviour.

We reduce Indian citizens to categories which can be despised: Terrorist, Maoist, Islamist, Separatist, Jihadist and so on. This makes it easier for our armies and paramilitaries to kill them, though as Hazaribagh and thousands of such incidents show, we also have zero regard for the poor. I used the example of the murder of helpless individuals faced with loss of their land, because in India today it is not possible to elicit sympathy for most categories of protestors. In such a place, a media organ that puts the armys interest above the citizens can align itself to the name republic. This is done without irony and perhaps without even understanding of what the word republic means. The armys interests can be supreme in a martial law state like Pakistan, not in constitutionally republican India.

When can we, wholly and in full measure, claim to be a republic? Only when the rights and liberties of Indian citizens are respected by the state, without exception. Not steamrolled over regularly, to applause from the media.

And when the violation happens, as it can happen anywhere, it is addressed meaningfully and ended. Till that happens, it would be fair to say that India is a democracy. But it is not really a republic.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Read more:
Yes, India is a democracy but it's not really a republic - Times of India (blog)

Comey’s Firing Tests Strength of the ‘Guardrails of Democracy’ – New York Times


New York Times
Comey's Firing Tests Strength of the 'Guardrails of Democracy'
New York Times
Political scientists who study democracy and authoritarianism know the answers will be long debated. The true significance of Mr. Comey's firing, they say, is that it presents a kind of stress test for American democratic institutions. In unhealthy ...
Trump's war on American democracyHerald Scotland
Perez: Firing of Comey Affront to DemocracyWJCL News
Opinion: After Comey's firing, how can we save our constitutional democracy?MarketWatch
The New Yorker -San Francisco Chronicle -ThinkProgress
all 17,276 news articles »

See the article here:
Comey's Firing Tests Strength of the 'Guardrails of Democracy' - New York Times

U.S. Wars in the Middle East Were Not Supposed to Bring … – Newsweek

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday that U.S.-led interventions in the Middle East and Central Asia were not about spreading democracy, but about addressing regional security issues.

Rice, who served in former President George W. Bush's administration asnational security advisor from 2001 through 2005 and as secretary of state from 2005 to 2009, made the revelation during an interview at the Brooking Institute. Rice played a key role in the Bush cabinet during the post-9/11 years that saw the U.S. launch two large-scale invasions against Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. In addition to the regional threat of the Al-Qaeda-allied Taliban government in Afghanistan and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction, later disproved, the White House defended its military action by touting a U.S.-led campaign to spread democracy to the region. In remarks referencing her latest book, however, Rice said otherwise.

Related: War in Iraq: Islamic State Collapses As Military Kills ISIS Commander in West Mosul

Subscribe to Newsweek from $1 per week

"We didn't go toIraq tobring democracy toIraq, we went toIraq tooverthrow Saddam Hussein, who we thought was reconstituting his weapons of mass destruction and who we knew had been a threat in the region. It was a security problem," Rice said. "We didn't overthrow the Talibanto bring democracy to Afghanistan, we overthrewthem because they were harboring Al-Qaeda in a safehaven after 9/11."

Then President George W. Bush delivers a speech celebrating what he deemed a victory in the Iraq War to crew aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, as the carrier steamed toward San Diego, California on May 1, 2003. Bush's former National Security Adviser and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has since said U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were about tackling security problems, not defending or spreading democracy. Larry Downing/Reuters

She compared the U.S.'s motives to that of World War Two when the nation intervened to defend European and Asian allies from the spread of Axis powers Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. She also said she regretted the notion that the U.S.'s first major military engagements of the 21st century were mixed up with the "freedom agenda" and emphasized that U.S.'s missions in Afghanistan, codenamed Operation Enduring Freedom, and in Iraq, codenamed Operation Iraqi Freedom, were strictly concerned with taking out U.S. foes. She claimed she would never have asked Bush tobring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan by military force, which she said was a "dramatic" example of democracy promotion.

Both Iraq and Afghanistan have suffered from ongoing conflicts since the U.S.'s intervention. In Iraq, the toppling of Hussein, a member of the country's Sunni Muslim minority, exacerbated long-standing sectarian tensions between Sunni Muslims and the Shiite Muslim majority. Ultraconservative Sunni Muslim groups, some of which were former members of Hussein's government and military, formed Al-Qaeda's franchise in Iraq, which took advantage of the post-war chaos to target U.S. soldiers and Shiite Muslims, further threatening the stability of the U.S.-installed government. Al-Qaeda in Iraq united with other jihadist groups to form the Islamic State of Iraq in 2006, which ultimately rebranded itself into the Islamic State militant group (ISIS). After mostly withdrawing from Iraq in 2011, the U.S. was forced to return in 2014, albeit in smaller numbers, to assist an Iraqi-led campaign against ISIS.

A member of the Army writes a note at a military base southwest of Mosul, Iraq, April 28, 2017. This year marked 14th consecutive year of U.S. military presence in Iraq. Suhaib Salem/Reuters

Since toppling the Taliban's government in Afghanistan, the U.S. continues to battle the insurgents, which have recently begun a new offensive after taking new swathes of territory across the nation. Most U.S. troops had left by 2016, but advisers of President Donald Trump have suggested another increase in U.S. forces on the ground after the Taliban's resurgence and the rise of an ISIS syndicate attempting to rival the Taliban's hold on the nation. Last month, the Taliban conducted its deadliest attack of the conflict yet when the group killed as many as 140 Afghan soldiers after infiltrating a military base.

Rice's comments on democracy and war echoed claims she made her in most recent book,Democracy: The Long Road to Freedom. In the book, which was released last week, Rice reflects on democracy movements and the transition to democracy in nations around the world, from the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. to post-war Iraq and Afghanistan. Since leaving the State Department at the end of Bush's last term, Rice returned to academia and joined the Council of Foreign Relations.

Visit link:
U.S. Wars in the Middle East Were Not Supposed to Bring ... - Newsweek

An appalling chorus of Trumpcare apologetics exposes the farce of American democracy – Salon

Republican politicians often strugglenot to come across as heartless plutocrats when defending their right-wingagenda to the world. Yeteven when they convincinglyprojectcompassion for those less fortunate, theystill frequently end up looking like pompous, out-of-touch elites.

This has been especially true over the past couple ofweeks, as congressional Republicans haveattemptedto defend the American Health Care Act (AHCA) which passed the House on a narrow party-line vote last week against its many critics. Considering howappallingand cruel the legislation is, it has not been surprising to seeRepublicans squirming a bit more than usual.

Last Friday, for example, Rep. Ral Labrador, R-Idaho, prompted a backlash when herespondedto an angryconstituent at a town hall meeting who suggestedthat he is mandating people on Medicaid to accept dying by supporting Trumpcare. Labradorsneeringlydismissed this claim, telling the voter that line is so indefensible, and thatnobody dies because they dont have access to health care a line that provokedan incredulousgaspfrom the audience.

The following day, Labrador attempted to qualify his statement in a Facebook post, writing that hospitals are required by law to treat patients in need of emergency care. However, as PolitiFact notes in its analysis(which rated the congressmans comment pants on fire), even if you accept hisclaim that emergency rooms protect the uninsured, that leaves out a whole range of chronic and potentially deadly diseases from heart disease to diabetes that can be prevented only through long-term access to physicians. So Labrador gave the impression of beingnot only callous and uncaring, but completely unaware of the fact that Americans die every day because of a lack of medical care.

On lastSundays broadcast of ABCs This Week, House Speaker Paul Ryan the real architect of Trumpcarealmost topped Labradors idiocy with his own let them eat cake moment, whichcame when Ryanrespondedto the Congressional Budget Office forecastthataround 24 million people will lose their health insurance under the AHCA.What the CBO is basically saying, and I agree with this, remarked Ryan, was that if the governments not going to force somebody to buy something they dont want to buy, then theyre not going to buy it. So theyre basically saying people, through their own free choice,if theyre not mandated to buy something thats unaffordable, theyre not going to do it. (Emphasis mine.)

One has to wonderwhether things would have turned out differentlyhad Marie Antoinette simply proclaimedthat the French peasants were starving to death by their own free choice.

Needless to say,Paul Ryan and his Republican colleagues in Washington probablydontstay up at night worrying about losing their health insurance, and therefore have difficultycomprehending the fact that millions of hard-working Americans who need medical care simply cannot afford it. Republican lawmakerstend to assume that a person who lacks health insurance either doesnt want it (and is merely exercising his or her free choice), is poor and thus lazy and undeserving, or is frivolous and spends her money on nonessential goods (e.g., the latest iPhone) instead of health insurance. In other words, its entirely a matter of personal responsibility, and no one cant get health insurance (just as no one dies because they dont have health insurance). In the conservativemind, it is inconceivable that an honest, hard-working and responsible American who has done everything he or she is supposed to may be unable to afford health insurance.

Last weeks trifecta of stupidity from congressional Republicans was rounded off by Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama, whotried to rationalizethe return of pre-existing conditions during an interview with CNNs Jake Tapper. Eliminating Obamacare protections for people with pre-existing conditions, Brooks argued, would help reduce costs for people who lead good lives and have done the things to keep their bodies healthy. One hardly needs to point out the folly ofthis argument when considering that cancer, multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, mental illness and Alzheimers disease are all defined aspre-existing conditions.

These stomach-churningattemptsto defendthe AHCA and its cruel implications showcase just how disconnected Washington politicians especially but not exclusively Republicans are from the people, and what a farce American democracyhas become. According to various polls,about six in 10 Americansnowsupport a single-payer style program in which the government ensures health care for all citizens, while only 22 percent of Americans, per a Gallup survey,support repealing Obamacarewithout a government replacement (in other words, support Trumpcare).

This serves as a useful reminder that the U.S. government is scarcely democratic, and that Washington will never represent the will of the people as long as it is dominated by specialinterests andinhabited by economic elites. Just consider one revealing statistic:In 2013, the median net worth of a member of Congress was $1.03 million, compared to a net worth of $56,355 for the average American household. A Congress full of millionaires is theresult of a political system that is controlled by organized money and business interests and according to a 2014 study from Princeton,economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

When most elected officialsare richmen and women (though mostly men)who spend much of their time in officecourtingbig campaign donors,andhave never known what its like to go without medicine because it isunaffordable or toworry about making ends meet unlike thesix in 10 Americans who do not have enough savings for an emergency and live paycheck to paycheck then a disconnect is inevitable. Privilegedpoliticians who see themselves as natural elites are bound to espouse concepts like freedom and personal responsibility to justify their social Darwinist agenda.

People with advantages are loath to believe that they just happen to be people with advantages, observed the American sociologist C. Wright Mills. They come readily to define themselves as inherently worthy of what they possess; they come to believe themselves naturally elite, and, in fact, to imagine their possessions and their privileges as natural extensions of their own elite selves.

People with advantages also control Washingtontoday, and tend to believe thatthe undemocratic system that favors natural eliteslike themselvesis a system worth preserving. Of course, it is the people who do not have such advantages like the millions who will lose their health insurance under Trumpcare who will suffer the consequences.

The rest is here:
An appalling chorus of Trumpcare apologetics exposes the farce of American democracy - Salon