Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Huge Crowds Protest Poland’s Governing Conservative Party

      by

      The country’s largest antigovernment gathering in years sought to reclaim the legacy of the Solidarity movement that led the struggle against a Communist system imposed by Moscow.Hundreds of thousands of people marched through Warsaw on Sunday in a huge display of opposition to the governing party before an October general election, summoning memories of Poland’s rejection of Communist Party rule decades before.The event, organized by the government’s political rivals, sought to deprive Poland’s deeply conservative Law and Justice party of its claims to the legacy of Solidarity, the trade union movement that led the struggle against a Communist system imposed by Moscow after World War II.Supporters and members of opposition parties protested against the conservative Law and Justice party in Poland’s largest antigovernment gathering in years.Kacper Pempel/ReutersLarge protests also took place in Krakow, Szczecin and other big cities controlled by the opposition, which is strong in urban areas but struggles in the countryside.Law and Justice, which regularly smears its foes as Communists and Russian agents, recently pushed legislation through Parliament to establish a commission to investigate Russian influence and bar individuals from public office for up to 10 years if they were found to have succumbed to it.The opposition denounced the move as a ploy to tar politicians critical of the governing party with the taint of Russia and disqualify them from running in October. The United States and the European Union voiced concern about the law, widely known as “Lex Tusk” because one of its targets is expected to be Donald Tusk, the main opposition party leader.In a speech to protesters in Warsaw’s Old Town on Sunday, Mr. Tusk, the leader of Civic Platform, accused Law and Justice of rolling back democracy and turning Poland away from Europe, comparing the coming election to the vote on June 4, 1989 — the country’s first free election since 1945 — which gave a victory to Solidarity and sealed the end of Communist rule.“The slogan of Solidarity was ‘we will not be divided or destroyed,’” Mr. Tusk said, adding that “the great hope” of democracy’s foes past and present “was our hopelessness, their strength was our powerlessness.”Referring to the opening line of the Polish national anthem, he added: “It’s over. Today, all of us in Poland, we all see, we all hear ‘Poland has not perished yet,’ we are going to victory.”Warsaw’s mayor, Rafal Trzaskowski, second from left, Donald Tusk of Civic Platform, center, and former President Lech Walesa, right, marching in Warsaw on Sunday.Kacper Pempel/ReutersOther speakers included Lech Walesa, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and the Solidarity leader who, after the collapse of communism, became Poland’s first freely elected postwar president, only to be denounced later by Law and Justice as an agent of the Communist-era secret police.Warsaw’s City Hall, which is controlled by political foes of the government, put the turnout at half a million. That was almost certainly an exaggeration but, even accounting for inflated numbers, the march on Sunday appeared to be the biggest antigovernment demonstration since street protests in the 1980s in support of Solidarity.TVP Info, a state-controlled news channel, reported that only 100,000 people had taken part at most and focused its minimal coverage of the march on obscenities voiced by some protesters, a tactic often used by pro-government news outlets to portray critics of Law and Justice as foul-mouthed infidels opposed to the Roman Catholic Church.As huge crowds gathered on Sunday afternoon, TVP Info led its news bulletin with a report on the “National Parade of Farmer’s Housewives’ Circles,” a modestly attended event organized by the Ministry of Agriculture.Law and Justice, in power since 2015, has a big advantage going into this year’s election for Parliament because of its tight control of state television and radio, and its backing by a large battery of nominally independent outlets dependent on state funding. Most opinion polls predict it will win more seats than Civic Platform but will fall short of a majority and could have trouble forming a stable government. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Can Kevin McCarthy and Joe Biden Fix Washington?

      by

      Among the various reassessments of Kevin McCarthy following his successful debt ceiling negotiations, the one with the widest implications belongs to Matthew Continetti, who writes in The Washington Free Beacon that “McCarthy’s superpower is his desire to be speaker. He likes and wants his job.”If you hadn’t followed American politics across the last few decades, this would seem like a peculiar statement: What kind of House speaker wouldn’t want the job?But part of what’s gone wrong with American institutions lately is the failure of important figures to regard their positions as ends unto themselves. Congress, especially, has been overtaken by what Yuval Levin of the American Enterprise Institute describes as a “platform” mentality, where ambitious House members and senators treat their offices as places to stand and be seen — as talking heads, movement leaders, future presidents — rather than as roles to inhabit and opportunities to serve.On the Republican side, this tendency has taken several forms, from Newt Gingrich’s yearning to be a Great Man of History, to Ted Cruz’s ambitious grandstanding in the Obama years, to the emergence of Trump-era performance artists like Marjorie Taylor Greene. And the party’s congressional institutionalists, from dealmakers like John Boehner to policy mavens like Paul Ryan, have often been miserable-seeming prisoners of the talking heads, celebrity brands and would-be presidents.This dynamic seemed likely to imprison McCarthy as well, but he’s found a different way of dealing with it: He’s invited some of the bomb throwers into the legislative process, trying to turn them from platform-seekers into legislators by giving them a stake in governance, and so far he’s been rewarded with crucial support from figures like Greene and Thomas Massie, the quirky Kentucky libertarian. And it’s clear that part of what makes this possible is McCarthy’s enthusiasm for the actual vote-counting, handholding work required of his position, and his lack of both Gingrichian egomania and get-me-out-of-here impatience.But McCarthy isn’t operating in a vacuum. The Biden era has been good for institutionalism generally, because the president himself seems to understand and appreciate the nature of his office more than Barack Obama ever did. As my colleague Carlos Lozada noted on our podcast this week, in both the Senate and the White House, Obama was filled with palpable impatience at all the limitations on his actions. This showed up constantly in his negotiation strategy, where he had a tendency to use his own office as a pundit’s platform, lecturing the G.O.P. on what they should support and thereby alienating Republicans from compromise in advance.Whereas Biden, who actually liked being a senator, is clearly comfortable with quiet negotiation on any reasonable grounds, which is crucial to keeping the other side invested in a deal. And he’s comfortable, as well, with letting the spin machine run on both sides of the aisle, rather than constantly imposing his own rhetorical narrative on whatever bargain Republicans might strike.The other crucial element in the healthier environment is the absence of what Cruz brought to the debt-ceiling negotiations under Obama — the kind of sweeping maximalism, designed to build a presidential brand, that turns normal horse-trading into an existential fight.Expectating that kind of maximalism from Republicans, some liberals kept urging intransigence on Biden long after it became clear that what McCarthy wanted was more in line with previous debt-ceiling bargains. But McCarthy’s reasonability was sustainable because of the absence of a leading Republican senator playing Cruz’s absolutist part. Instead, the most notable populist Republican elected in 2022, J.D. Vance, has been busy looking for deals with populist Democrats on issues like railroad safety and bank-executive compensation, or adding a constructive amendment to the debt-ceiling bill even though he voted against it — as though he, no less than McCarthy, actually likes and wants his current job.One reason for the diminishment of Cruz-like grandstanders is the continued presence of Donald Trump as the G.O.P.’s personality-in-chief, to whose eminence no senator can reasonably aspire. At least through 2024, it’s clear the only way that Trump might be unseated is through the counterprogramming offered by Ron DeSantis, who is selling himself — we’ll see with what success — as the candidate of governance and competence; no bigger celebrity or demagogue is walking through that door.So for now there’s more benefit to legislative normalcy for ambitious Republicans, and less temptation toward the platform mentality, than there would be if Trump’s part were open for the taking.Whatever happens, it will be years until that role comes open. In which case Kevin McCarthy could be happy in his job for much longer than might have been expected by anyone watching his tortuous ascent.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. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      In Russian Schools, It’s Recite Your ABC’s and ‘Love Your Army’

      by

      The curriculum for young Russians is increasingly emphasizing patriotism and the heroism of Moscow’s army, while demonizing the West as “gangsters.” One school features a “sniper”-themed math class.A new version of the ABC’s in Russia’s Far East starts with “A is for Army, B is for Brotherhood” — and injects a snappy phrase with every letter, like, “Love your Army.”A swim meet in the southern city of Magnitogorsk featured adolescents diving into the pool wearing camouflage uniforms, while other competitors slung model Kalashnikov rifles across their backs.“Snipers” was the theme adopted for math classes at an elementary school in central Russia, with paper stars enumerating would-be bullet holes on a target drawn on the chalkboard.As the war in Ukraine rolls into its 16th month, educational programs across Russia are awash in lessons and extracurricular activities built around military themes and patriotism.These efforts are part of an expansive Kremlin campaign to militarize Russian society, to train future generations to revere the army and to further entrench President Vladimir V. Putin’s narrative that “a real war has once again been unleashed on our motherland,” as he declared in a sober address at a ceremony last month.The drumbeat of indoctrination essentially started with Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, but the full-scale invasion of Ukraine has accelerated it. The Ministry of Education and Science releases a constant stream of material, including step-by-step lesson plans and real-life examples — like a video of a student concert that used poetry, dance and theater to explain the history of Russian foreign intelligence.“It includes all levels, from kindergarten to university,” said Daniil Ken, the head of the Alliance of Teachers, an independent Russian union, who works from voluntary exile. “They are trying to involve all these children, all students, directly in supporting the war.”Members of the Russian Young Pioneers attending an induction ceremony, organized by the Russian Communist Party, at Red Square in Moscow in May.Maxim Shipenkov/EPA, via ShutterstockFor years, Russia’s leaders sought to condition its citizens to accept Moscow’s leadership, partly by barring politics from schools. Now the Kremlin hopes to persuade the public to actively back the war effort, and when it comes to younger males, to fight.Yet it also wants to avoid fanning too high a patriotic flame, lest it push Russians to start questioning the purpose of the war. Much the way Mr. Putin has refrained from enacting multiple conscriptions of soldiers to avert prompting antiwar sentiment, the Kremlin has left parents some leeway to avoid propaganda lessons. In that, they may be hoping to avoid the disconnect that emerged in the Soviet era, when the education system portrayed the country as the land of Communist plenty, even as ordinary Russians could see that the shelves were bare.“They want enthusiasm, but they realize if they push too hard it could galvanize an organized opposition,” said Alexandra Arkhipova, a social anthropologist who studies public reactions to the war. “They do not want people to protest.”Interviews over the past month with sociologists, educators, parents and students, and a review of extensive material online posted by the schools themselves and by local news outlets, show a comprehensive government effort to bolster military-patriotic content through all 40,000 public schools in Russia.The cornerstone of the initiative is a program called “Important Conversations,” started last September. Every Monday at 8 a.m., schools are supposed to hold an assembly to raise the Russian flag while the national anthem is played, and then convene an hourlong classroom session on topics like important milestones in Russian history.The minister of education, Sergei Kravtsov, did not respond to written questions. When the program was introduced last fall, he told the official Tass news outlet, “We want the current generation of schoolchildren to grow up in completely different traditions, proud of their homeland.” Both an official Telegram channel and a website disseminate materials for the classroom.“Important Conversations” has been supplemented by programs with names like “Lessons in Courage” or “Heroes Among Us.” Students have been encouraged to write poetry extolling the Motherland and the feats of Russian soldiers. Myriad videos show elementary school children reciting lines like, “All the crooks are fleeing Russia; they have a place to live in the West; gangsters, sodomites.”In this photograph provided by state media, Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, is shown meeting with the country’s education minister, Sergei Kravtsov, in Moscow, in 2021.Sputnik/via ReutersLessons draw heavily on earlier conflicts, particularly the Soviet Union’s success defeating Nazi Germany. Suggestions based on that earlier time sometimes seem antiquated, like encouraging students to knit socks for the troops.“It is very theatrical,” said Ms. Arkhipova, the social anthropologist. “It serves as a kind of proof that the entire war is the right thing to do because it mirrors World War II.”Countless schools have been renamed to honor dead soldiers, and memorials are rife. They include a “Hero’s Desk” in classrooms that often displays the picture of an alumnus who is supposed to be honored.Veterans are trotted into classrooms frequently to detail their experiences. In late April in Dmitrov, a small city near Moscow, three soldiers addressed a roomful of students aged 10 to 15, some waving small Russian flags. A video of the session shows one fighter talking about wanting to protect his homeland against “fascist filth.”Overall, however, there is no monolithic propaganda machine because the decision on how to implement “Important Conversations” has largely been left to local school administrators.Some teachers take a hard ideological approach. A video posted by the Doxa news outlet showed a teacher demanding that students pump their fists in the air while singing a popular song called, “I Am Russian.” The teacher barks: “The thrust should be to the sky, to NATO.”Other teachers do not even mention the war, particularly in places like Moscow, where many parents disapprove of attempts to indoctrinate their children.Yuri Lapshin, formerly the student psychologist at an elite Moscow high school, said in an interview that while researching a paper, he found examples of unique interpretations of the program. One math teacher, for example, told students that the most important conversation in the world was about algebra, so he dedicated the class to that. On a day supposedly focused on the concept of “fatherland,” a biology teacher lectured about salmon spawning in the rivers where they hatched.Even when the war lessons occur, they sometimes fall flat. At an assembly with two fighters, students from a St. Petersburg technical college basically mocked them. They questioned why fighting in another country meant they were defending Russia, and how God might view murdering others, according to a recording of the assembly. Administrators rebuked at least five students for their questions, local reports said.Children holding portraits of Russian soldiers who were killed in the war in Ukraine as they take part in the opening ceremony of a memorial in their honor in Crimea in May.Alexey Pavlishak/ReutersSasha Boychenko, 17, a high school senior, attended four “Important Conversations” sessions in Vladivostok last fall before her family left Russia. Bored students laughed at the historic displays, she recalled. “After the class, we wondered why we had come,” she said in an interview.Alexander Kondrashev, a history teacher in Russia for 10 years, said he was awaiting a revised version of the textbooks this fall. An early copy obtained by the Mediazona news organization found one fundamental change; all references to Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, as the springboard for Russia as a Christian nation have been expunged.“Nobody perceives ‘Important Conversations’ as learning something that will come in handy in life, like physics, math, geography or the knowledge from history lessons,” Mr. Kondrashev said in an interview.Noncompliance takes various forms. The Alliance of Teachers advised parents that they can formally opt out of the classes, while some have their children show up late or call in sick on Mondays. Defiance makes certain parents nervous, experts said, especially given about a dozen cases where school officials reported on unenthusiastic parents or students.A woman named Zarema, 47, said she worried about her three sons in school in Dagestan. While she sends her youngest son, a sixth grader, to the “Important Conversations” class, she told him never to engage politically. “We are all scared of everything here now,” she said, asking that her full name not be used while criticizing the war.Russia has largely presented the war as an economic opportunity in poorer areas, while being far less aggressive in major cities.Cadet students in February at the Victory Museum, which is dedicated to Russia’s World War II victory over Nazi Germany.Nanna Heitmann for The New York Times“They are trying to target the people who have fewer resources,” Greg Yudin, a Russian sociologist doing research at Princeton University, said in an interview “They give you an option that promises money, status, benefits and in addition to that you will be a hero.” Even if they persuade only 20 percent of the youth to join the army, that is still a lot of brigades, he noted.Toward that end, the Ministries of Education and Defense have announced that military training will be mandatory next year for 10th-grade students. Girls will learn battlefield first aid, while the boys will be instructed in drill formation and handling a Kalashnikov, among other skills.At universities, the curriculum in the fall will include a mandatory course called “The Fundamentals of Russian Statehood.”The course is still in development, Mr. Yudin noted, but he said that what details have emerged tended to echo Mr. Putin’s worldview of Russian exceptionalism and the idea that the battle waged against Western dominance for the past 1,000 years would continue for another 1,000.“The single best possible way for them to get this society mobilized is to brainwash the young,” Mr. Yudin said. More

    • 50 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      ‘The View’ Has Narrowed

      by

      Illustration By The New York TimesThe ladies of “The View” were in high spirits. A piece of news they’d been hankering for had broken at last: President Biden, a revered figure around their talk show table, had kicked off his re-election campaign.The show’s hosts — known in “View” parlance as “the ladies” — had been hyping this moment for months. They’d lavished praise on President Biden for leading the country out of the pandemic and overseeing what they described as a thriving U.S. economy. They’d downplayed scandals and investigations involving Mr. Biden and his family members. They’d also taken extraordinary pains to disqualify as “ageist” questions of whether he is simply too old to run again. Mr. Biden would be 86 by the end of a second term, but when the Democratic strategist David Axelrod expressed mild concern, the comedian Joy Behar snapped that he “should keep his mouth shut.”“I’d rather have Joe Biden, drooling, than any Republican,” Ms. Behar said another day.Now the ladies agreed that Mr. Biden’s campaign announcement made them feel hopeful. They were tired of what Sunny Hostin called Republican “fearmongering,” which, in a startlingly casual aside, she noted had “led to the demise of our democracy.” If any of the ladies was perturbed by the irony of decrying scare tactics while calling U.S. democracy dead, she kept it to herself.“You get behind him,” the actress Whoopi Goldberg said of Mr. Biden, seemingly instructing the Democrats at large, “and we won’t have a problem.”This kind of unabashed cheerleading is reserved for Mr. Biden. The panel of “View” hosts has been annoyed and dismissive of other Democrats who might vie for the nomination. (“You start making inroads — maybe this person, maybe this person — we’re done for,” Ms. Goldberg said.) When compelled to discuss the Twitter-hosted presidential campaign announcement of Gov. Ron DeSantis of the Florida — a man they’d decried as “fascist,” “bigot” and “Death Santis” — the ladies used the occasion to mock the platform and its new owner, Elon Musk, for the tech failures that disrupted the event. As for Mr. Trump, forget about it: Ms. Goldberg won’t even utter his name, referring to him instead as “you know who.”The day after Mr. Biden’s announcement, the co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, a Republican political operative who’d already been silenced by Ms. Goldberg, giggled from her end of the table. Ms. Farah Griffin has said she’d write in another candidate before voting for either Mr. Biden or Mr. Trump, but her counterpoints tend to get interrupted or dismissed by the rest of the panel.Mr. Biden “needs another four years to finish the job,” Ms. Behar said. “You can’t fight fascism in four years only. You need eight years for that.”“He has had a lot of accomplishments,” Ms. Hostin agreed.“He brought us back from the precipice,” Ms. Goldberg said. “Maybe it’s not a perfect country, but it’s better than where we were.”With that, the music came up and the audience applauded. The discussion was done.I’ve been a regular Viewer for years, starting when I was a foreign correspondent salving late-night homesickness via satellite TV. Along the way I’ve amassed an encyclopedic knowledge of the hosts’ marriages and hobbies, and a habit of analyzing the “Hot Topics” discussions as a bellwether of centrist America’s political and cultural trends. I’m hardly alone — “The View” has long inspired pieces of serious analysis that bob along like flotsam on a choppy sea of dressing room gossip, leaks and hate tweets. For me, though, it’s a solitary fixation, for none of my friends or family members have ever shared my interest in “The View.”“Ugh, I can’t watch that show,” they grimace. Or — this most of all — “Aren’t they always arguing?”Which is funny because, if you ask me, the co-hosts don’t argue nearly enough. At least, not substantively. Not anymore. The freewheeling discussions that once evoked a spectrum of American opinion on everything from reproductive rights to foreign policy — those have mostly fallen silent. “The View” has become a chorus of conformity. The title of this show I’ve loved for years used to suggest messy and fearless debate. Lately, it seems like a command.The hosts include centrist Democrats (Ms. Hostin and Ms. Behar), centrist Republicans (Ms. Farah Griffin and Ana Navarro) and one centrist independent (the TV journalist Sara Haines). But, anyway, they agree. They agree (or at least pretend to agree) that Mr. Biden is basically a good president. Even on topics notorious for splitting American opinion — the need for “common-sense gun reform,” protecting L.G.B.T.Q. rights and funding the war in Ukraine — they don’t find much to debate one another about. Even those who privately consider abortion a sin agree that access should be preserved in some cases.We, the people, are split. Our many divisions obstruct coherent governance. But “The View” continues to project a brightly lit illusion of accord.And there is no article of agreement more important — lending the show an intoxicating but oddly irreal flavor — as the ladies’ absolute disdain for Mr. Trump and, increasingly, anyone who belongs to his party.Current events haven’t always anchored “The View.” Since the program’s 1997 debut, celebrity interviews, gossip and relationship advice vied for time against news and politics. In its current iteration, though, “The View” carries itself like an earnest journalistic platform — a must-do interview for establishment politicians and a reliable midmorning destination for nuggets of news analysis. In 2019, The New York Times Magazine dubbed it “the most important political TV show in America.”Which has made its erasure of the country’s most dynamic and least understood political strains all the more frustrating.As the current season got underway last September, Ms. Hostin, a former federal prosecutor, came out with a sweeping justification for shunning Republicans — all Republicans, she specified, not just MAGA loyalists — because polls showed that the majority of Republicans regard Mr. Trump as their figurehead.“So if you are saying that he is a fascist, what are they? If you are saying that he is a white supremacist, what are they?” Ms. Hostin continued. “If you follow someone that has hate in their heart, and I believe that he does, then you are complicit in that, and you don’t have a pass.”I gathered that Ms. Hostin was enshrining the new ground rules of “The View,” updated to reflect our ever more divided age. She has become the show’s dominant voice, although I can’t tell if that’s by design or whether it’s the inevitable result of her indomitable delivery and the clear, unambiguous opinions she’s polished into repeatable bites.Either way, the idea that Republicans could be written off en masse signaled a radical departure in “View” philosophy. The panelists have traditionally taken pains to distinguish between bad politicians and the regular people who vote for them. Barbara Walters, who created the show and presided over it for years, urged the ladies to appeal to an imaginary viewer in Wyoming, according to interviews with current and former panelists for the podcast “The View: Behind the Table.” When Ms. Goldberg and Ms. Behar stormed off the set mid-interview in 2010 to protest anti-Muslim rhetoric from Bill O’Reilly (“Muslims killed us on 9/11”), Ms. Walters was outraged.“You have just seen what should not happen,” Ms. Walters told the audience that day. “We should be able to have discussions without washing our hands” of one another “and screaming and walking offstage,” she said.But that was a different age. Ms. Hostin’s wholesale dismissal of Republicans comes across as a bleak but frank acknowledgment that the show had adopted the coping mechanisms of our time: Ban thoughts we don’t like and carry on as if all the reasonable people agree. It’s been particularly chilling to watch this attitude finally take hold at a mainstream women’s program that has long postured as a nonthreatening place to air whatever opinions were working their way through the land, a make-believe living room where you could disagree about politics but then bond over bratty bridal behavior and unrealistic beauty standards.There is an argument, familiar by now, that denying Mr. Trump and his supporters a platform is the only moral approach to a movement many regard as a historic evil. But trying to smother any serious consideration of his politics has the unfortunate effect of suggesting that we are afraid of letting Americans hear these ideas because — why? They might like them too much?To be fair, the animosity between “The View” and Republicans is mutual, and finding the origin point is something of a chicken-versus-egg conundrum. For example, “The View” invited Mr. DeSantis to appear this season — a fact we only know because his spokesman tweeted out the invitation, along with the governor’s refusal, which cited various slurs and insults the ladies had used to refer to Mr. DeSantis.Even beyond “The View,” many conservatives, especially those in the thrall of Mr. Trump, now avoid mainstream journalists they decry as purveyors of “fake news.”Whatever the reason, one fact is undeniable: “The View” brazened all the way through Mr. Trump’s first campaign and presidency without deigning to hire a Trump supporter.The closest the show came was Meghan McCain, who spent so much time name-checking her father and bickering peevishly that she often drowned out her own points — which amounted to tortured efforts to reconcile her disgust for Mr. Trump with a desire to speak up for his voters.This may not be a popular take on Ms. McCain (who eventually left the show amid mockery of her entitled attitude and embarrassing lapses in decorum), but she had moments of clarity. She raised valid but then-taboo questions about America’s pandemic response and, to the acute annoyance of her co-hosts, analyzed failures and weaknesses of the Democratic Party.In 2020, when the other ladies nitpicked Bernie Sanders (saying, among other things, that he was ineffective, a fake Democrat and backed by Russians), Ms. McCain calmly laid out her repugnance for the Vermont senator’s leftist policies while acknowledging that his runaway popularity could land him the nomination. It was Ms. McCain who frankly discussed the populist sentiment fueling the rise of both Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders.Ms. McCain’s seat was filled this season by the more cordial — or perhaps more easily cowed — Ms. Farah Griffin, a former spokeswoman for the Trump administration. Ms. Farah Griffin quit her job amid Mr. Trump’s election lies and went on to testify before the House select committee investigating the insurrection of Jan. 6 — insufficient atonement, according to her new colleagues. Her early weeks on the show were full of struggle sessions in which her co-hosts (most notably Ms. Hostin and Ms. Navarro) snubbed and needled her until she coughed up, yet again, a denunciation of Mr. Trump.“I do question you … ’cause you’re a very smart woman,” Ms. Hostin said to her in a typical early exchange. “When you looked at his history … did it give you pause? As a woman who considers herself a brown woman, ‘My God, I’m working for a racist’?”Ms. Farah Griffin repeated the familiar explanation: She believed public service was a higher calling and didn’t think it was acceptable to cede the White House to “the crazies.”“I could spend the rest of my life debating if that was the right choice and, honestly, I spend a lot of time thinking about it,” she said, sounding weary. “But what I worry about is that this man could be president again.”When I first started watching “The View,” I was immersed in the violence and upheaval that followed Sept. 11, 2001. Peering westward through the window of the TV, I’d marvel at how unaffected the ladies seemed, how coifed and manicured, chatting about cheating husbands while the wars ground along. Sometimes I had the sense of watching anesthesia dripping into the veins of the American public.But then, like clouds parting, the ladies would say real things. Looking back now, I’m struck by how layered and blunt those conversations were — especially compared to those of today.In a 2007 episode, for example, the ladies clashed over torture, morality and America’s reputation abroad. Elisabeth Hasselbeck sneered that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed deserved to be tortured for his role in the Sept. 11 attacks. “Why don’t we give him milk and cookies at the same time,” Ms. Hasselbeck said. “And a lawyer, and let him watch ‘American Idol’?”Rosie O’Donnell countered by asking if labeling someone a terrorist nullified that person’s humanity. “They have been treating them like animals, Elisabeth, not like human beings,” she said.The U.S. government was “sanctioning torture,” Ms. O’Donnell went on, “from the president all the way down,” leading to anti-American protests around the world.Ms. Hasselbeck was unmoved. “I’d rather be safe than liked,” she said.Ms. Behar, a compulsive mood lightener with a habit of cracking jokes and steering the discussion back to daily practicalities, sided with Ms. O’Donnell, saying that she wanted to be greeted warmly on vacation in Italy.“I want them to say, ‘Hey, Americana, come,’” Ms. Behar said. “I don’t want them to not like me.”I still loathe what Ms. Hasselbeck said — suggesting torture as a punishment, mocking the right to a lawyer, prizing safety above all else. But it didn’t shock me. Those values had dominated the U.S. government since 2001, and I’d been watching them play out disastrously in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. If anything, it was cathartic to hear the arguments trotted onto TV, to see them falter and collapse under challenge.What strikes me now, though, was how that debate ended. “I think you’re wrong,” Ms. O’Donnell told Ms. Hasselbeck. “I still love you, but I think you’re wrong.”I love you, but you’re wrong. “The View” isn’t like that anymore. I think Americans are, or could be, or want to be — but we certainly don’t see it done on TV.The ladies often seem on the brink of having an honest and textured discussion — somebody will say something intriguing — but the most compelling comments tend to go untouched.I envision behind them the suited figures of the ABC network and the Walt Disney Company, which owns the network, and the companies that buy ads to sell things in the breaks, all of which benefit from predictable centrist leadership and regard eruptions of popular sentiment as an undesirable expense.Ms. Goldberg, seemingly keen to avoid any steep ideological edges, frequently shuts down conversation with a sweeping and vague speech on the uncertainty of politics or the unreliability of polls or some such.One recent morning, Ms. Haines fretted about the insurrection of Jan. 6 and the erosion of public trust.“The media is at its lowest. The Supreme Court is at its lowest,” she said, ticking off on her fingers. “People don’t trust anyone these days, so to completely ——”Ms. Behar interrupted: “They trust us,” she snapped.“Yes!” Ms. Hostin said emphatically, hands folded around her coffee mug, like a teacher’s pet who’s just called the right answer. As the audience exploded in applause, Ms. Haines stammered to regain her thought.Ms. Behar shrugged, and interrupted again. “Sure,” she said curtly.And that was that.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.

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1), article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label {
      text-transform: uppercase;
      font-size: 1rem;
      font-weight: 600;
      line-height: 1.5rem;
      letter-spacing: 0.05em;

      }

      h1:first-letter {
      margin-left: 0;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1):after, article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label:after {
      content: “Guest Essay”;
      display: block;
      color: white;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1) a:link, article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1) a:visited, article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label {
      color: #D0021B;
      }

      @media screen and (min-width: 1024px){

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > div:nth-of-type(2) h1:before,
      article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) h1:before{
      content: “”;
      width: 8.75rem;
      border: 1px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.25);
      unicode-bidi: normal;
      display: block;
      margin: -8px auto 35px;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(2),
      article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) > div > div:nth-of-type(2) p {
      font-weight: 100;
      -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased;
      letter-spacing: 0.25px;
      margin-top: 10px;
      }

      }

      @media screen and (max-width: 1024px){
      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > div:nth-of-type(2) h1,
      article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) h1{
      margin-bottom: 5px;
      }
      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) p:nth-of-type(1) a:link, article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) p:nth-of-type(1) a:visited {
      color: #D0021B;
      letter-spacing: 0.07em;
      font-size: 1rem;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1):after, article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label:after{
      color: #111;
      }
      } More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Senegal’s Opposition Leader Is Sentenced to 2 Years in Prison

      by

      A case involving a rape charge against Ousmane Sonko has monopolized the country’s political life and raised concerns over the prosecution of political opponents.A court in Senegal sentenced the country’s leading opposition figure to two years in prison on Thursday after finding him guilty of “corrupting youth.” The ruling, which for now bars him from running in future elections, throws the West African nation’s political future into uncertainty less than a year before its next presidential contest.The opposition leader, Ousmane Sonko, was accused of raping an employee of a massage parlor in Dakar, the capital, and issuing death threats against her. The court acquitted him of those charges, which he had denied and has denounced as an attempt by Senegal’s president, Macky Sall, to sideline him.But the conviction of “corrupting youth” — a charge relating to an accusation that Mr. Sonko had a sexual relationship with the massage parlor worker, who was under 21 at the time — renders him ineligible to run in next year’s election, a vote that is widely seen in Senegal and broader West Africa as a test of democratic values in the region.Mr. Sonko cannot appeal, because he did not appear in court for the hearings or the verdict, citing threats to his safety.Clashes erupted between protesters and security forces across Senegal and in Dakar shortly after the verdict was announced, including near the city’s main university, where several protesters erected barricades and threw stones at the police, who responded with tear gas. A few protesters were injured.Clashes broke out in Dakar on Thursday after the verdict was announced.Zohra Bensemra/ReutersSenegal, a country of 17 million people, has long been hailed as a model of political pluralism in West Africa, a region known for coups and aging leaders clinging to power. Elections have been mostly peaceful since the country became independent from France in 1960. The United States and European countries, as well as China, hold the country as one of their most reliable partners in West Africa.Yet the battle around the political future of Mr. Sonko, 48, whose fiery rhetoric has made him popular among young Senegalese, has become the president’s biggest challenge. In the coming months, it could lead to the most serious test faced by Senegalese democracy in more than a decade, analysts say.“Senegal finds itself in a thick fog, with lots of uncertainties,” said Alioune Tine, a rights expert and founder of the AfrikaJom Center, a Dakar-based research organization. “It has turned into a police state and, increasingly, an authoritarian one.”There is no public proof that Mr. Sonko’s case has been politically motivated, but some academics, human rights observers and most opponents of Mr. Sall have raised questions about the lack of concrete evidence and the harsh treatment of Mr. Sonko throughout the proceedings. They have also in recent years warned of a steady erosion of democratic norms as several political opponents have been jailed and journalists arrested.In recent months, police officers have been posted at multiple traffic circles in Dakar; temporary bans on motorcycles to prevent quick gatherings of protesters have become a regular fixture in the capital; and demonstrators have faced a heavy-handed response from security forces, with clashes at times turning deadly. Protesters have also targeted the police, attacked gas stations and this week burned the house of Mr. Sall’s chief of staff.Demonstrators faced off with riot police officers during a protest on Thursday at the Cheikh Anta Diop University campus.Leo Correa/Associated PressMr. Sonko’s fate remained unclear as of Thursday. One of his lawyers, Bamba Cissé, said in a telephone interview that Mr. Sonko would not surrender, “because we’re against a judiciary system perverted by political leaders.” He continued: “For two years, Senegal has been told that Mr. Sonko was involved in a rape affair. Today we have the proof that it was a plot.”Riot police officers positioned near Mr. Sonko’s house in Dakar were blocking access, and on Wednesday had thrown tear gas at lawmakers from the National Assembly who were trying to peacefully approach it. The police have also targeted foreign journalists covering the episode.Adama Ndiaye, a supporter of Mr. Sonko’s who unsuccessfully tried to approach his residence on Thursday, said it was a bleak day for Senegal. “The ‘corrupting youth’ charge comes out of nowhere, it’s pure injustice,” said Mr. Ndiaye, a 35-year-old car salesman who said he was on his way to a Dakar neighborhood where protests were taking place.Opponents of Mr. Sall have accused him of repeatedly sidelining key opposition leaders, including Mr. Sonko, who was barred by Senegal’s constitutional council from running in last year’s parliamentary elections. Dozens of members of his party have been jailed or placed under electronic surveillance. Current and former Dakar mayors were also prohibited from running in the 2019 presidential election because of convictions for embezzlement.At a hearing last month, Mr. Sonko’s accuser said he had assaulted her five times at a massage parlor between late 2020 and February 2021, and sent her death threats. The New York Times does not routinely name accusers in rape cases, but Mr. Sonko’s accuser, Adji Sarr, has been publicly identified and has given news interviews. She has been under police protection since 2021.Gender-based violence has been decreasing in Senegal in recent years, but it remains widespread, though rarely talked about. About 30 percent of women aged 15 to 49 have experienced physical or sexual violence, according to a demographic and health survey released in 2017, with the highest rate, 34 percent, among those ages 25 to 29. More than two-thirds never spoke about it or sought help.Some Senegalese said they considered the trial politically motivated.Leo Correa/Associated PressEven as Ms. Sarr detailed at length last week the assaults she said she had faced, Senegalese newspapers published headlines with lewd innuendos, comparing her testimony to pornography.Marième Cissé, an expert on gender issues, said Senegalese society still put the blame on victims of sexual violence. The Sonko trial, she added, gave many Senegalese the impression that a crime as serious as rape had been used for political purposes.“That instrumentalization has minimized the seriousness of the accusation,” said Ms. Cissé, a researcher with the Dakar-based Wathi research organization. “It could discourage women from talking about the abuse they may face.”Many Senegalese say they do not believe the accuser.Moussa Sané, a 46-year-old businessman who attended the court session on Thursday, said that he was not a Sonko supporter but that the verdict showed the political motive of the trial. “The government is trying its best to prevent Sonko from running in the next election,” he said.Until Thursday, Mr. Sonko had been widely regarded as Mr. Sall’s strongest challenger in next year’s election, although Mr. Sall has not said whether he will run.According to most legal experts, the Senegalese Constitution prevents Mr. Sall from running: It limits presidents to two five-year terms, and Mr. Sall is set to complete his second term in February. But he argues that a constitutional reform adopted in 2016 reset the clock to zero and gives him the right to seek another term.Mr. Tine, the rights expert, said a third term would amount to a clear violation of the Constitution. “With Sonko convicted, Macky Sall has made him a political martyr,” he said. “And with this third-term issue, he has created another problem for himself.”Mady Camara contributed reporting. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Fear Sets In Among Turkey’s L.G.B.T. Community After Erdogan’s Attacks

      by

      When Yasemin Oz, a lesbian lawyer in Istanbul, heard President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claiming victory after a runoff election on Sunday, she said she feared for the future. In his speech, he declared “family is sacred for us” and insisted that L.G.B.T.Q. people would never “infiltrate” his governing party.They were familiar themes, heard often throughout Mr. Erdogan’s campaign for re-election: He frequently attacked L.G.B.T.Q. people, referring to them as “deviants” and saying they were “spreading like the plague.” But Ms. Oz said she had hoped it was just electioneering to rally the president’s conservative base.“I was already worried about what was to come for us,” said Ms. Oz, 49. But after the speech, she thought, “it will get harsher.”The rights and freedoms of L.G.B.T.Q. citizens became a lightning-rod issue during this year’s election campaign. Mr. Erdogan, facing the greatest political threat of his two decades as the country’s dominant leader and seeking to woo conservatives, repeatedly attacked his opponents for supposedly supporting gay rights. The anti-Erdogan opposition mostly avoided the topic for fear of alienating some of its own voters.That left many L.G.B.T.Q. people fearing that the discrimination they have long faced by the government and conservative parts of society could worsen — and feeling that no one in the country had their backs.“People are scared and having dystopian thoughts like, ‘Are we going to be slashed or violently attacked in the middle of the street?’” said Ogulcan Yediveren, a coordinator at SPoD, an L.G.B.T.Q. advocacy group in Istanbul. “What will happen is that people will hide their identities, and that is bad enough.”Turkey, a predominantly Muslim society with a secular state, does not criminalize homosexuality and has laws against discrimination. But in recent conversations, more than a dozen L.G.B.T.Q. people said they often struggled to find jobs, secure housing and get quality health care as well as to be accepted by their friends, relatives, neighbors and co-workers.Supporters of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan celebrating his victory in Istanbul on Sunday.An aerial view of a mosque and an election poster for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Kayseri, Turkey in April. Turkey is a predominantly Muslim society with a secular state.In recent years, they said, they have encountered new restrictions on their visibility in society. Universities have shut down L.G.B.T.Q. student clubs. And since 2014, the authorities have banned Pride parades in major cities, including in Istanbul, where crowds in the tens of thousands used to participate.That tracks with Mr. Erdogan’s vision for Turkey.Since the start of his national political career in 2003, he has increased his own power while promoting a conservative Muslim view of society. He insists that marriage can only be between a man and a woman, and encourages women to have three children to build the nation.Rights advocates say that as Mr. Erdogan has gained power, his conservative outlook has filtered down, encouraging local authorities to restrict L.G.B.T.Q. activities and pushing the security forces to crack down on gay rights activism.Anti-L.G.B.T.Q. rhetoric was more prominent during this election than in past cycles, even though there are no looming legal changes that would expand or limit rights. No political party is trying to legalize same-sex marriage or adoption, for example, or expand medical care for transgender youth.Instead, Mr. Erdogan and his allies use the issue to galvanize conservatives.“What they want to impose on society in terms of other values is full of hatred and violence toward us,” said Nazlican Dogan, 26, who is facing legal charges related to participation in pro-L.G.B.T.Q. protests at Bogazici University in Istanbul. “It was really ugly and it made us feel that we can’t exist in this country, like I should just leave.”Bambi Ceren, right, and other members of a Pride week organizing committee gather in an apartment in Istanbul.Nazlican Dogan, who is facing legal charges related to pro-L.G.B.T.Q. protests at a university, in Istanbul last week.During his campaign, Mr. Erdogan characterized L.G.B.T.Q. people as a threat to society.“If the concept of family is not strong, the destruction of the nation happens quickly,” he told young people during a televised meeting in early May. “L.G.B.T. is a poison injected into the institution of the family. It is not possible for us to accept that poison as a country whose people are 99 percent Muslim.”In April, his interior minister, Suleyman Soylu, went even further, falsely claiming that gay rights would allow humans to marry animals.SPoD, the advocacy group, asked parliamentary candidates during the campaign to sign a contract to protect L.G.B.T.Q. rights. Fifty-eight candidates signed, and 11 of them won seats in the 600-member legislature, said Mr. Yediveren, the coordinator.His group has also tried to expand legal protections for L.G.B.T.Q. people.While certain laws prohibit discrimination, they do not specifically mention sexual identity or orientation, he said. At the same time, the authorities often cite vague concepts like “general morals” and “public order” to act against activities they don’t like, such as Pride week events.“This week is very important because we don’t have physical locations we can come together as a community to support each other,” said Bambi Ceren, 34, a member of a committee planning events for this year’s Pride week, which begins on June 19.A drag performer who uses the stage name Florence Konstantina Delight at a club in Istanbul.People socialize at Ziba, a gay-friendly bar in Istanbul.Last year, the police prevented Pride events and arrested people who gathered to take part, committee members said.SPoD runs a national hotline to field queries about sexual orientation, legal protections or how to access medical care or other services. The group can solve most issues related to services, Mr. Yediveren said, but most callers’ problems are social and emotional.“People are feeling very lonely and isolated,” he said.Transgender individuals struggle to find jobs, housing and proper medication and care. And gay men and lesbians are sometimes forced into heterosexual marriages and fear coming out to their families and co-workers.Worrying about, “‘Will I be caught one day?’ causes a lot of stress for them,” Mr. Yediveren said.And the threat of violence is real.Some L.G.B.T.Q. people said they had been beaten by the security forces during protests or met with indifference from the police while being harassed on the street.A survey last year by ILGA-Europe, a rights organization, ranked Turkey second-to-last out of 49 European countries on L.G.B.T.Q. rights. Another group, Transgender Europe, said that 62 transgender people had been killed in Turkey between 2008 and 2022.Many L.G.B.T.Q. people fear that the demonization during the campaign will make that threat more acute.A queer university student from Turkey’s Kurdish minority, who grew up in a smaller city with no significant L.G.B.T.Q. presence, said she feared that bad days were ahead.Members of a Pride week organizing committee spraying graffiti in Istanbul.Berat, an openly gay architecture student, works as a hairdresser in Istanbul.People who would not normally commit violence might feel empowered to do so because the government had spread hatred for people like her, she said, claiming they were sick, dangerous or a threat to the family. She spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being attacked.Despite the increased danger, many L.G.B.T.Q. people vowed to keep fighting for their rights and maintaining their visibility in society. To deal with the fear of random attacks, they plan to look out for each other more to ensure they are safe.In Istanbul, a 25-year-old drag performer who goes by the stage name Florence Konstantina Delight and uses gender-neutral pronouns called the new attention unsettling.“In the whole history of queer life in Turkey, we could never be that visible,” they said in an interview. “But because of the election, everyone was talking about us.”They described growing up in Turkey as “full of abuse, full of denial, full of teachers ignoring your existence and what happened to you, like your pals bullying you.”At age 16, Florence accepted their sexual identity, attended a Pride parade and set up a Facebook account with a fake name to contact L.G.B.T.Q. organizations and make friends, eventually stumbling upon someone at the same high school.They later moved to Istanbul, where they perform weekly at a rare L.G.B.T.Q.-friendly bar.Mr. Erdogan’s win on Sunday caused Florence despair.“I stared into space for a while,” they said.A woman dancing at a lesbian bar in Istanbul in front of an image of Kemal Kılıcdaroglu, who lost to Mr. Erdogan in the presidential election. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Las elecciones presidenciales de Turquía en cinco puntos clave

      by

      Las crisis, incluidos los terremotos y la inflación, no impidieron la reelección de Recep Tayyip Erdogan. La votación se consideró libre, pero no justa, ya que Erdogan utilizó su poder para inclinar la balanza.ESTAMBUL — La reelección del presidente Recep Tayyip Erdogan le ha otorgado cinco años más para profundizar su impronta conservadora en la sociedad turca y hacer realidad su ambición de aumentar el poder económico y geopolítico del país.El Consejo Supremo Electoral de Turquía nombró a Erdogan vencedor después de una segunda vuelta electoral el domingo 28 de mayo. Ganó el 52,1 por ciento de los votos contra el candidato de la oposición, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, quien obtuvo el 47,9 por ciento con casi todos los votos escrutados, dijo el consejo.Las elecciones fueron seguidas de cerca por los aliados de Turquía en la OTAN, incluido Estados Unidos, que a menudo ha visto a Erdogan como un socio frustrante debido a su retórica antioccidental y sus estrechos vínculos con el presidente de Rusia, Vladimir Putin, los cuales han crecido desde la invasión rusa a Ucrania.Erdogan no ha dado indicios de que planee cambiar su política exterior, en la que ha buscado utilizar la ubicación de Turquía en la confluencia de Europa, Asia y Medio Oriente para expandir su influencia, o a nivel nacional, donde ha consolidado el poder en sus manos y respondió a una crisis inflacionaria con medidas poco convencionales que, según los economistas, exacerbaron el problema.En las elecciones lo desafió una oposición recientemente unida que calificó la votación como un momento decisivo para la democracia turca. El candidato de la oposición, Kilicdaroglu, se postuló como una figura anti-Erdogan y prometió restaurar las libertades civiles y mejorar los vínculos con Occidente. Se presentó a sí mismo como un candidato más en contacto con las luchas del ciudadano común.A continuación, algunas conclusiones:Las crisis perjudicaron, pero no abatieron a ErdoganEl candidato de la oposición, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, a la derecha en esta pancarta en Estambul, se presentó como una figura anti-Erdogan.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesEstas fueron las elecciones más desafiantes de los 20 años de Erdogan como el político más prominente de Turquía, como primer ministro desde 2003 y como presidente desde 2014. Antes de la votación, la mayoría de las encuestas apuntaban a una contienda reñida con Kilicdaroglu a la cabeza.Los analistas citaron varias razones por las que Erdogan podría tener problemas. La indignación por una dolorosa crisis del costo de vida puso a algunos votantes en su contra. Los fuertes terremotos de febrero acabaron con la vida de más de 50.000 personas y dañaron cientos de edificios en el sur de Turquía. Muchos sobrevivientes del terremoto se quejaron de la lenta respuesta inicial del gobierno, mientras que la destrucción planteó dudas sobre si la prisa de Erdogan por desarrollar el país había fomentado una construcción insegura.La oposición históricamente dividida de Turquía dejó de lado sus diferencias para unirse en apoyo a Kilicdaroglu y alegó que se requería un cambio para detener la caída del país hacia la autocracia.Pero Erdogan prevaleció, gracias al ferviente apoyo de una parte importante de la población y sus habilidades como político en campaña. Los conservadores religiosos que aprecian su expansión del papel del islam en la vida pública lo apoyaron e incluso muchos de los turcos indignados por la inflación afirmaron que no creían que la oposición pudiera gobernar mejor.El terremoto no tuvo un gran impacto sobre las eleccionesPersonas haciendo fila para la distribución de suministros tras los terremotos que sacudieron la ciudad de Antioquía, en febrero. La participación en las elecciones en las zonas afectadas por el sismo fue sorprendentemente alta.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesErdogan llegó al poder hace 20 años en medio de la indignación por la desastrosa respuesta del gobierno a un terremoto cerca de Estambul en 1999 en el que murieron más de 17.000 personas. Es por eso que muchos esperaban que el terremoto de este año también perjudicara sus posibilidades.Pero hay pocos indicios de que eso haya sucedido.Erdogan salió victorioso en ocho de las 11 provincias afectadas por el terremoto de febrero. A su partido, el gobernante Partido de la Justicia y el Desarrollo, y a sus aliados políticos les fue incluso mejor, pues ganaron la mayoría de los votos en las elecciones parlamentarias simultáneas en todas menos una de las provincias afectadas por el terremoto.La participación en la zona del terremoto también fue alta, a pesar de las preocupaciones de que muchos votantes desplazados por la destrucción tendrían dificultades para regresar a casa, como se requería, para emitir sus votos. Aunque la participación en las 11 provincias afectadas por el terremoto fue inferior al 88,9 por ciento de los votantes aptos que emitieron su voto a nivel nacional, en ninguna de esas provincias la participación fue menor del 80 por ciento.Entrevistas con sobrevivientes del terremoto indicaron muchas razones por las que el desastre no había cambiado su perspectiva política. Algunos describieron el terremoto como un acto de Dios al que cualquier gobierno habría tenido problemas para responder. Otros cuyas casas fueron destruidas dijeron que tenían más fe en Erdogan para reconstruir las zonas afectadas que en su rival.Las advertencias sobre el terrorismo resonaron en los votantesSimpatizantes de Erdogan en Estambul el domingo. Erdogan hizo de la oposición a los militantes kurdos un tema clave de su campañaSergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesErdogan socavó a la oposición al retratar a sus líderes como débiles e incompetentes, pero una línea de ataque resultó ser especialmente potente: las acusaciones de que serían blandos con el terrorismo.El mandatario planteó esta idea a los votantes en diversas ocasiones, argumentando que la oposición había recibido el apoyo del principal partido prokurdo de Turquía. A menudo, el gobierno acusa a ese partido de colaborar con militantes de la minoría kurda de Turquía, quienes, buscando autonomía, han estado en guerra con el Estado turco por décadas.Erdogan llegó incluso a transmitir videos manipulados en sus mítines para mostrar a los líderes militantes cantando la canción de campaña de Kilicdaroglu. Muchos votantes le creyeron y dijeron en entrevistas que no confiaban en la oposición para mantener la seguridad del país.El voto fue libre pero no justoRecuento de votos en Estambul el domingo. El contrincante de la oposición no impugnó el recuento, pero dijo que la elección en general fue injusta.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesLos observadores internacionales no reportaron problemas a gran escala con el proceso de recolección y conteo de votos, considerando el proceso libre.Sin embargo, señalaron las enormes ventajas que tenía Erdogan antes de que comenzara la votación, incluida su capacidad para liberar miles de millones de dólares en gastos estatales para tratar de compensar los efectos negativos de la inflación y otras tensiones económicas y la cobertura mediática abundante y positiva que recibió del canal financiado por el Estado.En las últimas horas del domingo, Kilicdaroglu no cuestionó el recuento de votos, pero les dijo a sus seguidores que las elecciones en general habían sido “uno de los procesos electorales más injustos de los últimos años”.Muchos en la oposición temen que la contienda reñida impulse a Erdogan a tomar medidas más agresivas contra sus oponentes políticos para evitar un reto así de difícil en el futuro.Erdogan ahora debe abordar los problemas económicosTurquía ha recurrido a sus reservas de divisas extranjeras mientras intenta estabilizar su propia moneda.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesLos economistas advirtieron que Erdogan recurrió a tácticas costosas a corto plazo para aislar a los votantes de la inflación y evitar que el valor de la moneda nacional se hundiera aún más. Pero no puede seguir haciendo eso para siempre.Las reservas de divisas extranjeras han disminuido drásticamente, lo que significa que el país podría perder su capacidad para pagarles a los acreedores extranjeros. Y, debido a que gran parte de ese dinero se ha gastado para mantener estable la moneda turca, su valor podría desplomarse cuando se detenga ese gasto.Erdogan no dio indicios durante su campaña de que planeara modificar sus políticas económicas, a pesar de una inflación obstinadamente alta de dos dígitos que, según los economistas, se ha visto exacerbada por su insistencia en bajar las tasas de interés en lugar de incrementarlas para combatir la inflación, como recomienda la economía ortodoxa.Es por eso que, independientemente de las medidas que a Erdogan le gustaría priorizar al comienzo de su nuevo mandato, es probable que los riesgos de una crisis monetaria o una recesión exijan su atención.Gulsin Harman More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Turkey’s Election Is a Warning About Trump

      by

      “The totalitarian phenomenon,” the French philosopher Jean-François Revel once noted, “is not to be understood without making an allowance for the thesis that some important part of every society consists of people who actively want tyranny: either to exercise it themselves or — much more mysteriously — to submit to it.”It’s an observation that should help guide our thinking about the re-election this week of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey. And it should serve as a warning about other places — including the Republican Party — where autocratic leaders, seemingly incompetent in many respects, are returning to power through democratic means.That’s not quite the way Erdogan’s close-but-comfortable victory in Sunday’s runoff over the former civil servant Kemal Kilicdaroglu is being described in many analyses. The president, they say, has spent 20 years in power tilting every conceivable scale in his favor.Erdogan has used regulatory means and abused the criminal-justice system to effectively control the news media. He has exercised his presidential power to deliver subsidies, tax cuts, cheap loans and other handouts to favored constituencies. He has sought to criminalize an opposition party on specious grounds of links to terrorist groups. In December, a Turkish court effectively barred Erdogan’s most serious prospective rival, Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu of Istanbul, from politics by sentencing him to prison on charges of insulting public officials.Then, too, Kilicdaroglu was widely seen as a colorless and inept politician, promising a return to a status quo ante that many Turks remember, with no fondness, as a time of regular economic crises and a kind of repressive secularism.All of this is true, as far as it goes, and it helps underscore the worldwide phenomenon of what Fareed Zakaria aptly calls “free and unfair elections.” But it doesn’t go far enough.Turkey under Erdogan is in a dreadful state and has been for a long time. Inflation last year hit 85 percent and is still running north of 40 percent, thanks to Erdogan’s insistence on cutting interest rates in the teeth of rising prices. He has used a series of show trials — some based in fact, others pure fantasy — to eviscerate civil freedoms. February’s earthquakes, which took an estimated 50,000 lives and injured twice as many, were badly handled by the government and exposed the corruption of a system that cared more for patronage networks than for well-built buildings.Under normal political expectations, Erdogan should have paid the political price with a crushing electoral defeat. Not only did he survive, he increased his vote share in some of the towns worst hit by, and most neglected after, the earthquakes. “We love him,” explained a resident quoted in The Economist. “For the call to prayer, for our homes, for our headscarves.”That last line is telling, and not just because it gets to the importance of Erdogan’s Islamism as the secret of his success. It’s a rebuke to James Carville’s parochially American slogan, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Actually, no: It’s also God, tradition, values, identity, culture and the resentments that go with each. Only a denuded secular imagination fails to notice that there are things people care about more than their paychecks.There is also the matter of power. The classically liberal political tradition is based on the suspicion of power. The illiberal tradition is based on the exaltation of it. Erdogan, as the tribune of the Turkish Everyman, built himself an aesthetically grotesque, 1,100-room presidential palace for $615 million. Far from scandalizing his supporters, it seems to have delighted them. In it, they see not a sign of extravagance or waste, but the importance of the man and the movement to which they attach themselves and submit.All this is a reminder that political signals are often transmitted at frequencies that liberal ears have trouble hearing, much less decoding. To wonder how Erdogan could possibly be re-elected after so thoroughly wrecking his country’s economy and its institutions is akin to wondering how Vladimir Putin appears to retain considerable domestic support in the wake of his Ukraine debacle. Maybe what some critical mass of ordinary Russians want, at least at some subconscious level, isn’t an easy victory. It’s a unifying ordeal.Which brings us to another would-be strongman in his palace in Palm Beach. In November, I was sure that Donald Trump was, as I wrote, “finally finished.” How could any but his most slavish followers continue to support him after he had once again cost Republicans the Senate? Wouldn’t this latest proof of losing be the last straw for devotees who had been promised “so much winning”?Silly me. The Trump movement isn’t built on the prospect of winning. It’s built on a sense of belonging: of being heard and seen; of being a thorn in the side to those you sense despise you and whom you despise in turn; of submission for the sake of representation. All the rest — victory or defeat, prosperity or misery — is details.Erdogan defied expectation because he understood this. He won’t be the last populist leader to do so.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. More