Mediaboss Marketing

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Every year since 1970s, the State Department has published a document called "World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers." You probably haven't read it, but it is interesting. It's a detailed accounting of global arms sales, what weapons were sold and where they wound up after they were. The U.S. government published this report in the interest of transparency and then continued to publish it through multiple politically charged scandals and conflicts that would include through Iran Contra, two separate wars in Iraq and all 20 years that we occupied Afghanistan. A report like this would be especially useful to have right now and would be critical to have as the Biden administration sends billions in high-tech military equipment every month to corrupt oligarchs in Eastern Europe.

Where are all of those weapons systems going? We should know the answer to that, but we don't know because this year, for the very first time in half a century, the Biden administration has stopped releasing that information. They never explained why they stopped. They just stopped and no one pushed them. Now you'd think this would be a scandal. If there's one thing the news media exists to do, it's to fight for the release of relevant government records because in a democracy, you have a right to know what is being done in your name, but not anymore. That information is classified, Mr. Citizen, so you don't get to find out where those billions of dollars of weapons that you're paying for are going. Who's getting them? What are they doing with them? You don't get to know.

You don't get to learn about anything about Ashley Biden showering with her father. You can get arrested for that. You don't get to know how many FBI assets were in the crowd on January 6 and what they were doing. As we just noted, you don't get to read the affidavit justifying the FBI's indefensible raid on the home of Joe Biden's primary political opponent. In fact, you don't even get to know why you're not allowed to know because that information has been redacted too. What are you a Russian agent? Stop asking. Didn't used to be this way at all. It's unrecognizable. A lot has changed in a very short time.

WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY KARINE JEAN-PIERRE DEFENDS BIDEN'S 'SEMI-FASCISM' CLAIM ABOUT 'MAGA REPUBLICANS'

The federal investigation into Hunter Biden and his tax affairs has reached a "critical stage," a source told Fox News, as officials are looking into whether to charge President Bidens son with various tax violations, possible foreign lobbying violations and more. ((Randy Holmes via Getty Images))

So. it turns out, looking back 18 months, the 2020 election was the most consequential election of our lifetimes. You assume Joe Biden was incapacitated and couldn't change much. Well, true, he is incapacitated, but the people behind him most definitely are not. They are more ideological and more aggressive than ever. Now it turns out among those people is our largest and most heavily armed federal law enforcement agency. That would be the FBI. The FBI is not allowed to insert itself into domestic politics. That would violate the U.S. Constitution. It is completely illegal, but for several years it has become increasingly clear that that is exactly what the FBI is doing, actively working on behalf of the Democratic Party, mocking the rule of law, subverting our democracy from within far more effectively than any foreign government ever could.

If that sounds like an overheated claim, and it definitely does sound like an overheated claim, unfortunately, you should know it's entirely true. We know that for a fact. Here's how we know and we learned it yesterday. Weeks before the 2020 election, the FBI pressured social media companies to kill the story of Hunter Biden's laptop. Why? Because that was a story that might have prevented Joe Biden from becoming president. That happened and we know this not because The New York Times investigated it. They didn't bother. They didn't bring you a special report in yesterday's paper giving you the details. The New York Times would never do that, even if they knew it to be true and they may. No, we know this instead, because Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook blithely admitted it almost parenthetically during an interview with Joe Rogan. Watch this.

JOE ROGAN: There was a lot of attention on Twitter during the election because of the Hunter Biden laptop story. The Post, so you guys censored that as well?

MARK ZUCKERBERG:So, we took a different path than Twitter. I mean, basically the background here is the FBI, I think basically came to us, some folks on our team was like, "Hey, just so you know, like, you should be on high alert." We thought there wasa lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. We have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump.. that's similar to that, so just be vigilant.

DEMOCRATS OPPOSED TO BIDEN STUDENT LOAN HANDOUT PREVIOUSLY SUPPORTED SEPARATE DEBT CANCELLATION BILL

Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg looks on during the VivaTech (Viva Technology) trade fair in Paris, on May 24, 2018. (GERARD JULIEN/AFP via Getty Images) (GERARD JULIEN/AFP via Getty Images)

Oh, so Zuckerberg, just to be clear, you just saw it, but let's just unwind what we saw. Zuckerberg was asked, "Why did you censor the story about Hunter Biden's laptop?" And he said "some folks from the FBI came to us and indicated there was about to be a dump of Russian propaganda." Now, there is still rewriting of history going on in which some are claiming, some on Facebook are claiming actually, that the visit from the FBI had nothing to do with the Hunter Biden laptop, but the answer you just saw was in response to a question about the laptop and the censorship of it and the answer was Russian propaganda, Russian disinformation.

Neither of those terms has an agreed upon meaning. They don't actually mean anything. What's Russian propaganda? Is it true? That should be the only question that any news or information company, including Facebook, ever asked. Is it true? Truth is the defense. No. It's Russian propaganda. Again, a term without a meaning. So, we wanted to know more. We reached out to Mark Zuckerberg after that interview and he responded to us to his credit.

Zuckerberg confirmed that the FBI didn't put any of these warnings about Russian disinformation propaganda in writing. Of course, they didn't. Nothing in writing and that makes sense. If you're the FBI, you wouldn't want to put that in writing because you were, of course, lying. At the moment, the FBI was warning Facebook about a propaganda dump that obviously would include Hunter Biden's laptop, they had Hunter Biden's laptop in their possession. So, they knew perfectly well it was authentic because anyone who looks at it does. We have looked at it and it's instantly obvious this is real and of course, we now know conclusively it is real.

BIDEN SEEMINGLY APOLOGIZES TO WHITE HOUSE STAFF AFTER TAKING TOO MANY MEDIA QUESTIONS: I SHOULDNT DO THAT

So, that laptop was not censored because it was propaganda, whatever that means. By the way, the FBI should never be in the information control business anyway. It was censored because it might hurt Joe Biden and the FBI is the government agency that pushed for it to be censored. Has that ever happened in the United States, ever? That is the definition of police state behavior: a government agency independently decides it's going to determine the outcome of a supposedly democratic election.

So, why is it nearly two years until we learn this? Well, it turns out Facebook is a very political place. The founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, paid hundreds of millions of dollars to affect the outcome of the election. Famously, we've reported on that and then, of course, there were Democratic Party operatives working within Facebook. So, on October 14, the Facebook communications official and former Democratic Party operative called Andy Stone claimed that Facebook was censoring this story because of Facebook's "standard process to reduce the spread of misinformation" whatever that means, but that was their initial explanation.

It wasn't until late October that Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of the company, publicly mentioned the FBI's involvement for the first time and here's what he said, "We relied heavily on the FBI's intelligence and alerts, both through their public testimony and private briefings that they gave us." He testified to that, but at the time, Mark Zuckerberg didn't mention anything but the FBI warning Facebook about, "Russian propaganda specifically."

BUTTIGIEG EMPHASIZES INFLATION ALLEVIATION AND NEW FLIGHT PROCEDURES WHILE PROMOTING NEW GRANT

Why didn't he say anything? That's odd because in October 2020, right before the election, weeks before a presidential election, every media outlet in the country and then candidate Joe Biden himself were using the very same line, "It's Russian misinformation, it's propaganda" and not surprisingly or coincidentally, dozens of former intelligence officials were saying the same thing. We can't play this enough. Here it is.

PETER STRZOK, 2020: When you look at this computer store owner in Delaware who allegedly received Hunter Biden's laptop, that is more in line with that when you think about somebody who's a useful idiot, that's kind of the entry point that is kind of, again, a classic indicator of the potential presence of disinformation.

KASIE HUNT, 2020: Right-wing media has been focused on Hunter Biden, this laptop that intelligence officials have warned is likely Russian disinformation .

NICOLLE WALLACE, 2020:Law enforcement is actively investigating whether the alleged Hunter Biden emails are linked to any foreign intel ops.

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS STAND TO BENEFIT FROM BIDEN STUDENT DEBT HANDOUT: WATCHDOG GROUP

JASON JOHNSON, 2020:The story is preposterous. So, we're supposed to believe that Hunter Biden, in a drunken stupor, dropped off his laptop inapparently a QAnon repair office.

So, those are the shills who will say whatever they're told to say. Of course, no sober person would take them seriously and we missed the bigger story, too. We will admit that. At the time we imagined that this lie, that the laptop was Russian misinformation, was being pushed almost exclusively by Democratic partisans, but that's not true. It was much worse and much more threatening to our democracy, in fact, utterly corrosive of our democracy than that.

Again, our media attributed these claims to former Intel officials who wrote a letter about Russian disinformation, but no, it wasn't just former Intel officials spreading that lie. It was members of the U.S. government, federal bureaucrats, people who work for federal agencies, senior FBI leaders who are still at the FBI. They lied and they knew they were lying and they never took steps to validate this claim that it was Russian propaganda or Russian disinformation. On this show in October of 2020, we interviewed one of Hunter Biden's business partners, a man called Tony Bobulinski, and he verified the authenticity of that laptop.

BIDEN JOINS OTHER DEMS IN DISMISSING REPUBLICAN VOTERS, SAYS HE DOESN'T 'RESPECT THESE MAGA REPUBLICANS'

He had firsthand information. He had texts and emails that were on his phone and also on the laptop. So, we reached out to Tony Bobulinski last night and we asked him a very simple question. Did anyone from the FBI ever call you or your lawyer to find out since your name was all over the laptop, if those texts and emails were real? If they wanted to know if this was Russian disinformation, they would, of course, call you, but not one of them ever did. They knew it wasn't Russian disinformation. They knew it wasn't propaganda, and they knew it was completely real and they lied about it. Here's what Bobulinskitold us in October of 2020.

TONY BOBULINSKI: On May 13, that email was sent from James Gilliar to me. I didn't generate that email. James Gilliar generated that email and in that email, James Gilliar goes through intimate detail of what each individual's requests were from a compensation perspective and how the equity in the enterprise would be divvied up. Very important. May 13. That email was generated by somebody else to me. In that email there's a statement where they go through the equity. Jim Biden has referenced, as you know, 10%. Doesn't say Biden. It saysJim and then it has 10% for the big guy held by H. I 1,000% sit here and know that the big guy is referencing Joe Biden. That's crystal clear to me because Ilived it. I met with the former vice president in person multiple times and Ihad been meeting and talking with Hunter Bidenand Jim Biden and Rob Walker and James Gilliar.

So, to note the obvious, that's not some cable news mouth breather who's giving you his stupid partisan opinion about Hunter Biden's laptop. That's Hunter Biden's former business partner, who can prove he was Hunter Biden's former business partner. No one disputes he was Hunter Biden's former business partner. His name, his emails or texts are all over the laptop and yet somehow the FBI, the agency that sent a dozen agents to investigate a rope in a NASCAR garage, the agency that used hundreds of agents to hunt down grandmothers from the election justice protest on January 6, that same agency couldn't spare a single agent to make a telephone call to Tony Bobulinski to ask questions about the laptop. You claim it's propaganda, it's misinformation. Why don't you call the guy who's on it and ask him? They didn't bother. This is what the FBI has become: an agency that seeks to exert control over the information that you read in the media. What is this? Well, it's terrifying and again, this isn't speculation.

REPORTER'S NOTEBOOK: BREAKING THE WAVE

We just had it confirmed in public yesterday. These are people whose main goal is to ensure that they never lose power in Washington, interfering with our elections and not simply by hiding information, resorting to force because they know they can get away with it. Joe Biden's chief political opponent, right nowBiden says he's going to run again. Trump has indicated he's runningwill be Donald Trump and so they're targeting them. Is anyone noticing this? John Paul Mac Isaac, the computer repair shop owner who first obtained the laptop, says an FBI agent threatened him so he wouldn't go public with the laptop. In case you've forgotten, watch.

JOHN PAUL MAC ISAAC:The FBI met with me at my home and asked me about my concerns. I voiced my concerns and they I then shifted and said, "Hey, can I just want this out of my shop. At this point, just get it out of my shop and give me a phone number I can call should somebody come looking for it or wants to harass me about it" and they're like, "Yeah, we can't do that." When they showed up, instead of bringing in a tech guy with them, they brought a subpoena and they're like, "Yeah, we're just going to take everything." I was a bit uncomfortable, a little nervous, but then excited at the same time, so I kind of cracked a joke. I said, "Don't worry lads. When I write the book, I'll leave your names out of this" and that's when Agent Mike turned around and said, "Oh, it's in our experience that nothing ever happens to people that talk about these things."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Yeah. So, in a free country, no one who obeys the law is afraid of law enforcement. That's true. No one should ever be afraid of the FBI except people who know full well they've committed federal crimes. Period, but in this country, let's be honest, everybody's afraid of the FBI because you know exactly what happens to you if you tweak the nose of the FBI or if you annoy Joe Biden. You get raided. You get hauled into the street inleg irons.

You get banned on social media. As Jen Psaki said from the White House podium last year, "We're flagging problematic posts for Facebook." Oh so it's White House, same administration which oversees the FBI, telling social media companies who's allowed to speak? It happened to Alex Berenson. It happened to Donald Trump. Now we know what happened to The New York Post and the people running the FBI, people who did that, are still there. This is a huge problem. This cannot be ignored any longer.

Tucker Carlson currently serves as the host of FOX News Channels (FNC) Tucker Carlson Tonight (weekdays 8PM/ET). He joined the network in 2009 as a contributor.

Read the original here:
Tucker Carlson: The FBI has been working on behalf of the Democratic Party - Fox News

Those who oppose marijuana policy reform would rather take voters out of the equation altogether.

By Paul Armentano, NORML

Those who wish to perpetuate the failed public policy of cannabis criminalization have lost the hearts and minds of the American public. And they know it.

With public support for marijuana policy reform reaching super-majority status in recent years, prohibitionists and other political opponents have largely abandoned efforts to try and influence public opinion. Rather, they are now relying on gamesmanship to prevent voters from weighing in on the issue. In some cases, they are even willing to overturn the will of the electorate to get their way.

This was the case last election. In Mississippi and South Dakota, reform opponents successfully litigated to nullify election results for a pair of marijuana legalization measures, thereby nullifying the votes cast by 73 percent and 54 percent of voters respectively.

That same year in Nebraska, members of the state Supreme Court struck down a proposed medical cannabis access initiative months after it had been approved by the Secretary of States office. Polling in the state showed that 77 percent of Nebraskans backed the initiative, but they never got the chance to show their support at the polls. Months later, Floridas Republican attorney general successfully brought suit to preemptively deny a proposed 2022 legalization initiative from appearing on the ballot.

Opponents are engaging in similar tactics this election cycle. In Arkansas, they are seeking to invalidate voters pending decision on a statewide proposal to legalize marijuana possession and retail sales. Although the measure will appear on the November ballot, it is now up to justices on the state Supreme Court to determine if the votes will ever be counted. In a filing before the court, opponents of the measure have cynically called upon judges to protect the interests and rights of [the minority of] Arkansans who oppose the legalization of recreational marijuana. (Statewide polling from earlier this year identified majority support for legalization among voters.)

In Missouri, representatives of a leading prohibitionist organization have joined legal efforts to try and disqualify a citizens initiative legalizing marijuana use by adults and providing legal relief for those with prior low-level convictions. Earlier this month, Secretary of State John Ashcroft issued a certificate of sufficiency to the Legal Missouri 2022 campaign, formally placing their initiative on the November ballot. But now opponents contend that election officials erred in doing so, opining that they may have miscounted. (Opponents basis for this claim appears to rest solely on initial media reports speculating that advocates risked falling short of signature requirements in one or two districts. Campaign proponents had vociferously denied these reports.) A statewide survey, published earlier this month, finds that 62 percent of registered voters back legalization.

Finally, in Oklahoma, election officials engaged in extensive delays prior to verifying that advocates had gathered the requisite quantity of signatures to qualify an adult-use legalization measure for the November ballot. Now officials are claiming that, because of those delays, there may be insufficient time to formally certify the measure ahead of the coming election.

In a healthy democracy, those with competing visions on public policy vie for voters support and abide by their voting decisions. In this case, however, it is becoming clear that those who oppose marijuana policy reform would rather take voters out of the equation altogether. Whether or not one personally supports or opposes cannabis legalization, these cynical and undemocratic tactics ought to be a cause of deep concern.

Paul Armentano is the Deputy Director of NORMLthe National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Lawsand he is the co-author of the book Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink? (Chelsea Green, 2013).

Heres How Many Marijuana Shops New York Plans To Approve In Each Region Of The State In The First Licensing Round

See the article here:
Marijuana Prohibitionists Have Lost The War Of Ideas And Are Now Attacking Democracy Itself (Op-Ed) - Marijuana Moment

Attacks on the FBI by Donald Trump supporters, including several very prominent politicians, reveal that the anger on the right has finally begun to consume the flamethrowers themselves.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich compared the FBI to "wolves," relentlessly hunting down ordinary Americans, and went on to liken agents to the Stasi, the former East German secret police known for their brutality.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was ready to investigate, indict, and put on trial the Attorney General of the United States for doing his job.

Ive seen enough. The Department of Justice has reached an intolerable state of weaponized politicization, McCarthy said. When Republicans take back the House, we will conduct immediate oversight of this department, follow the facts, and leave no stone unturned. Attorney General Garland, preserve your documents and clear your calendar. (Sounds like McCarthy has already declared guilt without trial.)

All sense of rational thinking and care and consideration of the great work of the Justice Department and the FBI in keeping America safe in recent years has disappeared. Instead, the right invents endless enemies and has now attacked another American institution that has firmly sought to ensure law and order rules since 1908.

Has the FBI made mistakes? Certainly, especially during the reign of Herbert Hoover, but overall they deserve their reputation for getting the job done.

The FBI is not perfect, but calling for arrests and investigations of agents is a bridge way too far and reveals the true intent of the GOP is no longer just about winning elections but to do so by whatever means necessary.

Irish American roots in the FBI run long and deep. There is a long tradition of Irish conservative Catholic culture among its agents, a source of pride to many.

Irish Americans face a choice as to whether they support the legitimate actions of the FBI, or if they seek an anarchist solution where FBI agents and other government workers could be fired and/or tried at will.

The FBI are the latest ones who are being violently attacked for doing their job and securing vital documents from Mar-a-Lago, Trump's winter residence.

For some nefarious reason, Trump had spirited the top secret documents out of the White House to his home. It is perfectly within the purview of the National Archives to seek and return possession of such documents which contain highly sensitive material.

The FBI went ahead and did its job, securing the documents. The response on the right was literal shots fired at an FBI office and vicious attacks from politicians and reporters alike.

The overall impact is that Trump has cleared his way back into the good graces of the right-wing machine and banished all his rivals for now anyway.

The notion of right-wing Americans venting hate and fury at the FBI would have been unthinkable a few years ago but it seems now we live in unthinkable times. The fact is, the ignorant army of the right is trying to end American democracy.

*This column first appeared in the August 24 edition of the weekly Irish Voice newspaper, sister publication to IrishCentral.

The rest is here:
Attacks on FBI by Trump supporters are a threat to democracy - IrishCentral

InThe Buzz Cut, we bring you a round-up of news you wish wasnt news.

Countrys Pillars of Democracy Found to Be Made of Lego as Adult Men Play With Press Freedom

Archeologists have revisited the monoliths holding our nation in place for a closer look. In a shocking revelation, it appears that there was nothing to see there. The historical site of the pillars of democracy was found to have been ransacked, leaving nothing behind. The current state of the ancient remains is unknown. Some believe, however, that theyve been converted into playthings for some important men seeking momentary relief from high-powered business decisions. Indeed, this week saw one such man spending some quality time honing his creativity with some toy bricks that looked suspiciously like one of the missing pillars. Some note that it was a smart business decision for someone with an eye for real estate, seizing upon the lucrative fourth estate along the way was only inevitable. The conversion of the pillar into blocks to play with, then, will help the visionary man build the much talked about development model that takes the country forward.

*

High EQ Man Compares Career Lows to Terminal Illness

They say that suffering defeat humbles a person, and they could not have been more right. A man speaking about his career bravely opened up about what the low points felt like. In a video where, by all accounts, he appeared to be in good physical health, the actor said that not being successful in the movies felt like skin cancer. While the average person fortunate enough not to have skin cancer can only imagine such a fate, this empath is the rare one among us who can actually feel it. Researchers of terminal illness were shocked to discover that the pain from surmountable setbacks in life was, in fact, comparable to that of a long-drawn, life-altering illness. And yet, the man has shown it is possible to compare the two if one is multifaceted enough in their worldview, like he is. In this case, the multiple facets involved are two entire points on an emotional intelligence scale.

*

Right Wing Actor Takes Unexpected Anti-national Turn by Dredging Up Beef With Award Show

An actor known for her unflinching support for religious majoritarianism has arrived at a crossroads; she must make a choice. On the one hand say, the right hand there is her love for and desire to protect cows; on the other, there is tempting beef to pick up with an award function. Having chosen to go left, in this case, choosing the beef, the actor became an unlikely candidate for joining the anti-national gang. She chose to sue the award show over nominating her for an award. Nearly everyone, including the beef, is confused over the debacle one that may prove to cost her. I always loved her, but her decision to indulge in unnecessary beef makes me question her beliefs, said one former fan. The consequences of the sudden turn are yet to be seen.

Read more:
The Buzz Cut: Country's Pillars of Democracy Found to Be Made of Lego as Adult Men Play With Press Freedom - The Swaddle

Opinion: research finds that civil society strategies are needed to help prevent any future far right growth in Ireland

By Barry Cannon and Joseph Munnelly, Maynooth University

While the far right has been rising electorally in Europe over the last 40 years, Ireland has been an exception to this trend, with little or no organised far right presence in our democratic institutions. Nevertheless, the far right was visibly present at demonstrations in this country against Covid 19 public health measures, alerting us to the possibility that this Irish situation could change quite quickly as it has done in Spain and Portugal.

The STOPFARRIGHT project was inspired by our concern at the possible rise of the far right in Ireland. We felt it important to find out how the groups most affected by far right discourse and actions such as migrants, ethnic and sexual minorities, feminists and anti-far right groups - could counter this.

We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences

From RT Radio 1's Brainstorm, what's behind the emergence of the far right in Irish politics?

We wanted to know how much of a threat they thought the far right is to Irish democracy, and about the extent and effectiveness of state, political party and civil society counter-strategising against it. The project also sought to facilitate information exchange between Irish, European and international civil society groups and academics on the theme through a series of five webinars.

Our research found that NGOs and community groups among the affected populations mentioned above, think the far right is an important threat to Irish democracy, although not an immediate one. However, this could change quite quickly, they warn, and Irish society should prepare itself for this possibility.

The experience of many of these groups underline the seriousness of such advice. A total of 130 groups were identified and contacted, online surveys sent to them and follow up interviews requested from those who indicated a willingness to be interviewed. We received 42 responses to the survey, around a 31% response rate, with seven follow up interviews being carried out. All research took place online.

We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences

From RT Radio 1's Today with Claire Byrne, broadcaster and film-maker Paul Mason on the rise of the far right in Europe

Our study found that almost 67% of respondent organisations have had staff or clients experiencing threats or violence from the far right. All respondents (100%) reported online harassment or threats, while 75% reported verbal harassment or threats, 50% physical and close to 40% property damage. Finally, the overwhelming majority (80%) felt that such attacks had increased in the last five years.

When asked about the states attitude to the far right, most participants feel that it is too tolerant of the latter and its discourse. They recommend a more pro-active policy from the state on the issue, becoming much less tolerant of intolerant speech, by, for example, putting stronger controls on social media companies, which they consider the main means such intolerance is spread.

Participants also thought the state should support education and dialogue among the general population, to help prevent hateful and exclusive attitudes and that it should pay more attention to the conditions behind individuals being attracted to far right ideas, such as inequality, austerity, and poor access to housing and health, themes which the far right piggy back on to gain attention and support.

We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences

From RT Radio 1's Drivetime, UCC international terrorism specialist Dr Natasha Dromey on the emergence of the far right in Ireland

Participants in the project also feel that non-far right political parties should exclude far right parties from their interactions and show active opposition to those parties and their policies. Non-far right parties should demonstrate values of inclusion, respect and equality, be proactive in denouncing and reprimanding any political group that stir division and propagate misinformation and steadfast in challenging the various forms of hate and discrimination when they appear. Additionally, these political parties should lead by example, upholding moral and political standards and principles which are antithetical to the far right.

The groups surveyed also provide examples of strategies they use to help counter-act the far right, which we term demarcation and confrontation. Demarcation is when an organisation clearly demonstrates how their values fundamentally differ from those of the far right, including in some cases banning far right individuals from membership.

Political parties should lead by example, upholding moral and political standards and principles which are antithetical to the far right

Confrontation means mounting demonstrations, working more closely with the authorities to fight against hate crime, and getting truthful information out to the public to counteract far right misinformation and disinformation. Some groups also monitor far right activity and collaborate with their colleagues in other organisations to prevent attacks from the far right. More work, has to be done, however, especially to ensure that social media companies are more effective in policing hate crimes online.

In general, participants argue that the most effective way to counter the far right is to have a national strategy which has bottom up, community involvement, placing education and awareness building at its centre. This includes strategies to tackle those inequalities which leave marginalised communities vulnerable to far right exploitation, and finely balances the rights of freedom of expression and freedom from threatening behaviours.

Within this, policies are needed to help strengthen democratic civil society including advocacy, training and funding for civil society organisations to help carry out such work. This, according to our research participants, is the best way to stop the far right entering our institutions and infecting our national discourse with hateful language and ideas.

The STOPFARRIGHT project is funded by the Irish Research Council's New Foundations Programme, and is in association with Crosscare's Migrant Project

Dr Barry Cannon is a Lecturer and Assistant Professor in the Sociology Department at Maynooth University. Joseph Munnelly is research assistant at the STOPFARRIGHT project at Maynooth University and a PhD student at the Centre for Humanitarian Action at UCD.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RT

Excerpt from:
Are the far right a threat to Irish democracy? - RTE.ie