Mediaboss Marketing

For decades, American presidents have used their inaugural addresses to celebrate the values of freedom. In his second inaugural address in 2005, President George W. Bush declared, The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world. Sixteenyears earlier, his father had asserted, We know what works: Freedom works. We know whats right: Freedom is right. President Ronald Reagan said the same at his second inauguration, declaring, America must remain freedoms staunchest friend, for freedom is our best ally.

At his inauguration on Friday, President Donald Trump will take to the podium to declare his aims for his next four years in office. Will he have anything to say about the importance of freedom? Will he depart from decades of Republican Party tradition and American tradition by declining to embrace Americas role as the leader of the free world? As a presidential candidate, Trump had almost nothing to say on this score. If he persists in ignoring the United Statesspecial relationship with these ideals, he risks undermining democrats around the world and damaging American national interests.

The collapse of communism a quarter of a century ago seemed to affirm the triumph of democracy as the only legitimate system. But then, in the 21st century, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, followed by conflicts in Libya and Syria, tarnished democracys standing, while non-democratic powers China, Russia and Iran asserted their regional power and global ambitions. Now the latest challenge to democracy is emerging where we had so long assumed it could not in Europe and the United States, where democratic institutions suddenly look vulnerable.

Despite recent setbacks, there remain compelling moral reasons to support democracy and human rights around the world. Democracies offer the most accountable system of government, the only tonic for illegitimacy and the best way to offer political participation to the disenfranchised. Democracies are also better at protecting basic human rights, representing the will of the people and checking egregious uses of power. Democratic governments do not commit genocide, do not barrel-bomb their own citizens, do not create refugees and do not starve their people. They also are more stable than other forms of government because they offer a peaceful, institutionalized mechanism for transferring power.

Democracies also provide more prosperity for their citizens than other systems of government. It is more than coincidence that the vast majority of the richest per capita countries in the world, excluding oil exporters, are democracies. On average, democracies have performed just as well as autocracies in generating economic growth over the last half-century in the developing world. Chinas recent experience of economic expansion is one of the rare exceptions. Far more often, dictators produce economic basket cases just see the Soviet Union under Leonid Brezhnev, Cambodia under Pol Pot, Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe, or China under Mao Zedong.

For these reasons and others, public opinion polls around the world consistently show that majorities of people in almost every country prefer democratic systems to dictatorships, absolute monarchies or theocracies.

Yet even if Trump cares little about the preferences and well-being of others abroad, Americans have selfish reasons for wanting to see democracy in the world survive and expand. More democracy makes Americans more secure and more prosperous.

First, our closest and most enduring allies have been and are today democracies. Democracies are the allies who go to war with us, vote with us in the United Nations, support international treaties and norms that serve our interests. Democratic allies are those most willing to provide for our common defense, be it providing support for our missile defenses against a possible North Korean attack, sharing intelligence with us to fight terrorist organizations, or implementing sanctions with us against Iran or Russia to advance our shared security objectives.

Second, our enemies are and have been dictatorships or political movements espousing anti-democratic ideas. In the 20th century, dictatorships in Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union directly threatened American national security. Every war we have fought has been against autocracies Germany, Italy, Japan, North Korea, North Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Libya. Never has a democracy attacked us. Today, not all dictatorships threaten the United States, but every entitythreatening the United States is a dictatorship or a movement such as the Islamic State, Al Qaeda or the Taliban committed to anti-democratic ideas.

Third, the consolidation of democracy after the fall of autocracy enhances American security. The construction of democracies in Germany, Japan and Italy after World War II firmly entrenched our alliances with all of these countries. During the Cold War, the United States partnered with autocrats to contain communism. Yet transitions to democracy in Portugal, Spain, Taiwan, the Philippines, South Korea, Chile and South Africa did not, as predicted, hurt American strategic interests, but instead served to nurture deeper, more lasting relationships. After the collapse of communism, new democracies in Europe have made vital contributions to NATOs mission in Afghanistan and missile defenses against a possible Iranian attack.

Fourth, the U.S. economy also benefits from successful democratization abroad. Aside from China, democracies are our most important trading and investment partners. The collapse of command economies in the former communist world added billions of dollars worth of trade to the world economic system, while also offering new frontiers for American investment. The expansion of a rule-based, market-driven world economy is good for the new entrants and beneficial for the largest economy in this system, the American economy.

If Trump persists in denying the centrality of democratic values, it will be up to the rest of us members of Congress, nongovernment organizations, private foundations and activists to fill the vacuum in the pursuit of both our values and interests. We cannot and should not allow this moment of doubt about democracys promise to become more than a passing trend.

See original here:
Dear Trump: Defending democracy is no vice - Washington Post

When a group of African nations stands up to a dictator, the world should take notice perhaps a lesson about democracy has taken root on the continent. That seems to be the case involving Gambia, one of Africas tiniest nations but one whose current political drama has the potential for big meaning.

Gambia held an election on Dec. 1 and its longtime ruler, President Yahya Jammeh, surprisingly lost the vote. At first he conceded to his opponent. But then he had second thoughts. Mr. Jammeh demolished the electoral commission, clamped down on dissent over social media, and extended his rule.

But he did not count on one thing.

Four of Gambias neighboring states in West Africa Senegal, Nigeria, Ivory Coast, and Liberia have each learned from hard experience from past leaders who failed to follow the will of the people and did not hand over power peacefully. Violence was the result. These nations are now leading an effort to oust Jammeh and install the winner of the election, Adama Barrow.

At first this group tried diplomacy. Its leaders, who represent the 15-member Economic Community of West African States, met twice with Jammeh to persuade him to step down. When that failed, they decided to prepare a military invasion and asked the United Nations Security Council for approval.

One of democracys basic cornerstones a peaceful transfer of power after a fair election really means something to Gambias neighbors. In fact, more than two-thirds of Africans prefer democracy, according to a poll by Afrobarometer. Africans have more than our fair share of brave, determined, principled, stubborn, wily citizens who will keep us from sinking too far into the mire, writes journalist Simon Allison in the African Arguments website.

In Gambia itself, people showed unusual courage in voting against Jammeh, who came to power in a 1994 coup. Since his electoral defeat, many of his key ministers have fled rather than remain loyal.

At least in West Africa, such dictators are becoming more isolated. In other parts of Africa, such as in Zimbabwe, Burundi, and Congo, leaders still overstay their welcome without much repercussion from other African states.

Democracy has had a bumpy path in Africa. But the lesson from the Gambia crisis shows it may have a brighter future.

Related stories

Read this story at csmonitor.com

Become a part of the Monitor community

See the article here:
Africa's object lesson in democracy - Yahoo News

The Office of the Pardon Attorney has announced President Obama has denied clemency to imprisoned Native American activist Leonard Peltier. Peltier is a former member of the American Indian Movement who was convicted of killing two FBI agents during a shootout on South Dakotas Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in 1975. He has long maintained his innocence.

Amnesty International condemned the decision.

We are deeply saddened by the news that President Obama will not let Leonard go home, said Margaret Huang, executive director of Amnesty International USA. Despite serious concerns about the fairness of legal proceedings that led to his trial and conviction, Peltier was imprisoned for more than 40 years. He has always maintained his innocence. The families of the FBI agents who were killed during the 1975 confrontation between the FBI and American Indian Movement (AIM) members have a right to justice, but justice will not be served by Peltiers continued imprisonment.

Peltiers attorney Martin Garbus appeared on Democracy Now! today.

"I think its fair to say that if he doesnt get commuted by President Obama, hell die in jail. Hes a very sick man," Garbus said. "So, Obamas not granting him clemency is like a sentence of death. Trump aint going to do it. And hes very sick, and hes not going to live past that time. I dont want to be negative, but thats the reality. Hes very sick, and hes been in prison over 40 years, hard years, six years of solitary."

Garbus was notified of Obamas decision earlier today. In an email, the Office of the Pardon Attorney wrote: "The application for commutation of sentence of your client, Mr. Leonard Peltier, was carefully considered in this Department and the White House, and the decision was reached that favorable action is not warranted. Your clients application was therefore denied by the President on January 18, 2017... Under the Constitution, there is no appeal from this decision."

See our full coverage on Leonard Peltier

Link:
Breaking: Leonard Peltier Denied Clemency by Obama - Democracy Now!

American constitutional democracy is in anexistential crisis right now, and it's not easy to see how this ends.

President-elect Donald TrumpDonald TrumpMcConnell breaks with Trump on NATO Trump makes unannounced stop at his DC hotel Rick Perry misunderstood Energy Secretary job: report MORE has made clear hewill not respect limitson presidential power. Even before taking office, he and his minions have threatened to clamp down onjournalistsanddissenters, demonstratingcontemptfor the First Amendment.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) recently suggested that Trump could "close down the elite press"by choosing which press outlets he personally decides are legitimate. Richard Painter, former ethics lawyer under George W. Bush, warns that Trump has "serious conflicts of interest" that will place him in violation of the Constitution as soon as he takes office.

Most troubling of all, the U.S. intelligence community has concluded thatRussian President Vladimir Putin ordered a cyber espionage operationaimed at helping Trump win election. There are unconfirmed reports that Russiaalso collected compromising informationit could use to blackmail Trump.There is also reporting raising concerns that the FBI "blocked a thorough inquiry into Mr. Trump [and Russia]."

Recently, civil rights activist Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) has concluded that, because of Russian interference in the election, Trumpcannot be a legitimate president.

The first step, when it comes to Russia, is sorting out what actually happened. That requires anindependent, nonpartisan investigation. The Senate intelligence committee hasannounced that it plans to begin investigating"counterintelligence concerns related to Russia and the 2016 election."

That's a good start (though not the kindof independent commissionmanyhave in mind), but we can't passively sit back and assume this will be sufficient.If the investigation confirms assessments and reports that Russia helped Trump win the presidency and is now in a position to blackmail him, that would require the extraordinary and unprecedented remedyof a new election. None of this can happen unless Americans of all political stripes recognize the danger we are in and support their elected representatives in doing what is necessary to set things right.

Whether we can find a path through this thicket depends on all Americans recognizing this is about the legitimacy of our constitutional democracy, not typical partisan divisions.

Some Republicans understand this. Mark Salter, former chief of staff to Sen. John McCainJohn McCainUS democracy is in crisis. Trump voters must help us get past it. The rise of Carlson, and the fall of Van Susteren Booker to vote against Tillerson MORE (R-Ariz.), suggests that we need "an uncommon country-before-tribe commitment from Republican and Democratic politicians"and others. He's right and elected officials can only find the courage to act if they have the support and urging of their constituents.

That means Trump voters must acknowledge they made a mistake. This is, without a doubt, a difficult thing to do. I understand this.

I was too young to vote in 1988, but I thought that year's presidential election was a contest for the soul of America. Then-Vice President George H.W. Bush'scampaign rhetoricand choice of an unqualified running mate, convinced me that he would be dangerous for the country. I worried he was in the pocket of the religious right and other extremist elements in the Republican Party.

I was wrong; Bush was no extremist. The elder Bush was a better president than Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis would have been, and likely would have been better in many if not most ways than Bill ClintonBill ClintonHillary Clinton tweets well-wishes to Bushes Chelsea Clinton: We must keep fighting Lanny Davis: Farewell, President Obama: Your legacy as one of the best presidents is secure MORE, the man elected to replace him in 1992.

We all make mistakes. What matters is owning up to that, taking responsibility for our actions, and trying to set things right. Those of us (which includes a number ofRepublicans andconservatives) who already are confronting the crisis our nation faces must reach out to Trump voters in friendship, as our fellow citizens.

This is not about bitterness, settling scores, or showing anyone up. It is about recognizing that we face the most serious constitutional crisis since Nixon's presidency. As we did more than 40 years ago, Americans must cross partisan lines to defend our constitutional democracy.

None of this will be at all easy, but it is an essential test of our patriotism, integrity and national character.

Chris Edelson is an assistant professor of government in American University's School of Public Affairs. His latest book, "Power Without Constraint: The Post 9/11 Presidency and National Security," was published in May 2016 by the University of Wisconsin Press.

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

More here:
US democracy is in crisis. Trump voters must help us get past it. - The Hill (blog)

WASHINGTON, D.C.It was not a hearing. It was the mere burlesque of a hearing, rendered meaningless by a preposterously accelerated process that rendered all questioning perfunctory and that left all cheap evasions hanging in the air of the committee room the way cigarette smoke used to canopy the proceedings back in the day. You would not hire a gardener through the process by which Betsy DeVos likely is going to become the Secretary of Education. A public school system wouldn't hire her to work the cafeteria line at lunch. It was appalling. It was unnerving. It was a grotesque of how an evolved democracy should operate. It was business as usual these days and it likely isn't going to matter a damn.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

As nearly as I can tell, the nominees for the president-elect's Cabinet fall into several different categories. There are the people you'd pretty much expect from any Republican administration. (James Mattis, Stephen Flynn, Ryan Zinke). There are the people who understand the mission of their departments and have spent their lives undermining it. (Jeff Sessions as Attorney General, Rick Perry at Energy, Andrew Puzder at Labor). And there are the people who are fundamentally clueless about the general nature of public service. (Rex Tillerson at State.) On Tuesday night, DeVos demonstrated that she is that rarest of Trump administration fauna: Someone who fits capably into all three categories.

Getty The Washington Post

She and her family and the Amway gozillions they control have been a bottomless reservoir for the dark money that is the engine behind a dozen different conservative fetish objects, from right-to-work laws, to gutting campaign finance regulations, to injecting splinter Protestantism into every part of the political commons. So she's pretty much what you'd expect from any Republican administration. She understands the mission of the Department of Education and truly dislikes it. And, as was graphically demonstrated even in the truncated questioning Tuesday night, she doesn't know enough about education policy to feed to your guppies.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

This was most clearly demonstrated during an exchange with Senator Al Franken. Franken asked her about the distinction in education between proficiency and growth. Then, this happened.

Franken: This brings me to the issue of proficiency, which the senator cited, versus growth. I would like your views on the relative advantage of assessments and using them to measure proficiency or growth.

DeVos: I think if i am understanding your question correctly around proficiency, I would correlate it to competency and mastery, so each student is measured according to the advancements they are making in each subject area.

Franken: That's growth. That's not proficiency. In other words, the growth they are making is not growth. Proficiency is an arbitrary standard.

Devos: Proficiency is if they have reached a third grade level for reading, etc.

(Ed. Note: At this point, the nominee was further at sea than Magellan ever was. We continue.)

Franken: I'm talking about the debate between proficiency in growth, what your thoughts on that?

DeVos: I was just asking the senator to clarify

Franken: This is a subject that has been debated in the education community for years. I have advocated growth as the chairman, and every member of this committee knows, because with proficiency teachers ignore the kids of the top who are not going to fall below proficiency, and they ignore the kid at the bottom who they know will never get to proficiency. I have been an advocate for growth. But it surprises me that you don't know this issue, and Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good reason for us to have more questions. This is a very important subject -- education, our kids' education. I think we are selling our kids short by not being able to have a debate on it.

As I may have mentioned, my father was a teacher and an administrator in the public high schools for over 35 years. He explained the essential difference between proficiency and growth to me 40 years ago. That a prospective Secretary of Education hadn't the faintest idea what Franken was talking about should have been enough to make the committee adjourn itself in helpless laughter.

What a Weekend It Was for Civil Rights

But there were even more risible moments to come. DeVos clumsily dodged every question about her family's financing of the dingier segments of the conservative movement. Rookie senator Maggie Hassan from New Hampshire doggedly pursued a $5 million donation made by a foundation ostensibly run by DeVos' mother to Focus on the Family, the anti-gay extremist chop-shop that the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated as a hate group.

Hassan: There is a foundation named for your parents, correct?

DeVos: My mother's foundation.

Hassan: And you sit on the board?

DeVos: I do not.

Hassan: So when it made the $5 million donation to Focus on the Family, you did not know anything about it?

DeVos: My mother makes the donations.

Here is the original post:
The Betsy DeVos Hearing Was an Insult to Democracy - Esquire.com