Mediaboss Marketing

For President Xi Jinping, the 20th anniversary of Hong Kongs return to China is a moment to toast the reunification of a nation and hail its unstoppable rise. But for activists such as Eddie Chu, one of the leading lights of a new generation of pro-democracy politicians, it has become an occasion for something quite different.

Boot-licking. Unprecedented boot-licking! he says, a smile breaking across his face as he reflects on how many members of the local elite have chosen to mark two decades of Chinese rule by plastering their homes and businesses with patriotic slogans and red flags in the hope, he suspects, of currying economic favour.

That is quite the opposite of what Hong Kong people wanted to see in 1997. We wanted to see democracy. Democracy is not boot-licking.

On Saturday morning, Chinas authoritarian ruler, who is making a rare three-day tour of the former British colony, will lead celebrations of two decades of Chinese control alongside Hong Kongs incoming chief executive, Carrie Lam.

At a flag-raising ceremony just down the road from where the umbrella revolution happened an unprecedented eruption of dissent in the autumn of 2014 the pair will remember the moment this city of 7.3 million residents returned to China after 156 years of colonial rule. A flypast and a sea parade will follow. By night, the skies over Victoria harbour, from where the royal yacht Britannia departed on 1 July 1997, will be illuminated by a spectacular 23-minute blaze of fireworks.

The moving occasion of Hong Kongs return to the motherland like a long-separated child coming back to the warm embrace of his mother, is still vivid in our memory, Xi told a dinner on Friday night.

But for members of Hong Kongs democracy movement, the anniversary is accompanied by a profound sense of uncertainty and trepidation.

Twenty years after Britains departure thrust this hyperactive lair of capitalism into the hands of a Leninist dictatorship, campaigners such as Chu fear Beijing is preparing to up the ante in its battle for control.

Ten pro-democracy legislators, of which he is one, are at risk of losing their jobs as a result of government-backed legal challenges against them. There are fears that under Hong Kongs new leader, who was elected by a tightly controlled selection committee, there will be a renewed push to enact controversial anti-subversion legislation.

And while Xi has sought to strike an upbeat tone during his visit, recent comments by another senior Communist party figure who vowed to consolidate Chinas control of the former colony has put activists on edge.

The relationship between the central government and Hong Kong is that of delegation of power, not power-sharing, Zhang Dejiang, Chinas number three official, said, adding that Hong Kong could only be governed by those who posed no threat to [its] prosperity and stability.

Feeding into activists sense of foreboding is the feeling that many western governments have now cut them loose for fear of damaging their economic relationships with the worlds second largest economy.

The foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, issued a carefully worded statement about the anniversary on Thursday, saying it was vital that Hong Kongs autonomy be preserved. But Johnson made no direct mention of growing fears about the erosion of Hong Kongs freedoms, or even of Beijings alleged abduction of a local bookseller who held a British passport.

The British government is just awful. Im afraid I cannot find any kind words to say about that, says Martin Lee, a 79-year-old barrister who is the elder statesman of Hong Kongs democracy movement.

Like many, Lee is convinced that China is gradually stripping away the freedoms promised to Hong Kongs citizens under the one country, two systems formula and that Britain has done nothing to intervene.

On Friday, a spokesperson for Chinas foreign ministry appeared to confirm those fears, telling reporters that the joint declaration, a deal negotiated by London and Beijing guaranteeing Hong Kongs way of life for 50 years, was a historical document that no longer had any practical significance.

Suzanne Pepper, a veteran chronicler of the citys quest for democracy, says campaigners can no longer count on London or Washington for support: As long as there is not blood in the streets, they dont care.

Not everybody is lamenting Saturdays landmark anniversary, however. The streets around Xis waterfront hotel are dotted with clusters of pro-government supporters and decorated with banners that read I love Hong Kong and One country, two systems has the strong vitality. Lilac posters hanging from bridges and lampposts carry the celebrations official catchline: Together. Progress. Opportunity. Skyscrapers have been decked out in bright red banners and neon displays that read: Warmly celebrate the 20th anniversary of Hong Kongs return to China.

Amid the omnipresent propaganda, there is also genuine patriotic fervour. Hong Kong people should be proud of the achievements of the motherland and all the progress our country has made, enthused Li Li, a guide at a government-sponsored exhibit about Chinas space programme that has been erected in Victoria Park to coincide with this weeks party.

Many more have greeted the anniversary and the presidential visit with nonchalance.

Chu estimated that about a third of the population was split between pro-democracy and pro-government supporters. The rest couldnt care less about the anniversary, and were most worried about the traffic jams caused by the massive security operation to protect Xi.

Swaths of the citys waterfront are sealed off with towering white and blue barricades, with agents patrolling the streets with assault rifles in their hands. Too many police! jokes one of hundreds of officers patrolling the area, sweat beading on his neck.

Lee says the lack of interest many young people are showing in Xis visit underline how disconnected they feel from mainland China and how Beijings policies have lost their hearts and souls.

Oh, this is the ruler of a neighbouring country thats what they feel, he says, pointing to a recent poll suggesting that only 3% of 18-to-29-year-olds consider themselves Chinese, the lowest rate since 1997. The young people want democracy. They dont want to be brainwashed.

For all the indifference and uncertainty, Hong Kongs protest movement appears in buoyant mood. Tens of thousands are expected to turn out on Saturday afternoon for an annual march marking the return to China. Their rallying cry will be Twenty years of lies. [It] was going to be Communist party officials, get out of Hong Kong, but they decided that was a bit too provocative, says Pepper.

Last September, a record number of young anti-Beijing activists were elected to Hong Kongs legislative council, or Legco, in what one victor called a democratic miracle. However, many of them could now be forced from office, mostly because of government legal challenges over protests the activists took part in while being sworn in last year.

If two to three of them lose their seats, then the whole political balance will change totally, and then Beijing will have absolute control of this legislature, warns Chu, who was to shout Democracy and self-determination and Tyranny must die while taking his oath.

Pepper said she was not optimistic that Beijing would offer concessions to activists, even though Hong Kongs incoming leader has pledged to heal the divide and build bridges. This is a bridge between democracy and dictatorship, said Pepper. How she is going to bridge that, I dont know.

Chris Patten, Hong Kongs last governor, has offered a more upbeat appraisal of the city he once ran, saying he was encouraged by the really profound sense of citizenship of its young activists. Above all, I think I am pleased about the way in which Hong Kong people themselves are the reason for it still being a cause of optimism rather than pessimism.

Lee, who is famed for an impassioned defence of democracy that he gave after Britains withdrawal, says he is an eternal optimist about his movements chances under a new, young leadership. These young people are our hope for the future. Im very proud of them.

Sitting in his chambers between a bust of Winston Churchill and a statuette of the Goddess of Democracy, the symbol of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, Lee remembers strolling through the umbrella movements main camp, a sprawl of tents and political debate, three days before police finally cleared it, in December 2015.

There were two little birds singing on the ground. [It was as if they were saying:] I wish I were free, you know? The air was fresh, he reminisces. I miss those days.

Additional reporting by Benjamin Haas and Wang Zhen.

Read this article:
'We wanted democracy': is Hong Kong's two-systems experiment over? - The Guardian

On Wednesday, the Washington Post published an article titled, "Why Donald Trump's diet is bad for America's health." That's right amid journalists' sustained hysteria over President Trump's efforts to discredit the mainstream news media, the mainstream news media is critiquing his diet.

To be clear, the article was amusing and I would never argue it shouldn't have been written or deserved to be censored. But it's just not necessary for a mainstream outlet to publish an article that goes after the president for his diet while working to convince the country that it's fully committed to rescuing our precious democracy from the "darkness." Editors at the Post should have passed and suggested it be submitted to Slate or Salon or another progressive publication.

This article, by the way, is just one of many similar examples of mainstream outlets finding laughably creative ways to attack Trump. Which is why Trump and his supporters argue the mainstream media will find any way at all to attack the president. The publication of this article doesn't exactly rebut their argument.

Really it's somewhat remarkable that mainstream journalists have the audacity to complain about Trump attacking the credibility of the media when their publications continue to willfully provide him with the ammunition to do so. Those are the very headlines that Trump allies blast around on social media or rant about on the radio, incrementally making Americans less and less inclined to trust the serious reporting from top outlets.

Yes, the Post publishes opinion articles from people on both sides of the aisle. Still, this one was filed under the paper's news analysis section, and almost comically embodied Trump allies' constant complaints about the press finding every possible way to critique him.

If you are concerned about the president discrediting you, do not provide him with the tools to do so. I, too am worried about the disintegration of trust in the media. I think it's important to have gatekeepers who can be counted on to tell readers the truth in a balanced way. But the media will never earn back the country's trust if it insists on publishing trivial attacks that only make the president's work of undermining their credibility so much easier.

Emily Jashinskyis a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.

Continued here:
Democracy Dies in Double Scoops: WaPo publishes article critiquing Trump's diet - Washington Examiner

By Ed Kellerman Special to The Sun

Would you like some good news on international affairs? About a place that survived a dictatorship and revolution, and created its own constitution and democratic government? Its not America, but Tunisia.

Yes, Tunisia! Battered by centuries of invasions and a 35-year dictatorship, four groups forged a new constitution to win a Nobel Peace Prize in 2014.

During a week-long School for International Training faculty workshop, seven professors met with historical and archeological experts, members of Parliament and political parties, non-governmental organization leaders, two Nobel Prize-winning groups and the Tunisian president. We found that every Tunisian carries a serious torch for democracy and our local coordinators, Mounier Khalifa and Najeb Ben Lazreg, spun stories from ancient cultures to current political intrigue.

After the fall of former President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali in 2011, Tunisians set up a Troika, an alliance between three parties the Congress for the Republic, with a provisional president; Ettakatol, led by the president of the National Constituent Assembly; and the Islamic party of Ennahdha, led by Rached Ghnaoucchi.

For a year, National Constituent Assembly President Mustafa Ben Jafar wrote most of the new constitution through 600 meetings with lawyers, technocrats, religious leaders, trade unions, business leaders and party leaders. They developed their Four Freedoms Dignity through jobs, social justice through equality, liberty through freedom of conscience, and democracy through universal suffrage.

The goal was to transform the one-party state into a responsive administration with human rights and gender equality. The election commission now requires each party to field equal numbers of women on their candidate lists.

How successful were they? The new constitution was ratified by 200 out of 217 electoral representatives! Tunisia now has over 200 political parties, 85 newspapers and more than 40 TV and radio stations, one of which (Mosaique) is a well-respected regional news service. Citizens now have multiple internet platforms and engage in spirited conversations at cafes over espressos, mint tea, beer or Turkish ice cream.

Despite factionalization, the best analogy is a rugby scrum where the players push and pull as the scrum moves around the field. Their fate is truly intertwined with each other.

The path to democracy is paved with pitfalls. Youth unemployment, especially among college graduates is high (an estimated 240,000 are out of work). Endemic corruption (estimated 40 percent of GDP) and low foreign direct investment (only 88 large companies in Tunisia) means low funds for infrastructure or business development.

Thanks to the internet and social media, demonstrations are frequent. Plus, the establishment of the final check and balance a federal judiciary is past its one year due date.

However, several times, Tunisians have turned away from physical carnage. Just before former President Ben Ali left the country, the Army refused to fire on thousands of demonstrators. Even after two assassinations and the most recent killing of two demonstrators in the oil town of Tataouine, the fervent demonstrations have not degraded into the violence of Egypt or lawlessness of neighboring Libya.

We stayed in a vibrant capital city, Tunis, visited Roman ruins and Dougga, a World Heritage site that is waiting for you. Police presence was high in the Tunis City Centre but moderate along the highways and I saw no baksheesh (bribes) changing hands. A meeting with current President Beji Caid Essebsi and a tour of the presidential palace included viewing priceless archeological artifacts and a stunning reception room overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. He met Donald Trump ceremonially in Saudi Arabia but said he would withhold judgment until the Group of 7 summit. Then he smiled.

The strength of the post-revolutionary period is a deep passion for true democracy, a secular state with religious freedom. Despite this preference for a secular democracy, the religious Ennhadha party surprisingly won the most parliamentary seats and the first freely elected presidency. But the party is conflicted over how much Islamization they will tolerate and how money from Saudi Arabia and Qatar will be used for non-secular purposes, especially in education.

Late in the Second Continental Congress, Ben Franklin addressed the contentious assembly, Gentlemen, if we dont hang together, we will surely hang separately. Tunisians now recognize the opportunity of a lifetime to become the envy of the Arab world. If they hang together, this could be a bright spot in a region not known for stability and democracy.

Now doesnt that just brighten your day?

Ed Kellerman is a master lecturer and Fulbright Scholar in the Dial Center for Written and Oral Communication in the University of Floridas College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. His full-length video on the trip is available on YouTube at http://bit.ly/tunisiatrip.

Read the rest here:
Ed Kellerman: A path to democracy paved with pitfalls - Gainesville Sun

Millennials voted in surprising numbers during the U.K. general election turning their frustration with tax and spend policies into impact at the polls. A pied piper captured the attention of a generation that feels betrayed by promises made to older citizens, but for which theyll have to pay. America should pay attention. That could and is happening here too.

One exit poll shows that 56 percent of 18-34 year olds turned out to vote, up 12 points from turnout in 2015. According to Sky Data, an overwhelming majority (63 percent) of millennials voted for Labour and 27 percent for Conservatives. The prevailing view of millennials being politically apathetic clouded the clear signs i.e. the spike in registered young voters that youth turnout would be high.

Millennials have surpassed Baby Boomers are the largest living generation and the largest voting bloc if they vote. While they self-identify as Independents, they are embracing socialist philosophy and anti-establishment dogma that will continue to cause heartburn for traditional parties. There are three reasons to think that what happened in Great Britain is happening here in the U.S.

First, millennials are enchanted with socialism in a way that older generations dont understand. A 2015 Reason-Rupe survey found that over half (58 percent) of Americans under 30 have a more favorable view of socialism than capitalism. Nearly 70 percent of 18 29 year olds were willing to vote for a socialist according to Gallup. Socialism is in vogue, but its a gentler version that offers a big public safety net that provides basic needs for people (to include higher education) just without political repression and human rights abuses. Its Sweden or Denmark rather than the Soviet Union.

Pied pipers Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn are taking that open invitation to lure away young people with promises of inclusiveness and equal outcomes. Never mind that those outcomes are mediocre and limit the potential of individuals.

Second, when we look at Corbyn and Sanders we see that youthfulness, charisma, and diversity are no longer prerequisites for revolutionary leadership among millennials. The Barack Obamas have been traded for white, well-off septuagenarians as gender, race, and charisma have taken a back-seat to style. Plain-talk wins over platitudes as two out of three global millennials like straight talk in their leaders according to Deloitte. While young people in developed countries are generally opposed to their political leaders taking controversial or divisive positions (64 percent), in the UK nearly half of millennials (48 percent) welcome it in politicians. This makes us wonder whether the Obama of 2008 would still motivate millennials?

Third and most critically, general wealth redistribution and a lack of economic mobility have created the dissatisfaction with what millennials perceive as a system robbing them of a better future than their predecessors. There is growing pessimism among millennials in developed countries about their futures. Deloitte also found that just a third (36 percent) of those in mature markets predict they will be financially better off than their parents and 31 percent think theyll be happier.

British young people mobilized last week in response to student debt, a housing crisis, a lack of secure jobs, falling wages, and social security. Older U.K. millennials have an average wealth of 27,000 each compared to 53,000 for those born in the 1970s had by the same age. British Baby Boomers at age 30 were 50 percent more likely to own their home than a millennial at the same age.

Add to that youth resentment over Brexit. Seventy-five percent of 18-24 year olds voted for the UK to remain in the EU compared to 56 percent of 25-49 year olds, 44 percent of 50-64 year olds, and just 39 percent over those over 65. UK youth are angry about the fiscal plans that will take 1.7 billion from millennials but given 1.2 billion to Baby Boomers in the next four years in pensions. So angry they took to the polls.

Meanwhile, U.S. millennials shrug their shoulders about the consequences of $20 trillion national debt driven by unfunded liabilities at the federal level. Only six percent expect to receive Social Security benefits, but 100 percent of workers watch one-eighth of their salaries disappear in the federal coffers.

Sanders and Corbyn recognized the angst of this generation and offered freebies including college tuition to appease this generation. Unfortunately like promising government-funded retirement security to seniors this will only grow costly and unsustainable without tackling the issue of affordability.

It would be nave for Americans to shake our heads and think that could never happen here. Young Americans are restless with their condition and have an appetite for change. If we do nothing about our nations long-term fiscal problems, many more millennials will hearken to the tune of these pied pipers and disappear into the dark caves of socialism.

We also need to get serious about correcting the record. Capitalism holds the record as the greatest anti-poverty program in history. When socialism bleeds into government overreach, it drains countries of prosperity and gumption. If we dont, and if Millennials overcome political apathy, the political landscape will change over the next decades into something we might not recognize.

Patrice Lee Onwuka is a senior policy analyst at the Independent Womens Forum.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

Read more:
Why UK millennials voting for socialism could happen here, too ... - The Hill (blog)

Shortly afterDonald Trumps victorylast November,callsfor the left to form its own version of the Tea Party to resistthe newly elected president were almost instantaneous. Panic-stricken at the mere thought of a Trump administration, liberals and progressives found something vaguely comforting in the idea of aTea Party of the left. Although it was never quite clear how people envisaged such a thing, it is obvious why the right-wing movement came to mind. The Tea Party was, after all,largely successful in transforming American politics and paving the way for Donald Trump.

It is easy to forget that just eight years earlierthe Republican Party looked doomed as a national party. Barack Obama had been easilyelected as the first African-American president and Democrats had gained seats in both the House and Senate, giving the partycontrol of both the executive and legislative branches for the first time in nearly 15 years. In other words, theemerging Democratic majority seemedinevitable and so didthe death of theGrand Old Party.

Looking back, itcertainly seemspossible that the GOP wouldhave continued down this death spiral had it not been for the Obamabacklash that manifested itself in the Tea Party. That movement mobilized thousands if not millions of Americans (with the help ofbillionaire donors), andeventually led to theRepublicans taking back the House in 2010 and narrowing the Democratic majority in the Senate.But it was the GOPssuccess at state and local levelsthat had a far bigger impact on the future of American politics.

The Republican Partymade historic gains in state legislaturesthat year,winning majorities in20new legislative chambersthat had been in Democratic hands going intothe election. Itis now widely recognized, seven years after the fact, that the GOPinvested heavily in local andstateelectionsin order to seize control of the redistricting process (which happensevery decade following a census year such as 2010).

Drawing new district lines in states with the most redistricting activity presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the nextdecade, explainedChris Jankowski, the Republican strategist behind the notorious REDMAP project. At the time, ofcourse,mostpeople especially Democrats were caughtcompletelyoff guard.The great gerrymander of 2010was unlike any gerrymandering planin history, and new redistricting softwaresturned the age-oldpracticeinto a precise science that securedthe GOPs House majority for at least a generation.

All of this made the Republican Partys revival(and the Democratic Partys collapse)possible, andit is hard to imagine that historic turnaround without theTea Party, whichusedlocal and statepolitics to overcomea clear nationaldisadvantage. It worked in spectacular fashion: Since 2010 the Democrats have lostabout 1,000 state legislative seatsin total.

It is only natural, then,for Democrats and progressives to look back atthe Tea Party for some guidance in 2017, whichis exactlywhat theauthors of the widely read Indivisibledocument didlast December, offeringa step-by-step guide for individuals, groups, and organizations looking to replicate the Tea Partys success in getting Congress to listen to a small, vocal, dedicated group of constituents. While their report highlighted theobviousimportanceof localpolitics andgrass-roots lobbying (e.g. ,town halls, sit-ins, coordinated calls, etc.), the authors also identifiedcharacteristics of the Tea Party that should be absolutelyavoided such as ignoring reality, making up ones own facts and threatening anybody who is considered an enemy.

In the six months since the Indivisible document was released, people seem to have heeded the calls for a Tea Party of the left, and popular protest has become a constant theme of the Trump era. Trumps presidency kicked offwith massiveprotests against the new president, and the day after his inauguration the Womens March attracted millions of peaceful demonstrators across the country. Protests have continued since then on the streets, attown hall meetings, on college campuses and Republicans have hadgreatdifficulty enacting their agenda (thanks in large part to the presidents unwavering incompetence). The Trump presidencyhas also prompted a huge increase in donations to nonprofit groupslike the ACLU, which received six times its annual average of donations in just one weekend after the first version of Trumps Muslim travel ban went into effect.

Of course, the resistancehas been far from perfect,and at times liberals seem to be imitating theTea Party in all the wrong ways. For example, many liberals have also come to ignore reality and create their own facts, whilefalling for conspiracy theories that bolster their increasingly paranoid worldview (particularly when it comes to Russia). Just as Tea Partiers once accused Obama of being a Kenyan-born Muslim, many liberals are today convinced that Trump is a Russian spy who is guilty of treason.

If the resistancehas been all too ready to embrace the Tea Partys paranoid style of politics, it has simultaneously been too reluctant to adoptthe anti-establishment politics that made the Tea Party such a dominant force in American politics. The Tea Party wasnt committed solely to opposing Obama and his liberalagenda, but also to challenging the Republican establishment and its crony capitalist policies as well (the bank bailouts in particular). Whilethe Tea Partys grass-rootscredibility was always in doubt, as it was largely bankrolled by billionaires and corporations,on the surface it was a populist movement, which made it appealing to those who were not just fed up with one party or one politician but with the whole of Washington.

While there are certainlysome populist and anti-establishment elements in the Trump resistance evincedbycertain progressive groups that arechallenging centrist Democrats in the primaries a kind of single-mindedness haslimited the movements scope. Liberals have become so fixated onTrump and Russia that the Democratic establishment has been able to avoid taking responsibility for the massive failure of 2016, while co-opting the grass-roots energy to serve its own purposes.

The failed campaign of centrist Democrat Jon Ossoff, who raised more than $20 million for a special election in Georgiayet lost decisively to his Republican opponent, was theclearest signyet that the resistance shouldnt just resist Donald Trump, but also the political establishment thatgot us here in the first place. Ossoff was the ideal candidate for theDNC establishment: He is young,handsome, educated, articulate and notably averseto progressive policies that are seen as too contentious,such as single-payer health care. (Ofcourse, these policies are only contentious with the donor class; they consistently garner support from the majority of Americans in polls.)

In the end, for the resistance to stop Trump and resurrectthe Democratic Party if that is indeed the goal it will have to transform American politics as the Tea Party did before it. This is no easy task, and while the Tea Party helped raisethe GOP from the dead, it also created the partys very own Frankenstein monsterin the process the orange-hued monsteris now the public face of the party.

If the left plunges further into conspiracy theories and magical thinking, while avoiding larger questions about how to transform America and tackle major problemslikeinequality andpolitical corruption, it mayend up creatingits own partisan monster while hastening the decline of our democracy. If, on the other hand, thegrass-roots energy that has beeninspired by Trumps election can be harnessed to create a sustainedpopular movement, then the Trump resistance could have an even greater impact on American politics than the Tea Party ever did.

Go here to see the original:
The Trump resistance vs. the Tea Party: So far, a story of immense potential and great danger - Salon