More stories

  • in

    Can France’s Far Right Win Over the ‘Beavers’? One Mayor Shows How

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCan France’s Far Right Win Over the ‘Beavers’? One Mayor Shows HowIn the southern city of Perpignan, voters who had long built a dam against the far right turned in the last election. Some wonder whether it’s a harbinger of things to come.Last year Perpignan became the largest city to come under the control of the National Rally, the far-right party led by Marine Le Pen.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesNorimitsu Onishi and March 13, 2021, 5:28 a.m. ETLire en françaisPERPIGNAN, France — Riding high in the polls ahead of the next presidential election, feeling they’ve won the battle over ideas, smelling blood in the Élysée Palace, leaders of France’s far right cocked their eyes across the land at perhaps the one thing standing between them and power: beavers.That is what some French call the voters who, time and again, have cast political differences aside and put in power anyone but far-right candidates — raising a dam against them as real beavers do against predators. Voters did precisely that in 2014 in Perpignan, a medieval city of pastel-color buildings on the Mediterranean near the border with Spain.But last year, the dam broke and Perpignan became the largest city under the control of the National Rally, the far-right party led by Marine Le Pen. Today the city of more than 120,000 is being closely watched as an incubator of far-right strategy and as a potential harbinger of what a presidential election rematch pitting Ms. Le Pen against President Emmanuel Macron could look like.A victory for Ms. Le Pen would be earth-shattering for France, and all of Europe. It has been an article of faith in France that a party whose leadership has long shown flashes of anti-Semitism, Nazi nostalgia and anti-immigrant bigotry would never make it through the country’s two-stage presidential electoral juggernaut.But steadily her party has advanced farther than many French have been prepared to countenance, and Ms. Le Pen’s debut in the final round of France’s last presidential election in 2017 came as a shock to the system.She may still be a relative long shot, given the party’s history in France, but for now perhaps not as long as she once was. Recent polls show her matching Mr. Macron in the first round of next year’s presidential contest and trailing by a few points in a second-round runoff. In a poll released Thursday, 48 percent of respondents said Ms. Le Pen would probably be France’s next president, up 7 percent compared with half a year ago.“They’ve been forming dams since 2002 now,” said Louis Aliot, the mayor of Perpignan and a longtime National Rally leader. “So to ask them again to form a dam with Macron — but what’s changed? Nothing at all.” Voter-built dams were no longer effective, unlike those made by the animal, he said, adding, “When beavers build dams, it works.”The mayor of Perpignan, Louis Aliot, succeeded in softening the party’s image in Perpignan.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesIn 2014, many voters on the left and right had successfully united in a “Republican front” against Mr. Aliot — the same way they raised a dam against Ms. Le Pen in the 2017 presidential election won by Mr. Macron.But in the intervening years, Mr. Aliot succeeded in softening the party’s image in Perpignan and won new converts, even as disillusioned beavers stayed home or left blank ballots on voting day in 2020. Mr. Aliot won handily — in a rematch against his opponent of 2014 who, like Mr. Macron, had tilted rightward and marketed himself as the best check against the far right.Nationally, Ms. Le Pen, who was Mr. Aliot’s common-law partner for a decade until 2019, has hewed to the same playbook in sanitizing her party’s image, even amid questions about the depth and sincerity of those efforts.She has softened the party’s longtime populist economic agenda — for instance, by dropping a proposal to exit the euro and by promoting green reindustrialization — while holding onto or even toughening the party’s core, hard-line positions on immigration, Islam and security.The effort by the party to wade into the mainstream has presented a special quandary for Mr. Macron. Sensing the political threat, and lacking a real challenge on his left, he has tried to fight the National Rally on its own turf — moving to the right to vie for voters who might be tempted to defect to it. Doing so, Mr. Macron hopes to keep the far right at bay.But the shift also helps destigmatize the far right, or at least many of its messages, argue National Rally leaders, some members of Mr. Macron’s own party and political analysts. Mr. Macron’s strategy may have the unintended consequence of helping the National Rally in its decades-long struggle to become a normal party, they say. “It legitimizes what we’ve been saying,” Mr. Aliot said. “These are the people who’ve been saying for 30 years: Be careful, they’re nasty, they’re fascists, because they target Muslims. All of a sudden, they’re talking like us.”Mr. Macron and his ministers, in recent months, have tried to appropriate the extreme right’s issues with new policies and dog whistles, talking tough on crime and pushing through security bills to try to limit filming of the police, which was dropped after protests, and crack down on what they call Islamist separatism. In a recent televised debate, the interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, even accused Ms. Le Pen of being “shaky” and “softer than we are” on Islamism.President Emmanuel Macron has tried to fight the National Rally on its own turf — moving to the right to vie for voters who might be tempted to defect to it.Credit…Pool photo by Thomas CoexMarine Le Pen has been sanitizing her party’s image, even amid questions about the depth and sincerity of those efforts.Credit…Alain Jocard/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThey have turned to identity politics, ordering an investigation into “Islamo-leftism” at French universities and other so-called American-inspired ideas that they say threaten to undermine French values.“The more we go on their ground, the stronger we make them,” Jean-Michel Mis, a national lawmaker from Mr. Macron’s party, said of the National Rally. “So their leaders are very pleased because, in the end, we’re legitimizing their campaign themes.”Nicolas Lebourg, a political scientist specializing on the National Rally, said that adopting the far right’s themes has often backfired. “What they’re currently doing is campaigning for Marine Le Pen,” he said.Even as Mr. Macron has portrayed himself as the best candidate to protect France from the far right, polls show voters may be growing weary of being asked to vote against a candidate, rather than for one.Among the former beavers of Perpignan were Jacques and Régine Talau, a retired couple who had always voted for the mainstream right, helping build the dam against the far right in Perpignan in 2014 and in the presidential election of 2017.Historically conservative and economically depressed, Perpignan was perhaps naturally receptive to Ms. Le Pen’s party, which had won smaller, struggling cities in the south and north in recent years. But winning over the Talaus of Perpignan was a tipping point.Their neighborhood, Mas Llaro, an area of stately homes on large plots amid vineyards on the city’s eastern fringe, is Perpignan’s wealthiest. In 2020, more than 60 percent of its residents voted for Mr. Aliot — 7 percentage points higher than his overall tally and 10 percentage points more than in 2014.Among the former “beavers” of Perpignan were Jacques Talau, left, and his wife, Régine, center, a retired couple who had always voted for the mainstream right.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMas Llaro had always voted for the mainstream right.But disillusioned and weary of the status quo, the Talaus, like many others, voted for the first time for the far right last year, drawn by Mr. Aliot’s emphasis on cleanliness and crime, saying their home had been broken into twice.Though satisfied with the mayor’s performance, Mr. Talau said he would still join the dam against the far right in next year’s presidential contest and hold his nose to vote for Mr. Macron. But Ms. Talau was now considering casting a ballot for Ms. Le Pen.“She’s put water in her wine,” Ms. Talau said, adding that Mr. Macron was not “tough enough.”Mr. Aliot’s opponent in 2014 and 2020, a center-right politician named Jean-Marc Pujol, had pressed further to the right in an unsuccessful move to fend off the far right. He increased the number of police officers, giving Perpignan the highest number per capita of any large city in France, according to government data.Even so, many of his core supporters appeared to trust the far right more on crime and still defected, while many left-leaning beavers complained that they had been ignored and refused to take part in dam-building again, said Agnès Langevine, who represented the Greens and the Socialists in the 2020 mayoral election.“And they told us, ‘In 2022, if it’s between Macron and Le Pen, I won’t do it again,’ ” she added.Mr. Lebourg, the political scientist, said that Mr. Aliot had also won over conservative, upper-income voters by adopting a mainstream economic message — the same strategy adopted by Ms. Le Pen.Since taking over the party a decade ago, she has worked hard at “dédiabolisation” — or “de-demonizing” — the party.A war memorial in Perpignan, a conservative and economically depressed city that has been receptive to the National Rally party’s message.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesIn 2015, Ms. Le Pen expelled her own father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who founded the party and had a long history of playing down the Holocaust.While she popularized dog whistles like “turning savage,” she consciously stayed clear of explosive language conjuring up a supposed “great replacement” of France’s white population by African and Muslim immigrants. In 2018, she rebranded the National Front as the more inclusive “Rally.”Still, the party wants to toughen migration policies for foreign students and reduce net immigration by twentyfold.It also wants to ban the public wearing of the Muslim veil and limit the “presence of ostentatious elements” outside religious buildings if they clash with the environment, in an apparent reference to minarets.In Perpignan, Mr. Aliot has focused on crime, spending $9.5 million to hire 30 new police officers, open new stations, and set up bicycle and nighttime patrols, responding to an increase in drug trafficking.Jeanne Mercier, 24, a left-leaning voter, said many around her had been “seduced” by the far-right mayor.Camille Rosa, left, a left-leaning voter, said she doesn’t know whether she would join again in building a dam against Ms. Le Pen in presidential elections next year.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York Times“We’re the test to show France that the National Front is making things work and that people are rallying and are happy,” she said, referring to the party by its old name. “In the end, it’s not the devil that we imagined.”Camille Rosa, 35, said she doesn’t know whether she would join again in building a dam against Ms. Le Pen next year. The attacks by the president’s ministers against “Islamo-leftism” and scholars on feminism, gender and race had fundamentally changed her view of the government of Mr. Macron.“I have the impression that their enemies are no longer the extreme right at all,” she said, “but it’s us, people on the left.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    À Perpignan, l’extrême-droite rallie ‘les castors’

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyÀ Perpignan, l’extrême-droite rallie ‘les castors’Dans cette ville méridionale, des électeurs qui avaient longtemps fait barrage à l’extrême-droite ont basculé aux dernières municipales. Un signe avant-coureur pour la prochaine présidentielle?Perpignan est devenue l’an dernier la plus grande ville de France à passer sous contrôle  du Rassemblement National, le parti d’extrême-droite dirigé par Marine Le Pen.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesNorimitsu Onishi and March 13, 2021, 5:28 a.m. ETRead in EnglishPERPIGNAN, France — Forts de bons sondages en amont de la prochaine élection présidentielle, estimant avoir gagné la bataille des idées et sentant le vent tourner à l’Élysée, les leaders de l’extrême-droite française n’ont peut-être plus qu’un obstacle entre eux et le pouvoir: les castors.C’est ainsi que certains en France surnomment ceux qui, d’un scrutin à l’autre, laissant de côté leurs différences politiques, choisissent d’élire n’importe qui plutôt que les candidats d’extrême-droite — érigeant un barrage contre ces derniers comme le font les vrais castors pour se protéger des prédateurs. C’est précisément ce qu’ont fait, aux municipales de 2014, les électeurs de Perpignan, cette ville médiévale méditerranéenne aux bâtisses couleur pastel située non loin de la frontière espagnole.Mais l’année dernière le barrage a cédé, et Perpignan est devenue la plus grande ville à passer sous contrôle du Rassemblement National d’extrême-droite que dirige Marine Le Pen. Aujourd’hui, cette ville de plus de 120 000 habitants est scrutée avec attention : elle est un incubateur de la stratégie de l’extrême-droite et un potentiel signe avant-coureur de ce à quoi pourrait ressembler le deuxième match présidentiel opposant Marine Le Pen à Emmanuel Macron.Une victoire de Mme Le Pen bouleverserait la France et l’Europe entière. Il a longtemps été considéré comme un principe acquis qu’un parti dont la direction a montré des signes d’antisémitisme, de nostalgie du nazisme et d’intolérance anti-immigrés n’arriverait jamais à remporter l’élection présidentielle.Mais petit à petit, son parti a progressé bien plus que beaucoup de Français n’étaient prêts à l’admettre. L’arrivée de Mme Le Pen au second tour de la dernière présidentielle française, en 2017, a été un électrochoc pour le système.Son combat est loin d’être gagné, vu l’historique de son parti en France, mais peut–être s’est-elle rapprochée de la ligne d’arrivée. Un sondage récent lui attribue un score égal à celui de M. Macron au premier tour de l’élection présidentielle de l’année prochaine, et une défaite par quelques points seulement au second. D’après un sondage publié jeudi dernier, 48% des Français estiment probable la victoire de Marine Le Pen à la présidentielle, soit 7% de plus qu’il y a six mois.“Ils ont fait barrage depuis 2002 maintenant”, dit Louis Aliot, maire de Perpignan et cacique de longue date du Rassemblement National. “Alors leur redemander de faire barrage avec Macron, mais qu’est-ce qui a changé? Rien du tout.” Les barrages des électeurs ne sont plus efficaces, contrairement à ceux de l’animal, estime-t-il. “Les castors, quand ils construisent des barrages, ça marche.”Le maire de Perpignan, Louis Aliot, a réussi à modérer l’image de son parti  à Perpignan.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesEn 2014, de nombreux électeurs de gauche comme de droite avaient formé avec succès un “front républicain” contre M. Aliot — de la même manière qu’ils avaient fait barrage à Mme Le Pen pour l’élection présidentielle de 2017 remportée par M. Macron.Mais depuis lors, M. Aliot a réussi à adoucir l’image du parti à Perpignan et à convertir de nouveaux électeurs, tandis que certains castors désabusés sont restés chez eux ou ont voté blanc le jour de l’élection en 2020. M. Aliot a gagné haut la main — une forme de revanche contre le même adversaire qu’en 2014 qui, comme M. Macron, avait viré à droite et s’était présenté comme le meilleur rempart contre l’extrême-droite.À l’échelle nationale, Mme Le Pen, qui fut pendant dix ans, jusqu’en 2019, la partenaire au civil de M. Aliot, adopte la même tactique d’assainissement de l’image de son parti, même si des questions demeurent quant à la réalité et la sincérité de ses efforts.Elle a modéré le programme économique longtemps populiste de son parti — en renonçant par exemple à la proposition d’abandonner l’euro et en promouvant la réindustrialisation verte — tout en perpétuant, voire en durcissant, les positions-clés et fermes du parti sur l’immigration, l’islam et la sécurité.Les efforts que déploie le parti pour se fondre dans les courants politiques traditionnels mettent M. Macron face à un dilemme. Sentant le danger politique à droite et sans réel challenger à sa gauche, il tente de combattre le Rassemblement National sur son propre terrain — en opérant un glissement vers la droite pour disputer à ce dernier les électeurs tentés de changer de camp. Ce faisant, M. Macron espère tenir l’extrême-droite à distance.Mais ce changement a aussi contribué à destigmatiser l’extrême-droite, tout du moins nombre de ses propositions, selon les leaders du Rassemblement National, des membres du propre parti de M. Macron, et des politologues. La stratégie de M. Macron pourrait avoir la conséquence imprévue d’aider le Rassemblement National dans son combat de plusieurs décennies pour devenir un parti normal, préviennent-ils.“Ça légitime ce qu’on dit”, dit M Aliot. “C’est des gens qui vous ont dit pendant 30 ans : attention, ceux-là ils sont méchants, ce sont des fachos, parce qu’ils s’en prennent aux musulmans. Tout d’un coup ils parlent comme nous.”Ces derniers mois, M. Macron et ses ministres ont tenté de s’approprier des thèmes chers à l’extrême-droite au moyen de politiques et d’expressions nouvelles. Ils ont adopté une posture ferme sur la criminalité, proposé des lois pour limiter la diffusion des images de policiers — abandonnées suite à des manifestations — et sévi sur ce qu’ils nomment le séparatisme islamiste. Lors d’un récent débat télévisé face à Marine Le Pen, le ministre de l’Intérieur Gérald Darmanin accusait celle-ci d’être “branlante” et “plus molle” sur l’islamisme que le gouvernement.Emmanuel Macron entreprend de combattre le Rassemblement National sur son propre terrain — glissant vers la droite pour disputer à ce dernier les électeurs tentés de faire défection.Credit…Pool photo by Thomas CoexMarine Le Pen tente d’assainissement l’image de son parti, même si des questions demeurent quant à la réalité et la sincérité de ses efforts.Credit…Alain Jocard/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIls ont adopté une stratégie identitaire, commandant une enquête sur “l’islamo-gauchisme” dans les universités françaises et d’autres idées supposées d’inspiration américaine qu’ils accusent de saper les valeurs françaises.“Plus on va sur leur terrain, plus on les renforce”, estime Jean-Michel Mis, un député de La République En Marche, au sujet du Rassemblement National. “Donc leurs dirigeants sont très contents parce que finalement on légitime leurs thèmes de campagne.”Pour Nicolas Lebourg, un politologue spécialiste du Rassemblement National, l’adoption des thèmes de l’extrême-droite est souvent contre-productive. “Ce qu’ils sont en train de faire, c’est faire la campagne de Marine Le Pen,” explique-t-il.Alors que M. Macron se présente comme le meilleur candidat pour protéger la France de l’extrême-droite, les sondages démontrent que les électeurs sont de plus en plus las d’être toujours appelés à voter contre, plutôt que pour, un candidat.Jacques et Régine Talau comptent parmi les anciens castors de Perpignan. Ce couple de retraités avait toujours voté pour la droite classique et avait contribué au barrage contre l’extrême-droite lors des municipales de 2014, puis des élections présidentielles de 2017.Historiquement à droite et en proie aux difficultés économiques, Perpignan était sans doute un terrain naturel pour le parti de Mme Le Pen qui, ces dernières années, avait remporté de petites villes sinistrées dans le sud et le nord du pays. Mais le ralliement du couple Talau a marqué un tournant.Leur quartier, le Mas Llaro, une succession de demeures cossues construites sur de larges parcelles au milieu des vignobles, à la périphérie est de la ville, est la plus riche de Perpignan. En 2020, plus de 60% de ses résidents ont voté pour M Aliot — 7 points de plus que sa moyenne dans la ville et 10 de plus qu’en 2014.Parmi les anciens castors de Perpignan, il y a Jacques Talau, à gauche, et sa femme Régine, des retraités qui votaient toujours pour la droite classique.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesLe Mas Llaro a toujours voté pour la droite traditionnelle.Mais, désabusés et lassés du statu quo, les Talaus, comme bien d’autres, ont voté pour la première fois pour l’extrême-droite l’année dernière, séduits par l’accent mis par M. Aliot sur la propreté et la criminalité. Leur maison a été cambriolée deux fois, disent-ils.Bien que satisfait du bilan du maire, M. Talau indique qu’il se ralliera quand même au barrage contre l’extrême-droite pour la prochaine présidentielle et votera Macron en se bouchant le nez. En revanche, Mme Talau envisage désormais de voter pour Marine Le Pen.“Elle a mis de l’eau dans son vin”, estime Mme Talau, ajoutant que M. Macron n’est “pas assez dur”.L’adversaire de M. Aliot en 2014 et 2020, Jean-Marc Pujol, candidate du centre-droit, avait viré davantage vers la droite pour tenter, sans succès, de contrer l’extrême-droite. Il avait gonflé les effectifs de la police, d’après les statistiques gouvernementales, faisant de Perpignan la grande ville de France avec le plus grand nombre de policiers par habitant. Malgré cela, nombre de ses partisans historiques semblent avoir davantage fait confiance à l’extrême droite sur le sujet de la criminalité, et fait défection. De nombreux de castors à gauche se sont plaints d’avoir été ignorés et ont refusé de participer une nouvelle fois à la construction de barrages, dit Agnès Langevine, la candidate des Verts et des Socialistes aux municipales de 2020.“Et ils nous disaient : en 2022, si c’est un Macron-Le Pen, je ne ferai pas plus,” ajoute-t-elle.M. Lebourg, le politologue, estime que M. Aliot a aussi gagné le vote des riches électeurs conservateurs comme les Talaus en adoptant un message économique classique — la même stratégie qu’adopte Mme Le Pen.. Depuis qu’elle a pris les rênes du parti il y a dix ans, Mme Le Pen travaille dur pour “dédiaboliser” le parti.Un monument aux morts à Perpignan, une ville historiquement à droite, en proie à des difficultés économiques, et sensible à la rhétorique du Ralliement National. Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesEn 2015, elle a expulsé son propre père, Jean-Marie Le Pen, qui avait fondé le parti et a longtemps minimisé l’Holocauste.Tout en popularisant des expressions comme “l’ensauvagement”, elle a consciemment évité tout langage explosif évoquant un supposé “grand remplacement” de la population française blanche par les immigrants africains et musulmans. En 2018, elle a rebaptisé le Front National du nom plus inclusif de “Rassemblement”.Le parti veut cependant durcir les politiques migratoires pour les étudiants étrangers et diviser le solde migratoire par vingt.Il veut aussi interdire le port du voile musulman en public et limiter la “présence d’éléments ostentatoires” à l’extérieur des lieux de culte s’ils ne s’accordent pas avec l’environnement, dans une référence apparente aux minarets.À Perpignan, M. Aliot s’est concentré sur la criminalité, dépensant 8 millions d’euros pour l’embauche de 30 nouveaux policiers, l’ouverture de nouveaux commissariats et la mise en place de patrouilles à vélo et nocturnes, en réponse à une augmentation du trafic de drogues.Jeanne Mercier, une électrice de gauche âgée de 24 ans, dit que beaucoup gens autour d’elle ont été “séduits” par le maire d’extrême-droite.Camille Rosa, à gauche, vote à gauche, mais ne sait pas si elle fera de nouveau barrage contre Marine Le Pen lors des élections présidentielles de 2022.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York Times“On est le test pour montrer à la France que le FN fonctionne et les gens adhèrent et sont contents”, dit-t-elle, utilisant l’ancien nom du parti. “Finalement c’est pas tant le diable que ça.”Camille Rosa, 35 ans, ne sait pas si elle fera à nouveau barrage contre Mme Le Pen l’année prochaine. Les attaques des ministres du président contre “l’islamo-gauchisme” et les universitaires spécialistes du féminisme, du genre ou des questions raciales ont changé son regard sur le gouvernement de M Macron.“J’ai l’impression que leurs ennemis, ce n’est plus du tout l’extrême-droite”, dit-elle, “mais c’est nous, les personnes de gauche”.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    What Happened When Germany’s Far-Right Party Railed Against Lockdowns

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyWhat Happened When Germany’s Far-Right Party Railed Against LockdownsIt didn’t work.Ms. Sauerbrey is a contributing opinion writer who focuses on German politics, society and culture.March 12, 2021A protester against lockdown measures in Berlin last year. Alternative for Germany has sought to improve its electoral standing by embracing anti-lockdown radicalism.Credit…John Macdougall/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBERLIN — In November, as Covid-19 cases began to rise, thousands of people gathered in Berlin to protest against restrictions. In among the conspiracy theorists and extremists were several lawmakers from the country’s main opposition party, the far-right, anti-immigration Alternative for Germany.It was striking to see legislators mingle with conspiracists in the streets before heading to the parliament for a debate. Yet it wasn’t too surprising. The party, known as AfD, has sought to improve its electoral standing ahead of the national election in September by associating with the anti-lockdown movement, an amorphous mix of conspiracy theorists, shady organizations and outraged citizens.But it hasn’t worked. In the months since the pandemic, the AfD’s support has slipped. Already struggling to reach new voters, its embrace of anti-lockdown sentiment seems to have further limited its appeal — and sped up its transformation into an extremist organization.When the pandemic reached Germany in March, the AfD’s initial response was cautious. Prominent party legislators warned about the virus, encouraged the government to act swiftly and voted for a package of economic relief. “Closing ranks is our first duty as citizens now,” Alexander Gauland, a co-leader of the party, said.But this attempt to cater to the average voter came at a cost. The party soon found itself deprived of many of its usual supporters, who took a different course, downplaying the danger and castigating the government. On Facebook and social media, the party stuttered. “The AfD,” said Johannes Hillje, a political consultant who analyzed the party’s social media performance during the pandemic, “lost its rage machine.”For a party fueled by indignation, that was a problem. As the first lockdown was tentatively lifted, through April and May, many leading AfD figures performed a 180-degree turn. No longer consensual, they fiercely railed against restrictions of any kind, which they claimed were unconstitutional as well as economically ruinous.In November, to demonstrate its defiance, the party held an in-person convention with hundreds of participants packed into a hall. That same month, an AfD legislator appeared in the parliament, where masks are mandatory, wearing one riddled with holes. And prominent party members not only attended some of the anti-lockdown protests that spread across the country last year but also adopted the protesters’ talking points, for example by calling Germany a “Corona dictatorship.” The AfD became something like the anti-lockdown party.The move made sense. By the time the pandemic arrived, the party “had started to struggle,” Kai Arzheimer, a professor of political science at the University of Mainz, told me. Migration had vanished from the top of voters’ concerns, depriving the party of its momentum. It was unclear how it might make further inroads.What’s more, the party was increasingly seen as extreme and radical. The media uncovered many ties to extremist groups such as the Identitarian Movement, which advocates ethnically homogeneous societies, while a radical internal group gained power. The AfD was considered so dangerous that the domestic intelligence service even put one wing of it under surveillance. “This has harmed the party’s potential to mobilize moderate voters,” Mr. Arzheimer said.Unable to appeal to more moderate voters, and in the midst of a pandemic that shored up support for the major parties, the party entwined itself with anti-lockdown radicalism. By conventional measures, the move has failed. National polls routinely place the party at or under 10 percent approval; two regional elections this Sunday are expected to underline the party’s electoral difficulties. The historic showing of 2017 — when the AfD became the first far-right party to enter Germany’s postwar parliament — is unlikely to be repeated, let alone surpassed.That doesn’t make the party less of a danger, though. In ways reminiscent of former President Donald Trump, the AfD is seeking to scuttle public trust in the political system. An AfD legislator suggested from the floor of the parliament that mail-in ballots were one of many “dark ideas” with which the other parties hoped to rig the vote, while a section of the party has run ads on Facebook warning against the practice.Ahead of an election where many may vote remotely — Germany’s vaccination program probably won’t be complete by fall — this amounts to a calculated strategy of subversion. Though the party’s influence is limited, the fact that 8 percent to 10 percent of the electorate seems unshakable in its support is deeply concerning.In a landmark decision last week, the country’s domestic intelligence agency put the entire AfD under surveillance, branding it an extremist organization. Whether it’s right to do so — and whether the order, which was suspended and is under legal challenge, will be enacted — is hard to know. But the AfD, and the danger it potentially poses to Germany’s democracy, is not going anywhere.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    How China Plans to Control Hong Kong’s Elections and Elevate ‘Patriots’

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }China’s Crackdown on Hong KongThe Security Law, ExplainedChina Rewrites HistoryFleeing Activists ChargedU.S. SanctionsMass ArrestsAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyHow China Plans to Control Hong Kong’s Elections and Elevate ‘Patriots’New rules imposed by Beijing will make it nearly impossible for democracy advocates in the territory to run for chief executive or the legislature.The changes to Hong Kong’s election rules were approved on Thursday during the closing session of the National People’s Congress in Beijing.Credit…Pool photo by Roman PilipeyKeith Bradsher and March 11, 2021, 7:22 a.m. ETBEIJING — China approved on Thursday a drastic overhaul of election rules for Hong Kong that would most likely bar many pro-democracy politicians from competing in elections, cementing Beijing’s grip over the territory.The National People’s Congress, China’s Communist Party-controlled legislature, voted almost unanimously to give pro-Beijing loyalists more power to choose Hong Kong’s local leader, as well as members of its legislature. The decision builds on a sweeping national security law for Hong Kong, imposed last year after months of protests, that the authorities have used to quash opposition in the former British colony.Premier Li Keqiang said at his annual news conference that the new legislation was needed to ensure that “patriots” run the territory. But critics contend that the new election system will wipe out the already limited democracy that Hong Kong enjoyed after its return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997.Here is what we know about the changes.Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s current leader, is eligible to run for re-election but has not yet said whether she will do so.Credit…Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesBeijing will have even more say over who leads Hong Kong.Until now, Hong Kong’s chief executive has been selected by a 1,200-member Election Committee dominated by Beijing’s allies. This has allowed China to pick leaders it trusts.But a groundswell of support for the territory’s democracy movement during massive protests in 2019 raised the possibility that the opposition could amass a majority of votes to stymie Beijing’s choice.Beijing plans to add 300 more spots on the committee, which could allow more seats to go to its allies. The congress also imposed a new rule that would most likely prevent democrats from getting on the Election Committee’s ballot. To be nominated, a candidate will now require at least some support from each of the five main groups on the committee. Beijing will now have the chance to form one group entirely from its loyalists, which would block pro-democracy nominees.Such moves are likely to deprive democracy supporters of much say when the committee votes early next year to select Hong Kong’s leader. The current chief executive, Carrie Lam, is eligible to run for re-election but has not yet said whether she will do so.Pro-Beijing activists showed support for the electoral changes in Hong Kong on Thursday.   Credit…Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesCandidates deemed ‘disloyal’ would be rooted out.Beijing will also empower the Election Committee to directly appoint some members of Hong Kong’s legislature. To many, this is a regression, as the committee lost the authority to appoint lawmakers several years after Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty from British rule.“I think overall this is an effective, fast, hard-line kind of reverse democratization package,” said Sonny Lo, a political analyst based in Hong Kong. “The pro-democracy forces, even if they can win all the directly elected seats, they will be destined to be a permanent minority.”Half the seats in the legislature are currently chosen by direct elections and half by so-called functional constituencies: various professions, business groups and other special interests. Until recently, the democrats had held around two dozen seats, and often used their presence to protest China’s encroachment on the territory’s autonomy and filibuster some local government measures.Mrs. Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, said the changes would prevent dissenting politicians from disrupting the legislature, known as LegCo.“We will be able to resolve the problem of the LegCo making everything political in recent years and effectively deal with the reckless moves or internal rift that have torn Hong Kong apart,” she said.Beijing ordered an expansion of the legislature, to 90 seats from 70. It did not say how many of those seats would be directly appointed by the election committee.The congress also said the Hong Kong government would establish a separate committee to vet candidates seeking to run for the legislature or chief executive. This process is designed to weed out anyone who might be considered disloyal to Beijing.From left: The Democratic Party members Andrew Wan, Lam Cheuk-ting, Lo Kin-hei and Helena Wong at a news conference in January. All had been arrested on charges tied to the national security law.Credit…Jerome Favre/EPA, via ShutterstockIt’s ‘a sad move,’ democrats say.Even before the legislation takes force, the Beijing-backed government in Hong Kong has moved quickly to extinguish the opposition.Many activists have been detained or arrested on charges tied to the national security law, including Joshua Wong; Martin Lee, known as the “father of democracy” in Hong Kong; and Benny Tai, a law scholar. Their voice has been significantly dimmed.Pro-democracy activists warned that the election law changes would amount to a death knell for the territory’s limited voting rights.Lo Kin-hei, the chairman of the Democratic Party and one of the few prominent opposition figures not in custody, called the electoral changes “a sad move for Hong Kong.”“They should actually make the Legislative Council more responsive to the people’s voice, instead of suppressing the people’s voice, like what their proposal is now,” Mr. Lo said.“I believe that in the future those legislative councilors will be less and less representative of the Hong Kong people and they will just be some loyalists who can do nothing and who cannot represent the Hong Kong people at all,” he said.Last month, the authorities charged 47 people — many of them well-known democracy activists — with conspiracy to commit subversion.Their crime in the eyes of the police was their role in holding a primary election intended to help identify pro-democracy candidates for legislative elections that were originally scheduled for last September. The government postponed those elections for a year, citing the pandemic, and has hinted that a further postponement might be needed while the new election law is drafted and implemented.Keith Bradsher More

  • in

    E.U. Parliament Strips Carles Puigdemont of Immunity

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCatalan Separatist Leader Loses Immunity, Clearing Way for Spain’s Extradition BidCarles Puigdemont has been charged with sedition for leading a 2017 independence bid. His European Parliament membership had shielded him from prosecution.A television showing Carles Puigdemont at the European Parliament in Brussels on Tuesday.Credit…Francisco Seco/Associated PressRaphael Minder and March 9, 2021Updated 8:33 a.m. ETMADRID — The European Parliament has stripped the immunity of Carles Puigdemont, the former separatist leader of Catalonia, clearing the way for Spain to make a fresh attempt to extradite him from Belgium and try him on sedition charges.The European Parliament said on Tuesday that a majority of its members had voted a day earlier in a secret ballot to remove the immunity of Mr. Puigdemont and two other Catalan members of the assembly who face charges in Spain related to a botched attempt to declare Catalonia’s independence in 2017. Spain’s judiciary has charged that their bid was unconstitutional.The vote on Monday ended a lengthy battle by Mr. Puigdemont and his colleagues to use their protection as elected members of the European assembly to shield them from prosecution in Spain. Now it is up to the Belgian judiciary to rule on whether Mr. Puigdemont should be sent back to the Spanish capital, Madrid, to stand trial.“It is a sad day for the European Parliament,” Mr. Puigdemont said. “We have lost our immunity, but the European Parliament has lost more than that and as a result, European democracy too,” he said, adding that this was “a clear case of political prosecution.”The Spanish government welcomed the vote.“The problems of Catalonia will not be solved in Europe or by Europe. They have to be solved in Spain by bringing all Catalan forces around the table,” said the foreign minister, Arancha González Laya. The vote showed that the European Parliament had “respect for the work of the judiciary in our country,” she added.The European Parliament’s decision comes only weeks after regional elections in Catalonia that increased the majority of pro-independence parties in the regional Parliament. Separatist politicians have held control since 2015, but the secessionist conflict has split Catalan society while also remaining a highly contentious issue in national politics.A polling station in Barcelona last month. Regional elections increased the majority of pro-independence parties in the Catalonian Parliament.Credit…Emilio Morenatti/Associated PressMr. Puigdemont and some of his colleagues have been in Brussels since October 2017, shortly after the Spanish central government ousted his regional government for holding a referendum that Spanish courts had ruled illegal and then declaring Catalonia’s independence.During the past three years, Mr. Puigdemont has successfully fought off attempts to extradite him both from Belgium and Germany, where he was briefly detained during a trip.In January, judges in Belgium also rejected a request to extradite another former member of Catalonia’s regional government, Lluis Puig, who is facing similar charges in Spain. The Belgian court argued that the Spanish Supreme Court did not have the legal authority to issue an arrest warrant against Mr. Puig, adding that he should be tried in a regional court.Part of Mr. Puigdemont’s former government, however, stayed in Spain and stood trial before the country’s Supreme Court. Nine Catalans received prison sentences after they were convicted of crimes including sedition and misuse of public funds.One former Catalan leader, Oriol Junqueras, was also barred by Spain’s highest court from taking his seat in the European Parliament. Both he and Mr. Puigdemont were elected to the assembly in 2019.The European Parliament’s vote will allow a Spanish judge to reactivate a European arrest warrant against Mr. Puigdemont that was suspended in early 2020, when Mr. Puigdemont and his colleagues took their seats in the European assembly.The Catalan leaders are not the first members of the European Parliament to be stripped of immunity.In 2019, the European Parliament stripped the immunity of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the founder of the far-right National Front party in France. It is still reviewing the case of Ioannis Lagos, who was sentenced in Greece last year for his activities with the far-right Golden Dawn party. The Greek government considers Golden Dawn a criminal organization.The Catalan case has divided politicians in Brussels, many of them loathe to set a precedent of lawmakers being tried over political activity. The removal of Mr. Puigdemont’s immunity was approved by three-fifths of the members of the European Parliament.It could take months for Belgian courts to rule on Spain’s latest attempt to extradite Mr. Puigdemont and the two other Catalan leaders, Antoni Comín and Clara Ponsatí.The Brussels Public Prosecutor’s Office is examining the possibility of renewing legal proceedings in Belgium, a spokeswoman for the office said.Should the Belgian courts block the extradition request, the Catalans would continue to sit in the European Parliament, but without special immunity rights.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    What Went Right in the 2020 Election

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyon techWhat Went Right in the 2020 ElectionIt wasn’t all a mess. Here’s how the government and tech companies tamed foreign interference.CreditCredit…By Rad MoraMarch 8, 2021Updated 2:39 p.m. ETThis article is part of the On Tech newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it weekdays.A lot went wrong after the 2020 election in the United States. But here’s one thing that went right during it: A risk everyone worried about — foreign election interference — mostly failed.That showed what is possible when government officials and technology companies are laser focused on a problem, effectively coordinate and learn from their past mistakes.But the false narrative that the election was stolen, culminating in a mob attack on the U.S. Capitol, also pointed to the limits of those efforts. The Russians or the Chinese didn’t delegitimize our election. We did it to ourselves.Today, I want to explore the glass half-full view. The largely averted threat of foreign election meddling was a success that shouldn’t be overlooked.What went wrong the last timeLet me first remind you what happened around the 2016 election. Russian hackers pilfered documents from the Democratic National Committee and tried to muck around with state election infrastructure. Digital propagandists backed by the Russian government also fanned information on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and elsewhere that sought to erode people’s faith in voting or inflame social divisions.Powerful American institutions — notably local, state and federal government officials as well as large internet companies — were slow to tackle the problem or had initially dismissed it. The effect of the hacking and trolling wasn’t clear, but the worry was that foreign governments would regularly seek to disrupt U.S. elections and that it would contribute to Americans’ lack of trust in our systems and with one another.What happened in 2020Some foreign governments, including Russia and Iran, tried to disrupt our elections again, but it mostly didn’t work. The same U.S. institutions and digital defenses that failed four years earlier largely held strong this time.“The progress that was made between 2016 and 2020 was remarkable,” said Camille François, chief innovation officer at Graphika, a firm that analyzes manipulation of social networks.What changed in government and techOne major shift after 2016 was that federal government officials and the state and local officials who run elections overcame initial mistrust to collaborate more effectively on voting threats. Matt Masterson, who until recently was a senior adviser on election security for the Department of Homeland Security, said coordination was the biggest change that helped shore up digital defenses in election management systems.“This is as good as the federal government has worked on any issue in my experience,” Masterson said.He also credited efforts in states, notably Georgia, that created paper trails of ballots that could be audited quickly and provide more visibility into the vote counting to help increase people’s trust in the election process.The tech companies, François said, shifted to acknowledge their blind spots. For the first time, online powers including Facebook wrote policies specifically tackling foreign government meddling and put people in charge of stopping it. They also made it harder for foreign trolls to use some of their 2016 tactics, such as buying online advertisements to circulate divisive messages widely.Social media companies also started to publicly announce when they found campaigns by foreign governments that were used to mislead people online. François said that helped researchers and journalists better assess the techniques of foreign propagandists — and the shared knowledge helped internet companies stop trolling campaigns before they had a big impact.Cooperation improved between government and tech companies, too. There were regular meetings between major internet companies and the federal officials responsible for election protection to share information. And internet companies began to tell the public when the U.S. government tipped them off about foreign interference on their websites.Both François and Masterson said that an “aha” moment was the response to Iran’s effort to intimidate voters during the fall. National security officials said then that Iran had obtained some Americans’ voter-registration data, most of which was publicly available, to send deceptive messages that threatened voters.Because they were ready for threats like this, officials were able to make connections between voter intimidation in multiple states, identify the source of the menacing messages, inform election officials across the country and tell voters what was happening — all in about a day.“That couldn’t have happened in 2016, and it likely couldn’t have happened in 2018,” Masterson said. “That was what we had all trained for.”What’s nextWhile internet companies and the U.S. government caught up to the kinds of interference they faced in 2016, they failed at confronting the even trickier challenge of a campaign led by the president himself to cast doubt on the election process despite no substantial evidence. And foreign cyber attacks and online propaganda efforts certainly haven’t stopped.But it could have been much worse. A lot went right in the election because powerful institutions took the risk of foreign hacking and trolling seriously and rose to the challenge. That’s a hopeful lesson for future elections, the pandemic and other crises.Before we go …It’s a weird time to become rich: My colleague Erin Griffith writes that a booming market in tech stocks and I.P.O.s has created a conundrum for newly wealthy technologists. Buying a Ferrari in the middle of a pandemic might be tacky and pointless, so instead they’re paying for Snoop Dogg to lead cooking classes on Zoom or piling into luxury vans for road trips.How online shopping affected these smaller businesses: Amy Haimerl spoke to owners of a grocery store in Michigan, a fitness studio and other smaller businesses about shifting their operations to online shops during the pandemic. For some of them, e-commerce helped them stay afloat, but for others it was more hassle than help.Kids spending more time online is … complicated: Screen time “as a concept to track meticulously, to fret and panic about, to measure parents’ worth in — is no longer considered a valid framework in a pandemic world,” a Washington Post writer said.Hugs to thisA train of duckies snakes through an opening in half-frozen water.We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    Bukele todopoderoso

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpiniónSupported byContinue reading the main storyComentarioBukele todopoderosoDespués de las elecciones legislativas en El Salvador, el presidente tendrá un dominio casi absoluto de la política. La democracia está en riesgo.El presidente de El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, en febrero de este añoCredit…Jose Cabezas/ReutersEs periodista y editor de El Salvador.8 de marzo de 2021 a las 05:00 ETSAN SALVADOR — La democracia salvadoreña ha parido un autócrata. Lo venía gestando desde hace casi un año, y ya está aquí, en todo su esplendor. Se llama Nayib Bukele y, a partir del 1 de mayo, gobernará este país como le plazca.El domingo 28 de febrero los salvadoreños votaron para elegir a sus 84 diputados y 262 alcaldes. Nuevas Ideas, el partido que se define como el de “la N de Nayib”, se estrenó en unos comicios dando una tunda a sus adversarios. Aún se realiza el conteo final, pero el preliminar dejó clara la tendencia, con más del 90 por ciento escrutado. Los candidatos a alcaldes de Bukele ganaron 13 de las 14 cabeceras departamentales. Sus candidatos a diputados, contando la alianza con otro partido, ganaron 61 de las 84 diputaciones.El adjetivo posesivo del párrafo anterior no es un despiste. Esos candidatos son suyos. Los que tuvieron alguna cobertura mediática o propaganda hicieron campaña con la foto de Bukele y prometieron fidelidad a su líder. Para atraer el voto, el partido llenó el país de enormes espectaculares que solo contenían un fondo celeste y una enorme N blanca al medio. La N del todopoderoso.El Salvador ha cambiado. Ya no existe el país con la correlación de fuerzas políticas que nos gobernaron durante toda la posguerra. Durante 29 años, después de los Acuerdos de Paz, dos partidos dominaron el poder político: Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN), a la izquierda, y la Alianza Republicana Nacionalista (Arena), a la derecha. Con estas elecciones se extinguió la polarización que nos carcomió durante décadas: ¿FMLN o Arena? Y se terminó de imponer otra polarización igual de simplista y nociva: ¿Bukelista o no?Con los 61 diputados, Bukele no necesita de ninguna otra bancada legislativa más que de la de su partido aliado que le ha prometido fidelidad absoluta y bajo cuyas siglas llegó a la Presidencia en 2019 cuando aún no había formado a Nuevas Ideas. La oposición ha caído en la irrelevancia. En la legislación salvadoreña, 56 es el número mágico. Es lo que conocemos como mayoría calificada, capaz de conseguir aprobación del presupuesto, reformas legales, la suspensión de garantías constitucionales o el nombramiento de magistrados de la Corte Suprema de Justicia.Los partidos tradicionales quedaron en coma profundo. Sobrevivirán artificialmente, conservando algunas curules, con gente que se sentará en el parlamento como si su presencia pudiera servir de algo. La exguerrilla, por ejemplo, el FMLN, obtuvo cuatro escaños. El menor registro de su historia era de 21 diputados en las elecciones de 1994, cuando la guerra estaba reciente y el fantasma del comunismo todavía era útil para espantar votantes. Arena obtuvo 14 escaños esta vez, lo que significa que tendrá 23 menos de los que ahora mismo tiene.A partir de mayo, a Bukele le bastará levantar el teléfono para ordenar que se apruebe una ley o que se destituya a un fiscal y se elija a otro. La gran mayoría de votantes salvadoreños decidió decir no al contrapeso de poderes, no al debate legislativo, no al consenso necesario, no a la oposición. Y al decir no al pluralismo y el sistema de controles que caracteriza a la democracia ha puesto al país en el camino de la autocracia. Como gustan decir los demagogos de plaza: el pueblo ha hablado, el soberano se ha expresado en las urnas. Una sociedad poco instruida en los principios democráticos ha confirmado a su caudillo. Una sociedad con tan precaria educación pública y tanta desigualdad ha ungido, más por fe que con argumentos, a su nuevo mesías.A El Salvador no se le impuso un autócrata: el país lo eligió.¿A qué dijeron que sí los votantes salvadoreños? A la acumulación de poder en un hombre de 39 años que ha demostrado ser autoritario, poco transparente y enemigo de la prensa independiente. Pero también a un hombre que los convenció, principalmente con eslóganes y demagogia, de que él no es como “los mismos de siempre”, aunque haya sido alcalde de la capital con el FMLN; que ofreció logros incontestables también, así como inexplicables, como la reducción de homicidios sin precedentes durante su primer año de mandato, que él atribuye a un plan que no ha permitido que nadie vea y analice, y no a sus demostradas negociaciones con la Mara Salvatrucha-13, de las que tanto le incomoda hablar.Bukele viste ropas muy diferentes a las de sus antecesores y es hábil manejando el Twitter en un país donde el anterior presidente no sabía ni cuál era su usuario en esa red. Sin embargo, al margen de los símbolos, comparte muchos rasgos de la clase política que llevó al despeñadero a El Salvador: bajo su mandato han ocurrido diversas denuncias de corrupción y nepotismo, sus ataques a la prensa le han ganado incluso cartas de reclamo de legisladores estadounidenses y su falta de transparencia le ha llevado a desmantelar poco a poco la institución garante de la información pública. Bukele luce diferente, pero en el fondo se parece mucho a los que ha logrado sacar del hemiciclo legislativo.Hasta las próximas elecciones de 2024, Bukele gobernará El Salvador con un poder que nadie ha tenido en la posguerra. Su discurso legitimará cada una de sus acciones respaldándose en una raquítica idea de democracia. El presidente tiene excusa para rato. Pero también tiene un nuevo reto. Se le acabó su enemigo. La idea de una oposición que bloqueaba todas sus iniciativas y no le permitía arreglar este país se terminó también en estas elecciones. Tener todo el poder también significa tener toda la responsabilidad. Ser el único que carga el jarrón implica también ser el único responsable si se rompe.Pero Bukele es fiel a su estilo de entender la política como un conflicto permanente que él debe ir ganando.Sin oposición que le estorbe, podría predecir lo que seguirá: el presidente buscará nuevos enemigos para seguir utilizando su narrativa de bueno y malos. Uno de los enemigos predilectos para llenar ese espacio seremos nosotros, la prensa y los periodistas. El presidente nunca ha entendido el rol de la prensa independiente. Su jugada —exitosa dentro de las fronteras nacionales— ha sido presentar a esa prensa como oposición política. Creo que esa animadversión crecerá hasta ocupar un lugar principal en el altar de los odios presidenciales.Haberle entregado el poder absoluto a Bukele traerá serias consecuencias que perdurarán en el imaginario político como una nueva forma de liderazgo: el desprecio por el Estado de derecho y el diálogo, los ataques a la prensa, la falta de transparencia, la perpetuación del nepotismo y el amiguismo, la deformación de las instituciones públicas hasta convertirlas en peones obedientes a la próxima jugada de su líder. Un Estado al servicio de un hombre.La prensa lleva en la mira de Bukele desde antes de que asumiera la presidencia. Hacer periodismo es cada vez más difícil a causa del acoso y las amenazas de funcionarios del gobierno. A partir de ahora, será aún más difícil. Pero este es el momento en el que El Salvador más necesita periodismo serio y riguroso.A los colegas periodistas les sugiero autorreflexión y templanza. Será necesario comprender el nuevo escenario y reinventar nuestros procedimientos para proteger a nuestras fuentes, cubrir los órganos de Estado o, sencillamente, salir a hacer nuestro trabajo a las calles.A la sociedad civil organizada le esperan necesidades similares: rearmarse para vigilar al poderoso, transformarse para dialogar con el convencido y caminar así, paso a paso, una vez más, ese camino nunca recorrido del todo, en el intento de llegar a una democracia plena y fuerte.Óscar Martínez es jefe de redacción de El Faro, autor de Los migrantes que no importan y Una historia de violencia y coautor de El Niño de Hollywood, sobre la MS-13.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    In Georgia, Republicans Take Aim at Role of Black Churches in Elections

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyIn Georgia, Republicans Take Aim at Role of Black Churches in ElectionsNew proposals by the G.O.P.-controlled Legislature have targeted Sunday voting, part of a raft of measures that could reduce the impact of Black voters in the state.Israel Small spent most of last fall helping members of his church with the absentee voting process.Credit…Stephen B. Morton for The New York TimesNick Corasaniti and March 6, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETSAVANNAH, Ga. — Sundays are always special at the St. Philip Monumental A.M.E. church. But in October, the pews are often more packed, the sermon a bit more urgent and the congregation more animated, and eager for what will follow: piling into church vans and buses — though some prefer to walk — and heading to the polls.Voting after Sunday church services, known colloquially as “souls to the polls,” is a tradition in Black communities across the country, and Pastor Bernard Clarke, a minister since 1991, has marshaled the effort at St. Philip for five years. His sermons on those Sundays, he said, deliver a message of fellowship, responsibility and reverence.“It is an opportunity for us to show our voting rights privilege as well as to fulfill what we know that people have died for, and people have fought for,” Mr. Clarke said.Now, Georgia Republicans are proposing new restrictions on weekend voting that could severely curtail one of the Black church’s central roles in civic engagement and elections. Stung by losses in the presidential race and two Senate contests, the state party is moving quickly to push through these limits and a raft of other measures aimed directly at suppressing the Black turnout that helped Democrats prevail in the critical battleground state.“The only reason you have these bills is because they lost,” said Bishop Reginald T. Jackson, who oversees all 534 A.M.E. churches in Georgia. “What makes it even more troubling than that is there is no other way you can describe this other than racism, and we just need to call it what it is.’’The push for new restrictions in Georgia comes amid a national effort by Republican-controlled state legislatures to impose harsh restrictions on voting access, in states like Iowa, Arizona and Texas.But the targeting of Sunday voting in new bills that are moving through Georgia’s Legislature has stirred the most passionate reaction, with critics saying it recalls some of the racist voting laws from the state’s past.“I can remember the first time I went to register,” said Diana Harvey Johnson, 74, a former state senator who lives in Savannah. “I went to the courthouse by myself and there was actually a Mason jar sitting on top of the counter. And the woman there asked me how many butterbeans were in that jar,” suggesting that she needed to guess correctly in order to be allowed to register.“I had a better chance of winning the Georgia lottery than guess how many butterbeans,” Ms. Harvey Johnson continued. “But the fact that those kinds of disrespects and demoralizing and dehumanizing practices — poll taxes, lynchings, burning crosses and burning down houses and firing people and putting people in jail, just to keep them from voting — that is not that far away in history. But it looks like some people want to revisit that. And that is absolutely unacceptable.”Diana Harvey Johnson, a former Georgia state senator, said she remembered facing “dehumanizing practices” when registering to vote in her youth.Credit…Stephen B. Morton for The New York TimesThe bill that passed the House would limit voting to at most one Sunday in October, but even that would be up to the discretion of the local registrar. It would also severely cut early voting hours in total, limit voting by mail and greatly restrict the use of drop boxes — all measures that activists say would disproportionately affect Black voters.A similar bill is awaiting a vote in the Senate. Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, has indicated he supports new laws to “secure the vote” but has not committed to all of the restrictions.Voting rights advocates say there is deep hypocrisy embedded in some of the new proposals. It was Georgia Republicans, they point out, who championed mail balloting in the early 2000s and automatic voting registration just five years ago, only to say they need to be limited now that more Black voters have embraced them.Georgia was one of nine mostly Southern states and scores of counties and municipalities — including the Bronx, Brooklyn and Manhattan — whose records of racist voter suppression required them to get federal clearance for changes to their election rules. The requirement fell under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the civil rights era law that curtailed the disenfranchisement of Blacks in the South.The changes Republicans are now pursuing would have faced stiff federal review and possible blockage under the part of the act known as Section 5. But the Supreme Court, with a conservative majority, effectively gutted that section in a 2013 ruling.Even after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, churches played a key role in civic engagement, often organizing nonpartisan political action committees during the 1970s and ’80s that provided, among other resources, trips to vote on Sunday where it was permitted. The phrase “souls to the polls” took root in Florida in the 1990s, according to David D. Daniels III, a professor of church history at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago. Raphael Warnock, one of the Democrats who won a special Senate race in January, is himself the pastor of the storied Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta.Historically, churches provided Black congregants more than just transportation or logistical help. Voting as a congregation also offered a form of haven from the intimidation and violence that often awaited Black voters at the polls.“That was one of the things that my father said, that once Black people got the right to vote, they would all go together because they knew that there was going to be a problem,” said Robert Evans, 59, a member of St. Phillip Monumental. “Bringing them all together made them feel more comfortable to actually go and do the civic duty.”In Georgia, the role of the A.M.E. church in civic engagement has been growing under the guidance of Bishop Jackson. Last year he began Operation Voter Turnout, seeking to expand the ways that A.M.E. churches could prepare their members to participate in elections. The operation focused on voter education, registration drives, assistance with absentee ballots and a coordinated Sunday voting operation.Bishop Reginald T. Jackson in Atlanta. He began a program to better prepare church members to participate in elections.Credit…Matthew Odom for The New York TimesIt had an impact in last November’s election, even amid the coronavirus pandemic: According to the Center for New Data, a nonprofit research group, African-Americans voted at a higher rate on weekends than voters identifying as white in 107 of the state’s 159 counties. Internal numbers from Fair Fight Action, a voting rights group, found that Black voters made up roughly 37 percent of those who voted early on Sunday in Georgia, while the Black population of Georgia is about 32 percent.State Representative Barry Fleming, a Republican and chief sponsor of the House bill, did not respond to requests for comment, nor did three other Republican sponsors. In introducing the bill, Republicans in the Legislature portrayed the new restrictions as efforts to “secure the vote” and “restore confidence” in the electoral process, but offered no rationale beyond that and no credible evidence that it was flawed. (Georgia’s election was pronounced secure by Republican electoral officials and reaffirmed by multiple audits and court decisions.)Limiting Sunday voting would affect Black voters beyond losing the assistance of the church. It would inevitably lead to longer lines during the week, especially in the Black community, which has historically been underserved on Election Day.The bill would also ban what is known as “line warming,” the practice of having volunteers provide water, snacks, chairs and other assistance to voters in line.Latoya Brannen, 43, worked with members of the church and a nonprofit group called 9 to 5 to hand out snacks and personal protective equipment in November.“We’ve learned that giving people just those small items helps keep them in line,” Ms. Brannen said. She said she had occasionally handed out bubbles to parents who brought young children with them.If Sunday voting is limited, it could induce more Black Georgians to vote by mail. During the pandemic, churches played an instrumental role in helping African-Americans navigate the absentee ballot system, which they had not traditionally used in the same proportion as white voters.At Greater Gaines Chapel A.M.E., a church about a half-mile from St. Philip Monumental, Israel Small spent most of last fall helping church members with the absentee process.“We took people to drop boxes to help make sure it would be counted,” said Mr. Small, 79. He said he was angered to learn this winter that Republicans were moving to restrict mail voting, too.Among the changes Republican state legislators have proposed is a requirement that voters provide proof of their identification — their license numbers or copies of official ID cards — with their absentee ballot applications.That signals a shift for Republicans, who have long controlled the Statehouse; in 2005 they passed a similar proposal, but for in-person voting.Pastor Bernard Clarke of St. Philip Monumental A.M.E. church has marshaled the effort to get his congregation to the polls for five years.Credit…Stephen B. Morton for The New York TimesThat measure included a new “anti-fraud” requirement that voters present one of a limited set of government-issued identification cards, like a driver’s license, at voting stations.The restrictions affected Black voters disproportionately, data showed. At the same time, state Republicans were moving to ease the process of absentee voting — predominantly used by white voters then — by stripping requirements that absentee voters provide an excuse for why they couldn’t vote in person and exempting them from the new photo-identification requirement.Justice Department lawyers reviewed the proposals under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and found that the new ID law would likely make voting disproportionately harder for Black citizens. The attorneys recommended that the George W. Bush administration block it.In a memo that the department’s political leadership ultimately disregarded, staff lawyers noted that a sponsor of the legislation had told them that she believed Black voters were likely to vote only when they were paid to do so, and that if the new law reduced their voting share it was only because it would limit opportunities for fraud.The memo also stated that the law’s sponsors defended the more lenient treatment of mail voting — like its exemption from the ID provision — by arguing that it was more secure than in-person voting because it produced a paper trail.Now, after an election year in which Mr. Trump repeatedly and falsely disparaged mail voting as rife with fraud, state Republicans are arguing that mail-in voting needs more restrictions.There is no new evidence supporting that assertion. But one thing did change in 2020: the increase in Black voters who availed themselves of absentee balloting, helping Democrats to dominate the mail-in ballot results during the presidential election.“It’s just really a sad day,” Mr. Small, from the Greater Gaines church, said. “It’s a very challenging time for all of us, just for the inalienable right to vote that we fought so hard for, and right now, they’re trying to turn back the clock to try to make sure it’s difficult,” he said.Pastor Clarke of St. Philip Monumental said the Republican effort to impose more restrictions could backfire, energizing an already active electorate.“Donald Trump woke us up,” he said. “There are more people in the congregation that are more aware and alert and have a heightened awareness to politics. So while we know that and we believe that his intentions were ill, we can honestly say that he has woken us up. That we will never be the same.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More