Group items tagged

Russian officials have suggested that the electoral system does not meet democratic standards, and that it and the politicization of media are responsible for the unrest at the capitol.

Yes! Both of these are very clear factors. I believe that media/social media in general plays a large role in the polarization of our country. The social dilemma (a movie you can find on Netflix) was super eye opening when it described the ways that social media companies expose you to specialized content that creates intra-national division.

^^I agree with everything said about the media and I second Theo's recommendation for the Social Dilemma. I think it also quite hypocritical that Russia is criticizing the US democratic system considering that they undermined our democratic process by interfering in the 2016 election.

I think that finding a balance between the freedom and social welfare has always been an issue in America and thats why this is such an interesting article. The Nordic countries seem to have a very good balance of free market success and equality. These countries would be good examples for America but there are two reasons that make this difficult. First off, many Americans seem to be deeply afraid of anything resembling socialism or communism. Second all these nordic states are small and relatively homogenous. This makes it much easier for the government to provide social welfare that meets everybody's needs and keeps everyone happy. The US is huge and has a much more diverse population. This makes for a completely different problem. While a social democratic government has worked so well for Scandinavia, we are far from getting to a state like that in the US.

Even though I believe a government like that would be ideal for the US, it is not very realistic due to how conservative the US is compared to Scandinavia.

As many take to the streets in China to protest covid restrictions, the people's dissatisfaction with freedom of expression and democracy resurface. While the effort is valiant and Chinese politicians have made certain promises to satisfy protesters, it remains unclear whether these protest will have any long-term difference. Protests in Hong Kong in 2019 were seemingly larger and had a large impact in the moment, but after the movement was suppressed, the communist party silenced those behind them. Given this past, will these protests create any real change?

I don't any change will come. The government has all the resources needed to prevent the protests and could simply slowly deploy vaccines and lessen the restrictions to stop the protests. The protests haven't been advocating for much change in the structure of Chinese society, so the government still maintains all the power.

And now the Chinese government has softened a bit to accommodate the protestors' demands for vaccines--maybe even fewer lockdowns; but not for free speech. Let's see how that goes with the protestors; will they be appeased? See https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/01/world/asia/china-covid-protests-restrictions.html

By Adewale Maye * May 2019

Center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) narrowly defeated Chancellor Angela Markel's center-right Christian Democratic Party, officially marking the end of Merkel's 16 years of leadership. The narrow outcome means the SPD must collaborate with other parties to form the new government, a process that could take weeks, if not months, leaving Europe's largest democracy in a state of uncertainty. This election signals an end to an era for Germany, a longtime leader in Europe with Merkel at the helm.

A referendum in Chile just rejected a draft of a new Constitution pushed by the new Chilean President Gabriel Boric and his extremely progressive coalition that would have replaced Augusto Pinochet's Constitution. The Constitution included the right to public health care, abortion, free speech, clean air and water, it would have given the federal government greater control over the Chilean economy, and would have officially recognized the sovereignty of Indigenous groups across the country, making it the third plurinational nation in South America. However, 61% of Chileans opposed the new Constitution, and a new assembly will have to be elected to redraft it. This rejection is interesting; does it highlight the overall mood in Latin American politics right now? Is this a rejection of liberal policies? What will the next few months have in store for Chile; bureaucratic breakdown, or unity around a new Constitution?

Really interesting article, Nick! Keep in mind that "liberal" in the international context means low government intervention and capitalism, so the correct way to phrase the question is "Is this a rejection of social democratic policies?" There was a wave of social democracy in Latin America in the 1990s and early 2000s, so I wonder if this is an effort to move that further, an effort which is contested. https://www.americasquarterly.org/article/chile-could-become-plurinational-what-does-that-mean/ As you know, there are many levels of inclusion and exclusion in different societies, and the indigenous rights movement in South America carries a dimension of racism held over from the colonial era, in addition to neocolonialism and extractive capitalism centered on banks and the owners of land.

Interview with Joseph Stiglitz, famous and well-respoected economist

This depicts the interesting tension between social democracy and liberalism. When right-wing regimes don't provide enough support in the face of global challenges, the people want more government support and that's Lula is surging in polls.

Amazing comeback for Lula as well!