australia

Subterms

    More stories

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Is Australian Democracy in Decline?

      by

      With a federal election just a few weeks away, it’s time to put Australia’s system and political flaws into context.The Australia Letter is a weekly newsletter from our Australia bureau. Sign up to get it by email.How healthy is democracy today?I’ve been thinking a lot about that question lately, after reporting on what’s needed to strengthen the liberal world order after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and as Australia’s campaign season has intensified.Worldwide, the diagnosis isn’t great.“Antidemocratic alliances.”“A rot within democracies.”“Dropping the pretense of competitive elections.”These are a few of the subheads in the latest Freedom House report about global governance. An even more data-driven study from more than 3,000 global scholars associated with the V-Dem Institute in Sweden recently reached similar conclusions, noting that liberal democracies like Australia are increasingly rare.Their numbers peaked in 2012 with 42 countries and are now down to the lowest levels in over 25 years, with 34 nations and just 13 percent of the world population.“Electoral autocracy” remains the most common form of government, with 44 percent of the world’s population. And it’s not hard to see why. Under electoral autocracy, there is enough systemic suppression to keep opponents disadvantaged, but elections exist. They’re just manipulated to serve those in power. I saw a version of this when I covered Cuba — the government there held elections that were far from free, and returned the Communist Party to power again and again.But more recently, democracies have slipped in that direction gradually rather than through revolution.“Since the end of the Cold War, most democratic breakdowns have been caused not by generals and soldiers but by elected governments themselves,” wrote Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in “How Democracies Die,” their 2018 book. “Like Chávez in Venezuela, elected leaders have subverted democratic institutions in Georgia, Hungary, Nicaragua, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and Ukraine. Democratic backsliding today begins at the ballot box.”Their book and these global reports make the same point: Democracy is fragile and should not be taken for granted. No country — as the United States has discovered in recent years — should consider itself immune to the slippery slope of democratic decline.Where does Australia fit into this dismal portrait?Australia is stronger than most. Freedom House gave the country a score of 95 out of 100. The experts at V-Dem ranked Oz 14th in its measure of liberal democracy, below New Zealand (coming in at No. 5) but far above the United States (at 29).A big part of that has to do with the way Australia runs elections. Compulsory voting ensures high turnout; the independent Australian Electoral Commission runs the election with technocratic efficiency according to national standards that are widely supported and respected by political parties and the public. Politicians do not decide district boundaries, or where to put polling booths, or how many polling sites to set up.“All of those ways that partisan politics can distort outcomes, it’s just not there,” said Judith Brett, an emeritus professor of politics at La Trobe University, who is also the author of a book on Australia’s electoral history called “From Secret Ballot to Democracy Sausage.”But there are still many causes for concern. Polls have been showing for years that a growing number of Australians distrust the government and feel disconnected from politics.Australia’s leaders and major political parties have also shown a disturbing tolerance for secrecy — especially when it comes to the money that finances their campaigns. As I wrote in February, Research from the Center for Public Integrity shows that over the past two decades, the source of nearly $1 billion in party income has been hidden.The combination of big money and a disaffected electorate is reshaping Australian democracy in other ways as well. Professor Brett pointed out that the government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison has a habit of spraying government funds all over districts it needs to win to stay in power, often for projects that defy logic but come pretty close to attempted vote buying — from dams to BMX courses to footpaths.The Australian media has taken to calling these “election sweeteners.” Critics call it soft corruption, and they fear that it could become the norm, making Australian election results more transactional, while encouraging leaders avoid the broader challenges society faces.“We have an electorate where party loyalty is less strong,” Professor Brett said. “It’s up for grabs and if the way those votes are grabbed is with money for a sporting facility, and serious policy issues are neglected, I think we’re in big trouble.”So what can be done? Solutions are out there, and according to democracy scholars, interactions that bring people together across political and social divides tend to produce stronger, more responsive governments.With that in mind, I’ll be helping to host an event at the New South Wales Parliament on May 11 in Sydney with the Athens Democracy Forum asking how we can reconnect people with their elected officials. Presented by The New York Times in collaboration with New Democracy, an independent research organization, we’ll be gathering everyday citizens, politicians and experts for a wide-ranging discussion that will help create a report with recommendations about how to better engage all of us in democracy, worldwide.If you’re interested in being a delegate, please fill out this form.You’ll hear from six speakers, including former Premier Geoff Gallop and Rod Simpson, the commissioner of Greater Sydney, in a participatory workshop format. We’ll be selecting about a dozen readers in Sydney (or those willing to travel to Sydney) to take part in the gathering.Now here are our stories of the week.Australia and New ZealandPrime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand in Tokyo last week.Pool photo by Yuichi YamazakiNew Zealand Deal May Put Japan Closer to ‘Five Eyes’ Intelligence Alliance The two countries announced a goal of “seamless” sharing of classified information as China moves to expand its influence in the Asia-Pacific region.Chris Bailey, Who Gave Australia Punk Rock, Dies at 65 His band, the Saints, introduced the country (and the world) to their raw sound just as the Sex Pistols were emerging in London and the Ramones in New York.Can Art Help Save the Insect World? A renowned photographer who hopes to persuade humans to love their insect brethren has teamed with scientists on a new exhibition at the American Museum of Natural History.Around the TimesA crew of quarantine workers in Shanghai. The city is in its fourth week of a Covid lockdown.The New York TimesChina’s Covid Lockdown Outrage Tests Limits of Triumphant Propaganda Public anger and grief over the bungled lockdown in Shanghai is creating a credibility crisis for the country’s leader, Xi Jinping, and his zero Covid policies.Fears Are Mounting That Ukraine War Will Spill Across Borders American and European officials say their concern is based in part on a growing conviction that the war will not end any time soon.At Madeleine Albright’s Service, a Reminder of the Fight for Freedom The former secretary of state, who died last month, was honored at Washington National Cathedral as America faces the kind of struggle between democracy and autocracy that she warned about.More Kids? After the Last Two Years? No Thanks. The travails of pandemic parenting have been well documented. But how has this time shaped decision-making (and baby-making) going forward?Enjoying the Australia Letter? Sign up here or forward to a friend.For more Australia coverage and discussion, start your day with your local Morning Briefing and join us in our Facebook group. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      In France, a Victory and a Warning

      by

      More from our inbox:Church Support of the ‘Big Lie’When Tragedy Strikes, Grandma and Grandpa Are ThereReturning to AustraliaRussian Disinformation, Then and NowHandwritten Archives, to Capture HistoryCampaign posters featuring Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen, in the French town of Roye, where two out of three voters backed Ms. Le Pen.James Hill for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “In France, Macron Defeats Le Pen for Presidency” (front page, April 25):That the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen came as close as she did to defeating Emmanuel Macron in France is further confirmation that extremists are successfully normalizing autocrat-friendly nationalist messaging.Ms. Le Pen, a longtime sympathizer of President Vladimir Putin of Russia, said in her concession speech, “The ideas we stand for are reaching new heights,” Le Monde reported.As chilling as that sounds, she’s correct, and the world should pay closer attention. But for now, those in the West who embrace free thinking, democracy and even just a scintilla of globalism can breathe a very brief sigh of relief.Cody LyonBrooklynTo the Editor:My dear French friends, you may have won a battle by re-electing Emmanuel Macron, but you are losing the war. So long as the reach of the bigoted right wing grows, France is losing.When in the midst of a gunfight, and with the other side getting stronger, dodging one bullet is no reason to celebrate.Peter MailleLa Grande, Ore.To the Editor:Has anyone noticed that Marine Le Pen, the loser, has actually accepted the results of the election and conceded? What a novel idea!And Vive la France!Irene Bernstein-PechmèzeQueensTo the Editor:I recall an earlier election when another Le Pen made it to the second round. In 2002, Marine’s father, Jean-Marie, was crushed 82 percent to 18 percent by the conservative Jacques Chirac. Leftist voters did their republican duty, voting against those who would put an end to democracy itself.The French do not like Emmanuel Macron. But they remember fascism. Perhaps if Americans had such memories, they would better defend the democracy that they are losing, bit by bit, every day.Bob NelsonYuma, Ariz.Church Support of the ‘Big Lie’ Dustin Chambers for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “The Stolen-Election Falsehood Goes to Church” (front page, April 25):You report that some evangelical pastors are hosting events dedicated to Donald Trump’s false claim that the 2020 election was stolen and promoting the cause to their congregations.To the extent that such a charge is true, do these churches still retain any semblance of a religious exemption from federal and state taxes, which prohibits political campaign activity? Just wondering.Michael PeskoeMiami BeachTo the Editor:How do church leaders who preach from the new King James Version of the Bible — “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free,” John 8:32 — perpetuate a lie?Talk about cognitive dissonance.Harriet VinesChapel Hill, N.C.To the Editor:Of all the scary articles in The Times about Ukraine, Russia, wildfires, climate change, Marine Le Pen, Ron DeSantis and more, I found the one about evangelical pastors by far the scariest.Ellen SchafferPalm Coast, Fla.When Tragedy Strikes, Grandma and Grandpa Are ThereMia Scala, 6, hugs her grandfather Angelo Conti, 74, while waiting for a Girl Scouts meeting to start.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesTo the Editor:“When Parents Are Lost to Covid, Grandparents Step In,” by Paula Span (news article, April 14), not only recognizes the role that grandparents are playing in the wake of Covid, it also acknowledges that “extended family has always been the first line of defense in the wake of such tragedies.”For my book on the history of American grandmothers, many of the 75 women I interviewed told about a 1950s grandmother who stepped up — took the grandchildren into her home or went to live in the grandchild’s home — when things fell apart because of parents’ death, divorce or illness.None of the grandmothers had anticipated this refilling of their empty nests, all of them struggled with the responsibility, and all of their granddaughters-turned-grandmothers now look back with awe at what their grandmothers did for them.One notable change from then to now: Grandfathers in the 1950s were not active in their care the way older men are today, another example of how feminism has improved family life.Engagement with grandchildren is not just a delightful extra in family life, it is also a serious form of insurance. Should a tragedy mean that grandchildren must live with grandparents, that painful transition is eased if the elders and the kids have experience with one another aside from holidays and have built trust over time.No grandparent wants the custodial job, but every grandparent should consider time with grandchildren as an investment in their security.Victoria Bissell BrownHavertown, Pa.The writer, a retired professor of American history at Grinnell College, is working on a book titled “The Nana Project.”Returning to AustraliaFamilies reuniting at the Sydney International Airport.To the Editor:Re “A Post-Lockout Reunion of Yearning and Dread,” by Isabella Kwai (Sydney Dispatch, April 10):The last time I had been home to Australia to see my entire family was in May 2019. At one point, over Zoom, my sister told me that it was as if I had flown to the moon and never returned.The plane home in January was completely full of anxious expats and earnest American grandparents eager to see newly minted Aussie grandbabies. All the arrival hugs were tighter and longer than they had ever been. The smiles were wider and the welcomes longer — even from the custom officials! And maybe the accents were even broader!And … yes … if I could have bottled the dawn laughter from the troop of cheeky kookaburras camped outside my Brisbane window just days before I returned to the U.S., I would have.Patricia RyanWest Lafayette, Ind.Russian Disinformation, Then and NowTo the Editor:The state-sponsored disinformation spread to the Russian people is an old game. In the 1930s my father traveled to Russia. As was required, he had an Intourist guide with him at all times. As they became more friendly, she started to ask him about life in the U.S.“You live in New York,” she said. “Tell me about the skyscrapers that fall down.” He could not convince her that such things were not happening. She told him that all Russians knew about the frequently falling skyscrapers and was disappointed that he couldn’t be more candid with her about it.The acceptance of such nonsense appears to be embedded by a long history, though the current pernicious version is surprising in an era of greater access to outside information.Ty DillardSanta Fe, N.M.Handwritten Archives, to Capture HistoryTo the Editor:Re “Preserving a Couple’s ’60s Insights,” by Douglas Brinkley (Arts pages, April 19):Doris Kearns Goodwin sums up the special role of archives in the last lines of this excellent and informative article:“Oh, how I love old handwritten letters and diaries. I feel as if I’m looking over the shoulder of the writer. History comes alive!”How sad that in today’s world of computers and “no paper,” the progression from draft to final speech or report will no longer exist in many cases. The “delete” key has replaced crossing out, rewriting by hand and literally cutting and pasting.Some of us fear that using only the computer means that there will be no file of marked-up notes or previous drafts for historians to see and then give us that looking-over-the-shoulder feeling. That will keep history from coming alive.Sally DorstNew YorkThe writer is a retired magazine editor. More

    • 75 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Quiz Time on the Campaign Trail

      by

      Several “gotcha” questions for candidates, including one that Anthony Albanese got wrong, raise deeper questions about the quality of the nation’s political discourse.The Australia Letter is a weekly newsletter from our Australia bureau. Sign up to get it by email. During the first week of the federal election campaign, politicians have been asked about: the price of bread, milk and petrol; the JobSeeker rate; the wage price index; the cash rate; the unemployment rate, and more.We still have five weeks to go, and I’m already exhausted.When the opposition leader, Anthony Albanese failed to correctly name the cash rate and unemployment rate on the first day of the campaign, it prompted widespread media coverage, and Prime Minister Scott Morrison seized on the opportunity to label his opponent as weak on the economy. Other politicians received pop quizzes on various other prices and statistics over the next two days, before it all screeched to a halt on Wednesday, when the Greens leader, Adam Bandt, excoriated the news media after being asked for the wage price index.“Google it,” he responded, adding: “Politics should be about reaching for the stars and offering a better society. And instead, there’s these questions that are asked about — can you tell us this particular stat or can you tell us that particular stat.”In an election campaign that so far seems lacking in big-picture vision, the episode has fueled debate about the value of so-called gotcha questions. Should any aspiring prime minister be able to recite these figures to show they have a good understanding of the country they want to lead, or do such questions just get in the way of better, higher-level political debate?Speaking about Albanese’s blunder on Monday, Andrea Carson, a political scientist at La Trobe University and the creator of the Below the Line election podcast, put it in a different category than a gotcha question devised to catch a politician out. Instead, it spoke to a lack of preparedness on the part of Labor to anticipate attacks from an opposition eager to paint it as weak on the economy, she said.“It wasn’t so much about the gotcha moment, it was the lack of pre-emption,” she said. “In one moment Albanese undid any good work they could have done in that space by feeding into the narrative that Labor can’t be trusted on the economy.”Elections have been lost in the past because of such own-goal blunders before, she added. In 1993, when Liberal opposition leader John Hewson wasn’t able to explain whether his proposed goods and services tax policy would increase or decrease the price of a birthday cake, it “made it look like he didn’t understand the policy he was campaigning on — and that was his election to lose.”More recently, the Labor opposition leader Mark Latham’s infamous handshake in 2004 turned voters off with its aggression, she added.Those were both “a seminal moment in the campaign that sort of sums up how that election campaign went,” said Carson, the political scientist. It’s yet to be seen whether Albanese’s moment will have the same impact.“Every election, there’s at least one gotcha fail,” said Paul Williams, an associate professor and political expert at Griffith University. Though they usually have quite a short life, he added, Bill Shorten’s gaffe during the 2019 election campaign, when he mistakenly ruled out introducing new taxes on superannuation, in contradiction to his party’s policy, “did tend to frame his campaign. It did injure his campaign quite significantly.”While it was understandable that swing voters would be critical of Albanese’s blunder, he said, they should also know that “this doesn’t define the party or his potential to be a prime minister, because prime ministers are chairs of cabinets and are responsible for policy. Prime ministers have become big-picture guardians.”And as much as the episode shows that Labor should have been better prepared, he said, there’s also something to be said for the idea that we should aspire to a better quality of political debate.We all contribute to it, he says: the journalists who ask the gotcha questions, because they’re short on time or know that’s what will attract clicks and views; the politicians and their spin doctors who protect “themselves so carefully with garrisons of PR that journalists have to ask those sorts of questions to break through”; and voters who respond to gotcha questions and horse-race framing and see the election as a personality contest rather than a contest between two parties’ policies.“We’re all to blame,” Williams said. “We all need to lift the political debate.”Now for this week’s stories.Australia and New ZealandHannah Gadsby in 2018.Molly Matalon for The New York TimesIn “10 Steps to Nanette,” Hannah Gadsby Moves From Stage to Page. The Australian comedian brings distinctive flair to the structure and tone of her memoir.New Zealand Welcomes Vaccinated Tourists From Australia and Relaxes More Policies. The latest steps toward reopening are being taken in a country that has maintained some of the strictest coronavirus precautions in the world.No Reusable Cup? In Australia, It’s at Your Own Risk. On a visit to Melbourne, a Times reporter got a lesson in cafe etiquette, and the challenges facing the sustainability movement.These Photographers Chase New Zealand’s Glowing Waves. Capturing bioluminescence, a phenomenon in which glowing algae give crashing waves an electric-blue glow, requires technical skill and a bit of luck.An Australia Homecoming, Mixed with Yearning and Trepidation. When “Fortress Australia” sealed its borders, thousands of citizens were stuck abroad. When allowed to return home, a reporter wondered how she would find the country — and how it would find her.Around The TimesA new simulation gives a detailed look at a shockwave that circled the planet for days.‘It’s Super Spectacular.’ See How the Tonga Volcano Unleashed a Once-in-a-Century Shockwave. A new simulation gives a detailed look at a shockwave that circled the planet for days.Elon Musk, After Toying With Twitter, Now Wants It All. The billionaire executive recently became one of the company’s largest shareholders. Now he says he wants to buy the whole thing and change how it handles speech.Even the Cactus May Not Be Safe From Climate Change. More than half of species could face greater extinction risk by midcentury, a new study found, as rising heat and dryness test the prickly plants’ limits.Tensions Over the Ukraine War Deepen the Chill Near the North Pole. The war and the comments of a Russian diplomat have strained relations on an archipelago in Norway where Russians, Ukrainians and Norwegians have lived peacefully for decades.Enjoying the Australia Letter? Sign up here or forward to a friend.For more Australia coverage and discussion, start your day with your local Morning Briefing and join us in our Facebook group. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Australia Asks: How Far Is Too Far in Making China a Campaign Weapon?

      by

      Australia’s conservative government has claimed, without evidence, that the political opposition would cozy up to Beijing. To many, it has crossed a red line.MELBOURNE, Australia — A group of middle-aged Chinese Australians logged onto Zoom to step, kick and punch through their regular exercise class one day late last month. Then they lingered online to despair at the government’s attempt to turn China into a campaign weapon.After years of deteriorating relations between the two countries, the seven men and women in Melbourne were resigned to the fact that China would become a political wedge in the federal election due by May. But when Prime Minister Scott Morrison questioned the allegiance of a leader of the opposition Labor Party by accusing him of being a “Manchurian candidate,” that felt like a step too far.“I was shocked and surprised that he would go so low,” said Anne Pang, 63, the class’s instructor, who runs the Barry Pang Kung Fu School with her husband and is a leader in the Chinese Australian community. “It was totally uncalled-for and totally un-Australian.”The concern across Melbourne and the rest of Australia’s large Chinese diaspora reflects the intense emotions and risks associated with the Morrison government’s attempt to exploit rising fears of China.For months, Australia’s governing conservative coalition has been trying to deflect from its domestic vulnerabilities by laying out a case for re-election that suggests its opponents will cozy up to a powerful and dangerous Chinese government.Prime Minister Scott Morrison, left, and the leader of the opposition Labor Party, Anthony Albanese.Sam Mooy/Getty ImagesRecent evidence says otherwise: Labor has been a partner in toughening foreign interference laws and joined the coalition in every recent standoff with China, over tariffs, detentions and human rights. The Labor leader, Anthony Albanese, has said his party would deal with Beijing “in a mature way” but would not significantly alter the government’s approach.That has not stopped the coalition from issuing louder and more ominous claims about foreign threats and supposed domestic collusion as it has faced criticism over its handling of the Omicron outbreak and sexual harassment cases in Parliament.It’s led to whisper campaigns against Labor candidates of Chinese descent in Sydney, along with intense disappointment among those who generally support the government’s desire to stand up to Beijing, but want Australia to dig deeper into the policy challenges that Xi Jinping’s China represents.“It’s unhealthy and unhelpful,” said Wai Ling Yeung, a former head of Chinese studies at Curtin University in Perth who contributed to a new report about Chinese influence. “The kind of reflection we need to have is about how much have we in Australia made our economy reliant on China? How did we not diversify, and what are the lessons we could learn now from this experience?”Mr. Morrison — often celebrated by American officials for his handling of Beijing — “has lost control of any prudent or rational dimension in his approach to China,” said James Curran, a history professor at the University of Sydney who is writing a book about Australia’s China debate.“What’s going on here is a mark of sheer desperation,” he added. “He’s on the political back foot, and he’s looking for anything that will work.”Mr. Morrison’s rush down what Mr. Curran called “the new Cold Warrior’s path” has mostly involved following the hawks within his own center-right and often divided Liberal Party. Peter Dutton, Australia’s defense minister and a rival of Mr. Morrison’s, has led the charge, warning that Chinese missiles could reach Australia, then declaring in Parliament in February that Chinese officials see Mr. Albanese, the Labor Party leader, “as their pick.”Mongolian construction workers last week at Wentworth Point in Sydney, an area with a significant Asian population.Matthew Abbott for The New York TimesMr. Morrison, after previously resisting such language, seemed eager to outdo Mr. Dutton, tossing out the “Manchurian candidate” line, which he later retracted, only to repeat his claim (without evidence) that the Chinese government wants Labor to win.In an isolated country with a history of xenophobia, the political gambit is built on a mix of tried-and-true scare tactics and cherry-picked facts.The Australian authorities, in public statements and leaks, reported last month that China was behind a recent plot to influence the election. But the officials also said that the plot had been foiled before any politicians or parties knew about it, and that foreign interference efforts had targeted both parties in the past.Mr. Morrison and his coalition are nonetheless seeking to make voters skeptical of Mr. Albanese, who has little international experience, and focus on their own efforts to counter China — including a partnership with Britain and the United States for nuclear submarines.The Morrison-Dutton pitch arrives at a moment of deep unease, with Russia invading Ukraine after announcing a closer partnership with Beijing. (This week, the prime minister accused China of abetting the bloodshed through its “chilling silence.”) And it builds on polls showing that Australians’ distrust of China has increasingly blurred the line between the Chinese government and anyone with links to the country.Australians in recent years have — often unfairly — blamed Chinese investors for rising property prices. And after Covid first spread from China, racist abuse against Asian Australians followed.In Melbourne, the men and women from the kung fu group told of receiving cold stares from strangers. Others who hadn’t personally had negative experiences pointed to stories from friends and in the media. They worried that the government’s heated language could embolden those who are not interested in distinguishing between the Chinese Communist Party and anyone who looks Chinese.Sally Sitou, second from right, a Labor candidate, meeting with local councillors and residents in Wentworth Point.Matthew Abbott for The New York TimesIn Sydney, too, Chinese Australians said they saw perceptions change, hurting their sense of belonging.Sally Sitou, 39, a Labor candidate who is running for the federal Parliament, said that when Mr. Dutton and Mr. Morrison linked her party to Chinese Communists, her greatest fears about running for office had come to life.She was heartbroken again when conservative media outlets started attacking Mr. Albanese with a video of him at an event in 2018 speaking a few words of Mandarin, a language she wishes she spoke better and wants her young son to respect and learn.“It made me realize the depths to which they’re willing to go,” she said, “and how nasty this campaign is likely to get.”Craig Chung, a former Sydney city councilor and Liberal Party member whose family moved to Australia from China in 1882, said it had been “a difficult couple of years” for Chinese Australians. What people often forget, he added, is that “there’s a difference between sticking it to the Chinese people and sticking it to the Chinese government.”Mr. Dutton and Mr. Morrison have at times tried to make that distinction clear. About 5 percent of Australia’s population — 1.2 million people — claim Chinese heritage, and it’s a diverse group. It includes those who fled China after Tiananmen Square, others from Hong Kong, Taiwan or Vietnam, along with recent arrivals who came to Australia for college.But as Australia has challenged China and it has responded with punishing tariffs on Australian products including coal and wine, that complexity has been ironed flat.Jason Yat-sen Li, 50, a Labor candidate for the New South Wales state legislature, said his campaign saw the impact firsthand in his by-election victory last month. Volunteers for his Liberal Party opponent were overheard telling voters to question his loyalty to Australia even though he’d been born and educated in Sydney.“It wasn’t overt. It was done quietly,” Mr. Li said. “They were picking who they thought would be receptive to that message, and they would whisper things like ‘If you vote for Jason, you might be voting for the Chinese government.’”Chinese Australians say they have seen perceptions change in Sydney, hurting their sense of belonging.Matthew Abbott for The New York TimesCriticism of the government’s tone extends beyond the political opposition.Dennis Richardson, a retired intelligence official who led several federal departments, said in an interview that by falsely suggesting that Labor favored appeasement, the government had crossed a “red line.”“China would like to see division, and it’s important that we not have that division,” he said.Whether the effort will work at the polls, no one yet knows.In the Melbourne kung fu group, some thought the situation might improve under a new government, but others worried that the ugly language could be dredged up again if either side needed help in the polls.Ms. Pang recalled the hostility she experienced when her family migrated to Australia from Taiwan in 1970, an era when policies that had restricted nonwhite immigration for decades were ending. Australia has become much more multicultural since then, but recently, she said, it has started to feel as if it is slipping backward.“I thought the times of the 1970s was gone in terms of racial discrimination,” she said. “But now I can see it quite vividly.”Yan Zhuang reported from Melbourne, and Damien Cave from Sydney. Chris Buckley contributed reporting from Sydney. More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Dark Money’ Suddenly Dominates Australia’s Election

      by

      Chinese financing, unreported donations, payouts from coal barons: The new political season is shining an unaccustomed light on a culture of opacity.SYDNEY, Australia — When Dr. Ken Coghill served in the Victoria state legislature in the early 1980s, he joined a movement to reform Australia’s campaign finance system, which allowed donations to slosh through politics, with donors mostly able to hide their identities and contributions.Dr. Coghill, a Labor leader at the time, said he was outraged because the so-called dark money undermined the principle of all voters being equal, giving unidentified donors and their chosen candidates or parties “a very considerable advantage.”Nearly 40 years later, Dr. Coghill is still outraged, because little has changed. But now, that culture of cashed-up secrecy is suddenly defining the start of the federal election campaign that will determine whether the current conservative prime minister remains in power.With an election due by the end of May, Australians are not being treated to policy debates but rather accusations of shadowy Chinese financing, failures to report large donations, and payouts to climate-change warriors from coal barons.“The flow of money is increasing, but also the political culture is becoming eroded,” said Han Aulby, executive director of the Center for Public Integrity. “There’s a sense that if you can get away with things, you do it.”Compared with the United States, Australia’s campaign season is shorter and less costly, as is the case for many countries with parliamentary democracies. But even among its peers, such as Canada and New Zealand, Australia is a laggard on campaign finance regulation. Research from the Center for Public Integrity shows that over the past two decades, the source of nearly $1 billion in party income has been hidden.Some scholars argue that Australia’s opacity reflects a distinct set of cultural idiosyncrasies: a belief that transparency is not an obvious social good and a sense that those in power should decide what the public needs to know.A view of the Sydney waterfront. A majority of Australians believe corruption in politics is a common occurrence.Isabella Moore for The New York Times“The prevailing view in Australia is still that the government owns the information — it is not held on behalf of the citizens — and if people want it, it should not be automatically available,” said Johan Lidberg, a media professor at Monash University. “That sits at the very core here. We haven’t shifted away from that yet.”The money fight this time follows a period of increased public concern about corruption.In a country far wealthier than it used to be, where infrastructure money has been known to flow toward political friends, and where government secrecy keeps expanding, polls show overwhelming support for an anti-corruption body at the federal level. A majority of Australians now believe corruption is a common occurrence.The center-right Liberal Party of Prime Minister Scott Morrison had promised to do something about that after winning the last election, in 2019, but never followed through. Now, with support for his government’s pandemic management in decline, he has begun using dark money as a theme on which to attack his political opponents.The effort started with accusations of money and support from China.This month, Mike Burgess, head of the Australian Security Intelligence Organization, the country’s main domestic intelligence agency, warned in his annual threat assessment that the authorities had foiled a foreign interference plot involving a wealthy individual who “maintained direct and deep connections with a foreign government and its intelligence agencies.”Mr. Morrison at a campaign rally in Sydney during the last election in 2019. His campaign pledge to create a federal agency to crack down on corruption has so far gone unfulfilled.Mick Tsikas/EPA, via ShutterstockThe “puppeteer,” he said, had hired someone in Australia and set the person up with hundreds of thousands of dollars procured from an offshore bank account.Speculation immediately turned to Beijing. The next day, in Parliament, Australia’s defense minister, Peter Dutton, said the Chinese Communist Party had chosen to support Anthony Albanese, the Labor party leader, “as their pick.” Mr. Morrison followed up by calling Labor Party leaders “Manchurian candidates.”Critics called the remarks scaremongering. The Labor Party has said it did nothing wrong, and Mr. Burgess has pushed back against the partisan attacks.“Attempts at political interference are not confined to one side of politics,” he said last week.Nor are accusations about hidden money.Zali Steggall, a political independent who entered Parliament in 2019 after defeating Tony Abbott, a former prime minister, with a campaign focused on fighting climate change, has run into her own problems. An Australian Electoral Commission review found that she did not correctly report a $100,000 donation in 2019 from the family trust of a former coal company executive.The commission’s review found that the gift — the largest single donation she received — was not reported because after the check had been received, the money was split into eight separate contributions that were under the $13,800 disclosure threshold.Ms. Steggall called it “a rookie mistake.” She argued that previous investments in coal should not prevent someone from donating to candidates supporting a greener future, and insisted that she did not know the donation had been misreported. Corrected last year, it has come to light now as several independent candidates are threatening to unseat Liberal incumbents in part with money from centralized issue-oriented organizations.Zali Steggall, a political independent who is a member of Parliament, failed to correctly report a $100,000 donation in 2019 from the family trust of a former coal company executive.Lukas Coch/EPA, via ShutterstockThe Steggall campaign’s financial controller is now a director of one such group, Climate 200.“What this highlights is there are a lot of people who are happy to throw stones, but they’re often in glass houses,” Mr. Morrison said.What it actually shows, according to advocates for a more transparent approach, is how the current system has been encouraging a spiral of misbehavior.Disclosures of donations for federal elections are still released just once a year, in unsearchable scans of documents riddled with errors and omissions. Supporters of reform have called for real-time reporting and lower thresholds for reporting donations.“This is an issue that has bubbled along since the early 1970s,” said Dr. Coghill, who is a professor of government at Swinburne University of Technology, as well as a veterinarian.“In a way, that’s a reflection of Australia’s relative isolation,” he added. “We don’t have frequent contact with people in other countries that do have more rigorous regimes in place.”But Ms. Aulby, who founded the Center for Public Integrity in 2016, said that many Australians were starting to question what happens in the shadows where favors and financing intertwine.She said one of the most blatant tactics to hide money involved “associated entities” — essentially shell companies that distribute donations.Both major parties rely on them. Labor, for example, received 33 percent of its income from 1998 to 2021 from associated entities, for a total of more than $120 million.Campaign posters outside a polling station in Melbourne in 2019. Both major parties rely on shell companies to hide donation money.Asanka Brendon Ratnayake for The New York TimesThe Liberals brought in even more from their associated entities — about $140 million in the same period, according to the center, amounting to 42 percent of all the party’s reported income.“They do a lot of business, but I don’t know who their directors are or if they and their money are from the resource or banking industry,” Ms. Aulby said.The consequences of that approach, however, are becoming more visible. Last month, Transparency International recorded a drop for Australia in its annual corruption index, giving the country its lowest score since the organization adopted its current measurements in 2012.Polls in Australia also show growing alarm. That has become especially true after the current government assigned public funds to sports infrastructure projects in districts that it needed to win in the last election, even when no one applied for the grant money.In those cases, the Morrison government stonewalled and refused to release its final internal report on what happened with more than $70 million in grants. The minister in charge of them was demoted only temporarily.“Scandal after scandal is happening without any consequence,” Ms. Aulby said.But once the accusations begin, the cycle can be hard to stop. Last week, Mr. Morrison was busy attacking opponents and their supposed financiers; this week his own coalition partner was being dragged through the media for failing to disclose a payment of 1 million Australian dollars ($721,000) from an influential property owner in the capital, Canberra.“There needs to be some consequences — electoral consequences, because there aren’t other consequences happening,” Ms. Aulby said. “I hope that voters have that in mind in the upcoming election.” More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Your Monday Briefing: Shelling in Ukraine intensifies

      by

      Plus the Olympics end and Queen Elizabeth II tests positive.Mortar attacks continued through the weekend in eastern Ukraine.Tyler Hicks/The New York TimesRussia’s imminent invasion?U.S. intelligence learned last week that the Kremlin had ordered an invasion of Ukraine to proceed, prompting a dire warning by President Biden that President Vladimir Putin had made the decision to attack.The new intelligence reveals that 40 to 50 percent of the Russian forces surrounding Ukraine have moved out of staging and into combat formation.Russian artillery fire escalated sharply in eastern Ukraine this weekend, deepening fears of an imminent attack and potentially giving Russia a pretext to invade. Ukrainians reluctantly left their homes, some evacuating to Russia. After repeated assurances that military drills would end this weekend, Belarus said that it and Russia would continue to “test” their military capabilities and that Russian troops would stay longer than planned. NATO has long warned that the deployment could be used as cover to build an invasion force.Resources: Here are live updates, an explainer about the conflict and a timeline.Genocide: The single word has become key to Moscow’s baseless accusations against the Ukrainian government — and a wider quest for a new imperial identity rooted in Russian ethnicity.Ukraine: The conflict has weakened Ukraine’s economy, but its people are doubling down. Paramilitary groups are preparing for an invasion.Diplomacy: President Volodymyr Zelensky left Ukraine to meet with leaders in Europe. Zelensky urged sanctions against Russia and criticized the Western response after the U.S. heightened its warnings of an imminent Russian attack. Geopolitics: Russia and China appear to be in lock step, and the U.S. is trying to build up global coalitions to counter the alliance. Experts say that Putin may be trying to revise the outcome of the last Cold War and that Russia’s troop buildup could be a sign that he has become more reckless.Flags at the closing ceremony in Beijing.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesThe Beijing Olympics closeFor all of China’s efforts to carry on the Winter Games with a festive spirit, Beijing 2022 unfolded as a joyless spectacle: constricted by the pandemic, fraught with geopolitical tensions and tainted once again by accusations of doping.Television viewership dropped significantly in the U.S., Canada, Britain and other countries, underscoring concerns facing the Olympic movement. But the sports shone through.Medals: Norway repeated its extraordinary success in the Winter Olympics, with a record 16 golds and 37 medals overall.China: The Chinese team had its best medal haul in a Winter Olympics: nine golds and 15 overall. Inside the country, online propagandists promoted a vision of the Games free of rancor or controversy.Athletes: Eileen Gu, an 18-year-old skier from San Francisco who competed for China, became the event’s breakout star. Some Chinese Americans see themselves in the duality she has embraced.Pandemic: China’s “closed loop” approach worked — and birthed new infrastructure. Only a few athletes had to miss their competitions, and there were days when not a single test came back positive.Business: Olympic sponsors are struggling to straddle a widening political gulf between the U.S. and China: What is good for business in one country is increasingly a liability in the other.If Queen Elizabeth II is too ill to fulfill her duties, her heirs — Prince Charles and Prince William — would step in to lead.Steve Parsons/Agence France-Presse, via Pool/Afp Via Getty ImagesQueen Elizabeth tests positive for Covid The 95-year-old British monarch was “experiencing mild coldlike symptoms,” Buckingham Palace said.Although the circumstances of the queen’s infection remained clouded in questions, Prince Charles, her eldest son and heir, tested positive in a breakthrough infection two days after meeting with her earlier this month.After canceling public events in the fall, citing exhaustion, the queen has begun appearing in public again. Her frailty is deepening anxiety that her extremely popular reign may be coming to an end.Pandemic: Prime Minister Boris Johnson was expected to announce the lifting of the remaining restrictions in England on Monday, including the legal requirement for those who test positive to isolate.In other pandemic developments:Australia will reopen to travelers on Monday.Canadian police cleared demonstrators in Ottawa in an attempt to end the weekslong occupation over Covid restrictions.Hong Kong will postpone the election of its next leader, citing a surge in cases.South Korea, which is experiencing its largest Covid-19 wave yet, will set a 90-minute window for Covid-positive voters to cast their ballots in next month’s presidential election.THE LATEST NEWSAsiaCharanjit Singh Channi, the chief minister of the Indian state of Punjab, is both the incumbent and the underdog.Saumya Khandelwal for The New York TimesThe Indian National Congress, once the dominant force in Indian politics, faced a major test in Punjab’s election on Sunday.A young Afghan boy died on Friday after being trapped in a deep well for several days.World NewsCritics say the China Initiative chilled scientific research and contributed to a rising tide of anti-Asian sentiment.Stefani Reynolds/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe U.S. Justice Department will modify the China Initiative, a Trump-era effort to combat security threats. Critics said it unfairly targeted Asian professors.Recently leaked data from the 1940s until the 2010s showed how Credit Suisse held millions for strongmen, spies and human rights abusers.A severe storm pummeled parts of Britain and northern Europe with fierce winds, killing at least eight people. Hundreds of people were rescued on Friday from a burning ferry near Greece. At least one person has died, and 10 are still missing.Syrians are mixing wheat flour with corn to cope with shortages, after years of conflict and climate change destroyed the country’s breadbasket.What Else Is HappeningJean-Luc Brunel, an associate of Jeffrey Epstein charged with the rape of minors, was found dead in an apparent suicide in a Paris jail.The Biden administration is pausing new federal oil and gas drilling in a legal fight over how to weigh the cost of climate damage.Forensic linguists believe they have identified two men as the likely sources of the QAnon conspiracy theory movement.A Morning ReadScientists land on an ice floe to take measurements.Explorers have started combing Antarctica’s icy Weddell Sea for one of the most revered ships in the history of polar exploration: Ernest Shackleton’s Endurance. As underwater drones scan the seafloor for the wreck, scientists are also looking for signs that the climate crisis is changing the pack ice.ARTS AND IDEAS Ana MiminoshviliHow will we travel in 2022?With Omicron cases ebbing, travel agents and operators have reported a significant increase in bookings for spring and summer trips. Big bucket-list trips seem to be in high demand.Here are a few trends to watch:Air travel will probably open up. Expect fewer restrictions in 2022, more travelers and more flights. Maybe even cheaper fares, too.Entry requirements may still snarl plans: Here’s a guide of what to expect at international borders.Cities are back: Travelers are itching for museums and great restaurants, especially in European capitals.So are all-inclusive resorts, catering to pandemic-scarred travelers wary of leaving the grounds.There’s also a rise in sexual wellness retreats, education-focused jaunts for families looking to help children supplement missed learning and smaller, more niche cruises. Happy trails!PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookAndrew Purcell for The New York TimesThis gingery fried rice is a good way to use up leftover vegetables.What to Read“The Naked Don’t Fear the Water: An Underground Journey With Afghan Refugees” is an “expansive, immersive work that reads like the most gripping novel.”WellnessCan a cold water plunge really reduce anxiety and depression?Now Time to PlayHere’s today’s Mini Crossword.Here’s today’s Wordle. (If you’re worried about your stats streak, play in the browser you’ve been using.)And here is today’s Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. Tell us what you think about this newsletter in this short survey. Thank you! See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. Times reporters shared how they have covered the U.S. as it struggled to navigate Covid-19.The latest episode of “The Daily” is about the shortage of nurses in the U.S.You can reach Amelia and the team at briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in World Politics

      A Focus on Violence Creates Blind Spots in Assessing the Far-Right Threat

      by

      In the aftermath of terrorist attacks in Madrid (2004) and London (2005), many Western governments developed countering violent extremism (CVE) strategies, with the UK’s PREVENT scheme, launched in 2007, being considered the world’s first of this kind. What these CVE programs (more recently “prevention” was added turning the initialism into P/CVE) had in common is their focus on jihadist-inspired extremism and their claimed focus on preventing violence rather than policing “extreme” religious or political beliefs.

      The Complex Role of Racism Within the Radical Right

      READ MORE

      CVE measures have been criticized for many reasons, but the declared emphasis on preventing political violence has been crucial and justified: The only significant threat that “Islamist” extremism can pose to Western societies has been violence. However, this article is not about jihadist-inspired violent extremism. Instead, as national policymakers subsequently sought to apply their CVE strategies to the rising threat of right-wing extremism, multifaceted threats of far-right movements and challenges have emerged.  

      No Thought Police

      When in the mid-2010s the far-right threat could no longer be ignored, Western governments expanded their CVE programs to respond to the new threat environment. This response was guided by the conviction of convergences between different forms of extremism and governments’ intentions to avoid accusations of double standards.

      However, applying such an ideologically neutral lens has hampered a holistic threat assessment and the development of effective prevention and intervention measures. In particular, the adoption of preexisting CVE terminologies, principles and programs to counter the far right has created blind spots by focusing mainly on violent extremism.

      The unprecedented risk of far-right terrorism and political violence cannot be overstated, but how can we move toward a broader threat assessment beyond the focus on violence, which characterizes current P/CVE strategies in several countries, including Australia? Australia’s national CVE program, Living Safe Together, for example, was set up to prevent and counter violent extremism, defined as a person’s or group’s willingness “to use violence” or “advocate the use of violence by others to achieve a political, ideological or religious goal.” Similarly, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation recently emphasized that it “does not investigate people solely because of their political views.”

      Embed from Getty Images

      From a law enforcement perspective, focusing on violent (or otherwise criminal) acts appears appropriate in a democratic society where dissenting, even radical, political ideas should not be unduly curtailed or criminalized. However, the line between political views and advocating violence is often difficult to draw. This poses a challenge for combating (violent) extremism of any kind, not only but especially on the far-right of the political spectrum where violence against the “enemy” is often an integral element of the political ideologies.

      Research on far-right online spaces, from Facebook and Twitter to alt-tech sites such as Gab, consistently finds not only occasional calls for violence, but also high levels of What Pete Simi and Steven Windisch refer to as “violent talk” — messaging that cultivates, normalizes and reinforce hatred, dehumanization and aggressive hostility toward minority groups and the “political enemy.”

      While stressing the “important distinction between talking and doing,” Simi and Windisch argue that “Violent talk helps enculturate individuals through socialization processes by communicating values and norms. In turn, these values and norms are part of a process where in-group and out-group boundaries are established, potential targets for violence are identified and dehumanized, violent tactics are shared, and violent individuals and groups are designated as sacred…. In short, violent talk clearly plays an important role in terms of fomenting actual violence.”

      Identifying calls for violence linked to real-life plans to commit violent acts and violent talk that advocates violence is both challenging and crucial. However, the focus on violence in countering the far right tends to overlook other threats that are specific to radical or extreme right-wing movements.                   

      Community Safety

      The 2019 terror attacks in Christchurch, New Zealand, by an Australian far-right extremist sent shock waves around the world, but it has had particularly severe and lasting effects on the sense of physical safety among Muslim communities, especially in New Zealand and Australia. For many, it has been a painful reminder that anti-Muslim hatred can lead to violence.

      When asked about far-right activities in Australia, Adel Salman, president of the Islamic Council of Victoria, stated: “Muslims feel threatened. We don’t have to look back to the very tragic events in Christchurch to see what the results of that hatred can be.” A recent large-scale survey among Australian Muslims confirms these community fears, with 93% of respondents expressing concerns about right-wing terrorism.

      While Australia has seen incidents of far-right violence in the past, none of these acts have ever been classified as terrorism. However, the reemergence of radical and extreme right-wing groups and their actions in the 2020s, while mostly non-violent, has nevertheless given rise to significant safety concerns among communities targeted by the far right. This has had tangible effects on these communities.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Our research found, for example, that far-right mobilization against a mosque in a regional town of Victoria fueled fear of personal safety among the Muslim communities. Many felt so intimidated that they would no longer leave the house alone or after dark; some even questioned their future in Australia.

      Similar public safety concerns exist among many targeted communities. For example, after a series of anti-Semitic incidents, including verbal abuse and swastika symbols displayed near a synagogue, a representative of the Jewish community in Canberra stated in a 2017 New York Times interview that “For the first time in my life, I don’t feel safe in Australia. I have little children who don’t feel safe playing outside.”  

      Such community concerns around public safety are not caused by violence or advocating violence by far-right networks but by public expressions — such as online, graffiti or postering — of exclusivist views of white supremacy, racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism or homo- and transphobia. These community perspectives have hardly been taken into account in the current violence-centered threat assessment of right-wing extremism and radicalism.

      Mainstreaming Hatred

      When representatives of communities targeted by far-right mobilization speak about these threats, they often do not clearly differentiate between manifestations of hatred such as racism, anti-Semitism or homophobia and deliberate political actions of far-right groups or individuals. For their lived experience, it seems to make little difference as to whether the abuse or threat is perpetrated by someone who is affiliated with a far-right network or not.  

      When I interviewed an LGBTIQ+ community representative for a study on far-right local dynamics, for example, she noted experiences of transphobic abuse in the streets and that many in her community would avoid certain public places for fear of being subjected to such aggression. Although the locally active white nationalist group was described as holding particularly aggressive homophobic and transphobic views, the problem was portrayed as a societal one — it was not about the political ideology but the public climate of exclusion and intimidation.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      This points to a second underappreciated factor in the current far-right threat assessment: its potential to mainstream exclusivist, hateful and dehumanizing sentiments. A literature review on extremism and community resilience concluded that far-right movements “exert disproportioned levels of agenda-setting power as they manage to attract high media attention through their message of fear and anger.” Christopher Bail referred to this as the “fringe effect” in his study of anti-Muslim fringe organizations in the US that, he suggests, “not only permeated the mainstream but also forged vast social networks that consolidated their capacity to create cultural change.”

      The potential to spread exclusivist, hateful messages from the fringes into the societal mainstream needs to be considered when assessing far-right threats, even when there is no use or advocacy of violence. The risk of promoting exclusivist sentiments toward minority communities and fueling social division poses a significant threat to a pluralistic society, especially given that significant segments of the population already hold negative views on certain groups and may, under certain conditions, be receptive to some of these narratives pushed by the far right.

      Undermining Democratic Norms

      Strengthening commitment to democratic values has been a central piece in some national governments’ strategies to combat right-wing extremism. However, such an emphasis tends to be absent or underdeveloped in national contexts where countering extremism focuses on political violence. Here, the problem of far-right mobilization undermining democratic norms and processes is not a common feature in the public debate.

      If it is mentioned at all, it is presented as a process of advocating ideologies that contradict liberal democratic principles of equality. Researchers have argued, for example, that far-right discourses tend to “challenge the fundamentals of pluralist liberal democracy through exclusivist appeals to race, ethnicity, nation, and gender.”

      Embed from Getty Images

      But far-right actions may also be able to influence democratic decision-making processes. When far-right groups held a series of disruptive street protests against a local mosque application in an Australian suburb, our fieldwork suggests that these protests may have influenced the local council’s decision on the mosque planning permit. The council deferred the case to avoid making a “contentious” decision, as one study participant maintained, adding that a small group of far-right protesters sought to “intimidate” councilors to vote against the mosque.

      Another community representative interviewed for our study explained the council’s deferral with a reference to the previous far-right street protests: “You wouldn’t want to say yes [to the mosque application], because that’s when the trouble would start again.” The far-right protesters did not engage in a legitimate form of democratic deliberation about the local mosque; instead, their actions seemed to undermine the democratic process by creating a climate of intimidation.

      Beyond Political Violence

      The threats that far-right movements can pose to liberal democratic societies are complex and manifold, and they certainly include the risk of political violence and hate crimes. But the potential of the far right to cause serious harm to communities and the democratic order goes beyond the use or advocacy of violence.

      Strategies to prevent and combat right-wing extremism need to acknowledge this complexity. A focus on terrorist acts and violence makes sense in the context of combating jihadist-inspired violent extremism, which has never had the capacity to threaten the stability of democratic principles and institutions, to spread its ideologies into the societal mainstream or to create widespread concerns around safety so that people were too scared to leave their homes.

      Without downplaying the threats of any form of violent extremism, there is a need for more nuanced and holistic approaches to assess, prevent and counter right-wing extremism. This would require us to take into account the capacity of far-right mobilization to create fear in many parts of our communities, spread divisive and socially harmful ideologies, and undermine the legitimacy of democratic norms and institutions. There are no quick fixes, and this article is not the place to propose a comprehensive strategy.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      What is clear, though, is that the answer does not lie in the repression or criminalization of dissenting, radical political views. Instead, preventing and countering the far right should pay more attention to the concerns of targeted communities and take action to support and empower these communities. This is also related to the need for effective anti-racism and anti-homo/transphobia programs, which have been central components of government strategies to prevent the proliferation of right-wing extremism in several Western countries.

      Our efforts against far-right ideologies is also a struggle for democracy — a struggle US President Joe Biden recently called “the defining challenge of our time.” Given the prevalence of far-right assaults on democratic principles and institutions, strengthening citizens’ commitment to democracy and human rights should be considered a key element in a holistic strategy to counter the far right. This would require a much stronger role of civil society actors in this commitment for a democratic culture as well as a more place-based focus on supporting local pro-democracy community initiatives.

      None of these considerations are new. They have all been tried and tested in other countries, such as Germany, where the comprehensive federal program Live Democracy! forms a crucial element in the government’s commitment to combating right-wing extremism. Every national context is different, of course, but far-right threats go beyond political violence in all societies.   

      *[Fair Observer is a media partner of the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Behind the Scenes of the Events of Jan. 6

      by

      More from our inbox:‘I Won’t Mount a Coup.’ Now Is That Too Much to Ask?Missing Yazidis, Captives of ISIS: ‘The World Must Act’Clerical Celibacy in the Catholic ChurchTaxing the UltrarichAn appearance in 2019 on Mark Levin’s Fox News show brought John Eastman, right, to President Donald J. Trump’s attention.via Fox News ChannelTo the Editor:Re “He Drafted Plan to Keep Trump in White House” (front page, Oct. 3) and “Jan. 6 Was Worse Than It Looked” (editorial, Oct. 3):Regarding my advice to Vice President Mike Pence in the days before the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6: Although I take issue with some statements in the front-page news article, its most important point, one backed up by very thorough reporting, is that I did not recommend “that Mr. Pence could simply disregard the law and summarily reject electors of certain key battleground states,” as your editorial contends.Rather, as your own reporters noted, I told Mr. Pence that even if he did have such power, “it would be foolish for him to exercise it until state legislatures certified a new set of electors for Mr. Trump.”That honest bit of reporting contradicts not only your editorial but also myriad other news accounts to the same effect.John C. EastmanUpland, Calif.The writer is a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute.To the Editor:Reading the excellent but frightening editorial “Jan. 6 Was Worse Than It Looked,” I was not surprised that the former president wanted to stay in power despite losing a fair election. What was staggering was the number of people who wanted to help him.Jana GoldmanHonor, Mich.To the Editor:Your editorial hit on a serious issue that worries us all, including your many friends in Australia. An independent electoral commission manages, scrutinizes, counts the votes and announces the results of all state and federal elections in Australia.No one ever doubts its word, and challenges are resolved by it quickly and based on evidence that is made publicly available, and only very rarely end up in the courts. The commission also draws electoral boundaries, according to statutory formulas, so there’s no possibility of gerrymandering.We find the heavy politicization of your system puzzling.Nuncio D’AngeloSydney, AustraliaTo the Editor:In “He Drafted Plan to Keep Trump in White House,” John Eastman’s influence is attributed to giving President Trump “what he wanted to hear.”The former F.B.I. director William Webster gave me the most important advice on leadership when I was a White House fellow serving as one of his special assistants. As the only nonlawyer on his executive staff, I was unsure about my job description until he explained, “Your job is to make sure I hear things people think I don’t want to hear or that they don’t want me to hear.” Within a day, it was clear what that entailed.I have shared that advice, and it has proved valuable for countless leaders. Mr. Eastman demonstrates the risks of disregarding it.Merrie SpaethPlano, Texas‘I Won’t Mount a Coup.’ Now Is That Too Much to Ask?  Jason Andrew for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Is there a chance that in the 2024 election all the presidential candidates would sign a pledge that if they lose the election they will not try to overthrow the government?William Dodd BrownChicagoMissing Yazidis, Captives of ISIS: ‘The World Must Act’The Sharya camp near Duhok in August.Hawre Khalid for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Yazidis Know Some of Their Missing Are Alive, as Captives” (news article, Oct. 4):As a Yazidi, I read this piece with a heavy heart, and I ache to do more for these women, children and families. I have been to the camps in Duhok, in northern Iraq, and met with many families hoping for their loved ones to return, but they can barely afford daily necessities, let alone ransoms.I believe that what we need is a task force, comprising Iraqi authorities, U.N. agencies and civil society organizations, formed with the sole goal of searching for and rescuing Yazidi captives of the Islamic State.Opportunities for asylum must be expanded and support given for their recovery. Every necessary resource should be committed to ensuring that survivors can live in freedom and safety for the first time in years.Seven years is an unthinkable amount of time to be held in sexual slavery. We must act. The world must act to rescue women and children from captivity.Abid ShamdeenWashingtonThe writer is executive director of Nadia’s Initiative, which advocates for survivors of sexual violence.Clerical Celibacy in the Catholic Church Benoit Tessier/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “Report Describes Abuse of Minors Permeating Catholic Church in France” (news article, Oct. 6):Clerical celibacy in the Catholic Church wasn’t imposed until the 12th century. How many more of these stories do we have to read until the church acknowledges that it made a dire, if well-intentioned, mistake by instituting that policy?Kate RoseHoustonTaxing the Ultrarich  Erik CarterTo the Editor:Re “This Is How America’s Richest Families Stay That Way,” by Robin Kaiser-Schatzlein (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, Sept. 24):Mr. Kaiser-Schatzlein states that the ultrarich could pass on stock bought for $1 but worth $100 at death, and that the inheritors would pay tax only on gains above the $100. While that is accurate, it neglects to mention that instead of paying the federal capital gains rate of 20 percent on the $99 gain, the estate would pay the estate tax of 40 percent on the full $100 value (since we are discussing the ultrarich, the $11.7 million exclusion for the estate tax would be a rounding error).This omission gives the misleading impression that the inheritance would be untaxed, when in fact it would be taxed at a higher rate.Peter KnellPasadena, Calif.The writer is managing director of an investment management company. More