World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      The Storm is Upon Us review: indispensable QAnon history, updated

      by

      The Storm is Upon Us review: indispensable QAnon history, updated Donald Trump welcomed the conspiracy at the White House. Its followers stormed Congress. Big Tech still seems not to care. Mike Rothschild’s book should sound the alarm for us allWhat is it that has hypnotized so many addled souls who devote themselves to decoding the Delphic clues of the QAnon conspiracy?QAnon’s ‘Q’ re-emerges on far-right message board after two years of silenceRead moreWhat they think they’re getting is “secret knowledge”, from “Q” and a bunch of other military insiders working for Donald Trump, about “the storm … a ringside seat to the final match” in a “secret war between good and evil” that will end with the slaughter of all “enemies of freedom”.In short, an irresistible mix of “biblical retribution and participatory justice”.The bad guys are “Democrats, Hollywood elites, business tycoons, wealthy liberals, the medical establishment, celebrities and the mass media … They’re controlled by Barack Obama” – a Muslim sleeper agent – and Hillary Clinton, “a blood-drinking ghoul who murders everyone in her way … and they’re funded by George Soros and the Rothschild banking family (no relation to the author)”.This updated edition of Mike Rothschild’s exhaustive history of the Q movement is more important than ever. Why? Partly because of the crucial role played by so many QAnon devotees in the storming of the Capitol on 6 January 2021 but mostly because Rothschild documents how much of this insanity has penetrated to the heart of the new Republican party, propelled by many of America’s most loathsome individuals, from Ted Cruz and Donald Trump Jr to Alex Jones, Michael Flynn and Roseanne Barr.As Rothschild writes of Trump’s first national security adviser, “Flynn’s family even filmed themselves taking the ‘digital soldier oath’… part of what would become a total enmeshment between members of the Flynn family and QAnon.”In the two years before the 2020 presidential election, “nearly 100 Republican candidates declared themselves to be Q Believers” while Trump “retweeted hundreds of Q followers, putting their violent fantasies and bizarre memes into tens of millions of feeds”.Asked about a movement which has repackaged most of the oldest and harshest racist and antisemitic conspiracies for a new age, Trump gave his usual coy endorsement of the behavior of America’s most damaged internet addicts.“I don’t know much about the movement,” he mumbled, “other than I understand they like me very much, which I appreciate.”In winter 2021, as the Omicron variant sent Covid cases skyrocketing, “QAnon promoters were among the most visible anti-vaccine advocates pushing out lies and conspiracy theories” to “dissuade people from getting vaccinated”.As with so many of QAnon adherents’ positions, the message was “both clear and completely contradicted by the available evidence: they believed the pandemic was over and any mandates related to vaccines or masks were totalitarian control mechanisms that were actually killing people”.More than anything else, this is the latest horrific confirmation of what the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt recently described as “the power of social media as a universal solvent, breaking down bonds and weakening institutions everywhere it reached”.Like so many other ghastly conspiracies of recent decades, especially the blood libel that the Sandy Hook massacre was a staged event in which no one was actually killed, QAnon was propelled at warp speed by a combination of the incompetence and greed of all the big-tech big shots: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube.Rothschild describes the usual futile internet game of Whac-A-Mole.Reddit “abruptly banned the 70,000-member r/Great Awakening board because members had started harassing other users” and had released the personal information “of at least one person they incorrectly claimed to be a mass shooter”.No matter: Q followers just migrated to Twitter and “closed Facebook groups with tens of thousands of members … Just in 2018, Q believers shared Q YouTube videos over 1.4m times, and drove hundreds of thousands of shares to Fox News, Breitbart and the Gateway Pundit”.By 2019, “Trump was routinely retweeting QAnon-promoting accounts.” By the 2020 election, “Trump had retweeted hundreds … and was regularly sharing memes created by the movement”.When Twitter and Facebook finally started “cracking down on Q iconography in the summer of 2020”, much of the movement just moved on to Instagram. Amazon and Etsy joined in the fun with books and merchandise and there were even “Q apps on the Google Play Store”.‘The lunacy is getting more intense’: how Birds Aren’t Real took on the conspiracy theoristsRead moreQ’s legacy includes what now looks like the permanent deformation of the Republican party. A December 2020 poll by NPR/Ipsos found about a third of Americans believed in a shadowy “deep state” and a robust 23% of Republicans “believed in a pedophilic ring of Satan-worshiping elites”.Rothschild ends by asking behavioral experts if there is anything the rest of us can do to help those who have gone far down this wretched rabbit hole. They say the only effective solution is a complete “unplugging” from the internet.Every time I read another book like this one, I’m increasingly inclined to the idea that this could be the only road back to sanity for all of us.
      The Storm is Upon Us: How QAnon Became a Movement, Cult, and Conspiracy Theory of Everything is published in paperback in the US by Melville House
      TopicsBooksQAnonThe far rightPolitics booksUS politicsSocial mediaInternetreviewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump set to ask court for ‘special master’ to review Mar-a-Lago evidence

      by

      Trump set to ask court for ‘special master’ to review Mar-a-Lago evidenceLegal motion would seek appointment of official to decide what materials can be used in investigation, attorney and sources say Donald Trump is expected to seek the appointment of a special court official to determine whether materials that the FBI seized from his Florida resort can be used in a criminal investigation, according to his lead attorney Jim Trusty and two sources familiar with the matter.US political violence is surging, but talk of a civil war is exaggerated – isn’t it?Read moreThe motion would be the first formal legal action by the former president after federal agents last week confiscated about 30 boxes of highly-sensitive documents from his Mar-a-Lago resort in connection with an investigation into the unauthorized retention of government secrets.Trump would argue that the court should appoint a special master – usually a retired lawyer or judge – because the FBI potentially seized privileged materials in the search, and the justice department should not itself decide what it can use in its investigation, the sources said.The ex-president’s lead attorney, Trusty, said on the Mark Levin Show on Friday evening that he was anticipating a motion that would force the justice department to disclose what “pre-raid” instructions were given to the FBI agents who executed the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.Trusty, a former chief of the organized crime section at the justice department, also said on the radio show that a court filing could come that evening, saying: “It’s probably going to be more like hours” – though there was no entry on the docket as of early Saturday afternoon.Why Trump is filing a motion now, nearly two weeks after the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago, was not clear. The former president and his allies have previously moved quickly to request special masters, including when the offices of his former lawyer Michael Cohen were searched in 2018.TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsFBIMar-a-LagonewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US supreme court backs Black voters challenging Georgia election rules

      by

      US supreme court backs Black voters challenging Georgia election rulesRuling comes as plaintiffs say current Georgia public service commission election system discriminates against Black voters Black voters challenging Georgia’s method of electing members to the state’s public service commission scored a preliminary US supreme court order in their favor late Friday.The decision came after conflicting rulings from lower courts earlier this month, offering up a rare example of the supreme court’s 6-3 conservative majority’s siding with voters over state officials.Louisiana woman faces ‘horrifically cruel’ abortion choice over fetus missing skullRead moreEarlier this month, a federal district judge found that the current system gave Black residents’ votes less weight. Each of the commission’s five seats hold jurisdiction over a specific district, but each seatholder is elected in a statewide race that dilutes Black voters’ power, said that ruling, which came from Trump White House-appointed judge Steven Grimberg.Grimberg ordered the postponement of a November election for two commissioners’ seats to allow the state legislature the time to create a new system for electing commissioners, granting a request from a group of voters challenging the system.However, last week, the federal 11th circuit court of appeals temporarily halted Grimberg’s ruling, citing the “Purcell principle”, which discourages courts from changing election rules immediately before an election.The supreme court on Friday reinstated the Grimberg ruling, with the plaintiffs citing testimony from numerous experts who found the current Georgia public service commission election system to be discriminatory against Black voters.Political data analyst Bernard Fraga, who focuses on the behavior of voting within communities, testified that statewide voting lets Georgia’s majority white population drown out votes coming from districts with mostly Black residents.“And, because elections are staggered, a minority group has less of an opportunity to concentrate its voting strength behind a candidate of choice,” Fraga said, according to the ruling.The ruling also cited the testimony of a former employee at the US justice department’s civil rights division, Stephen Popick.He said his study on voting behavior in Georgia between 2012 and 2020 showed “voter polarization” between Black and white voters, and the latter’s candidate always won even though Black voters all got behind the same leader as a group.Plaintiffs attorney Nico Martinez on Saturday told the Guardian he is “confident the district court’s well-reasoned decision will ultimately be upheld” as the case continues playing out in the 11th circuit, which could still block Grimberg’s ruling on other grounds, paving the way again for the November election date.“We are pleased that the supreme court took this important step to ensure that this November’s [public service commission] elections are not held using a method that unlawfully dilutes the votes of millions of Black citizens in Georgia,” said Martinez, a partner at the law firm Bartlit Beck.TopicsGeorgiaUS politicsUS supreme courtLaw (US)newsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in World Politics

      Why Do Women Support Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi?

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      As the US-led Postwar System Crumbles, a New World Order Emerges

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden bounces back: Inside 19 August Guardian Weekly

      by

      Biden bounces back: Inside 19 August Guardian Weekly Joe Biden rides high. Plus, 75 years since the Partition of India
      Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address Joe Biden’s political capital is riding high after a key plank of his legislative programme came to fruition. But the US president has greeted this “hot streak” in his usual quiet fashion. For his predecessor, it was a decidedly rough week after his home was raided by the FBI, looking for official documents that Donald Trump had held on to after his presidential term had ended. The reaction was a typical explosion of rage and accusation. David Smith, our Washington bureau chief, follows this compare-and-contrast theme to see which of the two men, who at this juncture still look likely to face each other again in the 2024 presidential election, came out on top.We report on two anniversaries in one region this week as Monday marked 75 years since the Partition of India, as well as a year since Afghanistan returned to Taliban rule. Our world affairs editor, Julian Borger, examines the extent to which Pakistan and India are still scarred by a final, brutal colonial flourish that divided communities, while Stefanie Glinski’s photo essay from Kabul focuses on how women’s rights have been eroded in the past year.The shocking news of the stabbing of Salman Rushdie reminded the world of the importance of free speech and how the efforts of ideological fanatics to curb it must be resisted. As Margaret Atwood writes on our Opinion pages, attacks on writers are a cheap populist distraction, while on the news pages we look at how Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses triggered hatred against him.Leading our features section this week is a story about a reversal in reputation. Peru-based writer Dan Collyns explains how Bolivian tin baron Moritz Hochschild, had been viewed as an exploitative oligarch until the discovery of a cache of papers revealed his role in saving thousands of Jews from Nazi Germany and how he used his power to overcome antisemitism in the ruling elites. And then we take a full and frank look at the growing popularity of naturism in Britain. The photographs are necessarily coy, with artfully placed props, but writer Sally Howard takes the pastime as seriously as its practitioners. We hope you enjoy this week’s issue.Get the magazine delivered to you at homeTopicsUS politicsInside Guardian WeeklyDonald TrumpJoe BidenSalman RushdieFreedom of speechIndiaAfghanistanReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Liz Cheney loses Wyoming Republican primary to Trump-endorsed rival

      by

      Liz Cheney loses Wyoming Republican primary to Trump-endorsed rivalThe vice-chair of the House January 6 panel faced retribution from state voters for going against the former president Liz Cheney has paid the price for her staunch opposition to Donald Trump’s assault on US democracy by losing her seat in Congress to a challenger backed by the former president.In praise of Liz Cheney. May we have more politicians like her | Robert ReichRead moreThe vice-chair of the January 6 committee was beaten by a conservative lawyer, Hageman – who has echoed Trump’s false claims of widespread voter fraud – in a Republican primary election to decide Wyoming’s lone member in the House of Representatives.Conceding defeat in a speech in Jackson, she said: “No House seats, no office in this land is more important than the principles we are all sworn to protect. And I well understood the potential political consequences of abiding by my duty.“Our republic relies upon the goodwill of all candidates for office to accept honorably the outcome of elections. And tonight, Harriet Hageman has received the most votes in this primary. She won.“I called her to concede the race this primary election is over. But now the real work begins.”Widely predicted by opinion polls, the result continues a winning streak for Trump-endorsed candidates in congressional primaries and deals a blow to the last vestiges of the Republican party establishment.It would have been unthinkable just a few years ago in Wyoming, a deeply conservative state where the Cheney family has been seen as political royalty.The three-term congresswoman’s father, Dick Cheney, represented the state in the US House for a decade before becoming defense secretary under George HW Bush from 1989 to 1993 and vice-president under George W Bush from 2001 to 2009.Supporting his daughter this month, Dick Cheney called Trump the greatest “threat to our republic” in American history.He also said he was proud of his daughter “for standing up to the truth, doing what’s right, honoring her oath to the constitution when so many in our party are too scared to do so”.But Liz Cheney’s crusade against Trump during the January 6 committee’s televised hearings angered local Republicans, who accused her of putting her national career ambitions ahead of Wyoming constituents.She was praised by Democrats and independents for taking a principled stand despite the likelihood it would prove an act of political self-sacrifice.Leading Republicans were eager to celebrate Cheney’s defeat.In a statement released before the race was called, Elise Stefanik of New York, who replaced Cheney as the No3 House Republican, said: “Congratulations to Harriet Hageman on her massive Republican primary victory in Wyoming over Nancy Pelosi’s puppet Liz Cheney.“… Harriet is a true America First patriot who will restore the people of Wyoming’s voice, which Liz Cheney had long forgotten”.Ronna McDaniel, chair of the Republican National Committee, followed suit, saying Hageman would “make Wyoming proud”.The Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump group formed by disaffected conservatives, said: “Tonight, the nation marks the end of the Republican party.“What remains shares the name and branding of the traditional GOP, but is in fact an authoritarian nationalist cult dedicated only to Donald Trump.” More details soon …TopicsUS midterm elections 2022US CongressHouse of RepresentativesRepublicansUS politicsUS Capitol attackJanuary 6 hearingsnewsReuse this content More

    • 313 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Taiwan is now a touchstone issue for the UK, the US and for us in China. This is how we see it | Zheng Zeguang

      by

      Taiwan is now a touchstone issue for the UK, the US and for us in China. This is how we see itZheng ZeguangAfter Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, relations between the countries are at a delicate stage. There must be no miscalculation

      Zheng Zeguang is the Chinese ambassador to the UK
      Chinese ambassador warns UK not to cross ‘red lines’ over Taiwan
      Over the past weeks, the world has seen the resolute response from China after the visit to Taiwan of US House speaker Nancy Pelosi. Some people have asked why this is necessary. To understand, one needs to learn some history.Taiwan has been an inalienable part of China’s territory since ancient times. Throughout history, the island has been twice lost and regained. During the colonial expansion of western countries, it was occupied by the Dutch for 38 years before it was recovered in 1662 by Chinese national hero Zheng Chenggong. When imperial powers were carving up the world among themselves, Taiwan was subjected to Japanese occupation for 50 years. The Cairo declaration of 1943 and the Potsdam proclamation of 1945 made it clear that Taiwan should be returned to China.Although the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have been caught up in prolonged political antagonism since 1949 as a result of the Chinese civil war, China has never been divided, the island has remained part of China’s territory, and the historical and legal fact that the two sides of the Strait belong to the one and same China has never changed. The Chinese people will firmly safeguard, at any cost, their national sovereignty and territorial integrity. “Taiwan independence” means war and will lead to a dead end. Opposing and defeating such attempts is meant to avoid war and safeguard peace and stability in the region.That is why China strongly opposed and had been repeatedly warning against the provocative visit of the US House speaker, a move that seriously infringed upon China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.Over the years, the US has been playing the “Taiwan card” to contain China by approving arms sales to the island, upgrading its relations with the authorities there and hollowing out the one-China principle. The authorities on the island, led by the Democratic Progressive party, have refused to recognise the 1992 consensus that embodies the one-China principle. They have gone all out to advance “de-sinicisation” and promote “incremental independence”. Against such provocation, it is only natural that China takes necessary measures in response. These measures are aimed at opposing interference from the US in China’s internal affairs, restraining the separatist attempts of “Taiwan independence” forces, safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity and upholding peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. The US side and “Taiwan independence” separatist forces must bear full responsibility for their wrongdoings. Some people may say that by suspending cooperation with the US in certain areas, China is “punishing the world”. But China will continue to stand by its commitments to the international community on issues such as climate change. China has the best record of fulfilling its pledges to the world.The right way for China and the US, two major countries, to handle their relations is to respect each other and avoid confrontation. China has made enormous efforts to promote the healthy and steady development of China-US relations, but we will never sit by and do nothing in response to provocative moves that undermine our core interests. The right thing for the US to do is to acknowledge the one-China principle and the three Sino-US joint communiques: stop playing the “Taiwan card”; sever any official ties and military cooperation with the island; and stop creating further crises.The Taiwan issue has always been a sensitive matter at the centre of relations between the UK and China. Our countries began to explore diplomatic ties in the early 1950s, but it was not until 1972 that the relationship was upgraded to the ambassadorial level, with the signing of a joint communique. Full diplomatic relations had to wait until the UK clearly recognised the Chinese government’s position that Taiwan is a province of the People’s Republic of China, decided to revoke its official representative office on the island, recognised the government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, and promised to maintain only an unofficial relationship with Taiwan. This history must never be forgotten and pledges should be honoured.The Taiwan question is a major issue of principle. There is no reason for the UK to disregard that fact and follow in the footsteps of the US. Calls to “help Taiwan defend itself” and the like are extremely irresponsible and detrimental. Any move that violates the one-China principle and the provisions of the joint communique, or crosses the red line of the Chinese side, will bring serious consequences to bilateral relations. There should not be any miscalculation on this.Over the past 50 years, the exchanges and cooperation between China and the UK have brought enormous benefits to the peoples of both countries. These hard-won outcomes must be cherished. China-UK relations are now at an important juncture. The Conservative party will soon elect a new leader and the country will have a new prime minister. The trajectory of Britain’s policy on China is being followed closely from all quarters. Around the world, daunting challenges, such as the lingering pandemic, the economic downturn, energy shortages and the climate crisis, remain.Under such circumstances, China and the UK should strengthen rather than weaken their cooperation. The two sides should follow the principles of mutual respect, equality and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, engage in dialogue and cooperation, and join hands to address common challenges. This is the right choice, one that conforms to the fundamental interests of the peoples of both countries.
      Zheng Zeguang is the Chinese ambassador to the UK
      TopicsChinaOpinionTaiwanAsia PacificUS politicscommentReuse this content More