FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Sep 18

Free Speech is on the Decline in America

by bcurry

Political satire has long been considered one of the gems reflecting the strength of free speech in America.  However, recently, freedom of expression has taken a hit in the entertainment industry, as exemplified by the cancellation by networks of two popular late-night talk shows.  I am of course referring to The Late Show With Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel Live.  Both shows have been signalled out by the Donald Trump and his administration.

Let’s first begin by pointing out that the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is a political appointee.  Trump nominated Brendan Carr for FCC chairman in November 2025, obviously someone trusted by the president.  The FCC is supposed to be an independent body overseeing licensed media sources in the U.S., primarily regulating the industry and ensuring certain prescribed activities are followed under its purview.  The FCC also oversees the rules governing how much of a sector a private company can obtain in order to prevent any one company from monopolizing the output of a media source — be it television or radio for example.  For this reason, the FCC wields power over the broadcast licenses that are granted to local TV stations by the federal government and the merger of companies running specific media sources.

Paramount Global’s pending sale to Skydance Media needed the Trump administration’s approval (i.e. FCC).  It just so happened that Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS, settled a recent lawsuit with Trump over a 60 Minutes interview involving Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris.  In Stephen Colbert’s subsequent monologue, he said he was “offended” by the $16-million U.S. settlement.  In addition, Colbert has targeted Trump for years.  From 2005 to 2014, The Colbert Report aired a satirical riff on right-wing news talk shows, especially Trump’s favourite Fox News.  Paramount and CBS executives claimed in a statement that the cancellation was purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night television, noting that it was not related in any way to the show’s performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount.  Something difficult to believe given that Colbert’s award winning show was ranked in the most recent ratings from Nielsen as the best late-night show and the only one to gain viewers so far this year.

Shortly after Carr’s criticism on Fox News of Kimmel’s remarks in a podcast about MAGA and the assassination of Conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Nexstar, an owner of ABC affiliate stations around the country, pre-empted Mr. Kimmel’s program for the foreseeable future.  Of note, Nexstar recently announced that it planned to acquire a rival company in a $6.2 billion deal, which has to be scrutinized by the F.C.C.  According to the New York Times, Chuck Schumer, opposition Democratic leader in the U.S. Senate, denounced on CNN the pressure on ABC from the Trump administration as “despicable, disgusting, and against democratic values.”  He compared it to the playbook of autocratic Chinese and Russian leaders, noting that Trump and his allies seem to want to shut down speech that they don’t like to hear.  It certainly would appear, given Carr’s public outbursts, that the FCC is being used to do just that.

Now, the life of television and radio shows normally rely on the free enterprise market as it relates to corporate sponsors and their marketing through ads on popular shows.  This is fine given that there is a good deal of healthy competition within varying media.  People’s interest in and following of media outlets is what rightfully determines a show’s success.  However, as in the print news media, we see today increasing interference by leaders in trying to influence the programming and content of shows, especially those involving political satire and editorial opinion.  The power of the FCC to regulate the industry is obviously being abused by the current administration.  Once again, this is clearly another attack on the right to free speech as provided for under the U.S. constitution. 

Civil Liberties Donald Trump Free Speech Republican Party Social Media US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jun 6

What Is Going On With the Circus in Washington?

by bcurry

Never before in all the years that I have been following American political news have I ever seen such a circus as the current one in Washington.  We now have the current break-up of the romance between Donald Trump and Elon Musk.  With the use of social media, the barbs are flying everywhere.  Remember that on X, Musk has almost 225 million followers.  Trump on the other hand was reported in August 2022 to have only 3.9 million Truth Social followers.  The number of Trump followers has certainly increased since becoming president, but no where near Musk’s numbers.

Then there are the members of Trump’s cabinet who continue to not impress us with their mistakes and lack of applicable backgrounds and experience.  One has the Secretary of Defence, Pete Hegseth, who recently discussed top secret military missions against the Houthi rebels in Yemen on the non-secure platform “signal”, and included his wife and personal lawyer in one post.  Then you have the Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has initiated a quick study about the causes of “autism” by a number of non-experts with dubious backgrounds.  Kennedy has endorsed a number of health claims that are not backed by scientific evidence, including many on vaccines, which have concerned many medical experts.  Next is Attorney General Pam Bondi who did not know the meaning of “habeas corpus” as defined in the constitution.  Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, likes to dress up and have photo ops at the southern border.  Education Secretary, Linda McMahon, who was a World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) co-founder, did not know the difference between AI (artificial intelligence) and the steak sauce A1.  We also hear very little from Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who appears often to take a back seat to Vice-President J.D. Vance.  Vance actually visited Greenland, only to the displeasure of the Prime Minister of Denmark and the vast majority of Greenlanders.  Today, it was announced that Trump Administration has taped a 22-year-old Thomas Fugate, who is one year out of college, to head up the Terrorism Prevention Role at Homeland Security.  He just happened to work on Trump’s campaign and has no experience in this important national security field.

Trump is reportedly fuming about his new nickname “TACO”, standing for “Trump Always Chickens Out”.  The acronym was brought to Trump’s attention at the White House press conference on May 28th by CNBC correspondent Megan Cassella.  The acronym refers to the President’s ongoing tendency to suddenly introduce high tariff rates on countries, only to reduce them shortly after or to defer them to some future date.  The continuous introduction of new fluctuating rates has created a great deal of economic uncertainty and has caused chaos in the markets and affected most business sectors.  It makes no sense at all!

With the Trump-Musk feud, late-night hosts are having a field day.  The heads of foreign countries are wondering what the hell is going on in Washington, including the Prime Minister of Canada.  Hopefully, trade negotiations and foreign policy matters can continue to be carried out rationally behind closed doors in order to avoid all the senseless and needless noise.  If the Trump administration’s gaffs weren’t so serious, they unfortunately would actually be hilarious.

Donald Trump Economy Elon Musk Foreign Policy Protectionist Trade Policies Social Media Trading Relationships US

Leave a comment »
Mar 30

U.S. Increasingly Moving Towards Police State

by bcurry

President Trump is obviously clamping down broadly on dissent using the tools of the federal government.  Now, the administration has put the pressure on universities themselves to crack down on student protesters.  Increasingly, for example, one is seeing that colleges are using surveillance videos and search warrants to investigate students involved in pro-Palestinian protests.  Some experts believe that it’s this new frontier in campus security that could threaten civil liberties.

In addition, it has been pointed out in the media that some colleges, such as the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, George Mason University, University of California, Indiana University Bloomington, and University of North Carolina to name a few, have had the university police obtain warrants to search personal property such as a student’s car, laptop or cellphone.  In most cases, no actual crime has been committed by the affected student.

Zach Greenberg, a First Amendment lawyer at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a free speech group, reportedly notes that university police have sometimes even cited social media posts to justify warrant requests.  But as he states, such posts are constitutionally protected speech, and he goes on further to stipulate that such campus police tactics could very likely chill free expression.  Furthermore, lawyers representing affected students argue that a college seeking a search warrant against one of its own students is not because that student committed a crime, but purely because in many cases a student attended a protest and was filmed at the protest.  In most cases so far, few students end up not even being charged.  In some cases, the university may simply threaten them with possible suspensions should they continue to participate in protests, including those that are peaceful.

In addition, for months now, President Trump has been threatening to deport foreign students who took part in last year’s campus protests over the Israel-Hamas war.  Apparently, investigators from a branch of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have begun scouring the internet for social media posts and videos that the Trump administration could argue showed sympathy toward Hamas.  Curious indeed since ICE typically focuses on human traffickers and drug smugglers for possible deportation.  As in the recent arrest by ICE of Mahmoud Khalil, a young U. of Columbia graduate student with a green card living in New York, the government is using an old provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to argue that his actions during protests at Columbia University harmed U.S. foreign policy interests by fomenting anti-Semitism.  As of yet he has not been charged with an actual crime.  The Act was passed in the context of Cold War-era fears and suspicions of infiltrating Soviet and communist spies and sympathizers within American institutions and federal government.  Anticommunist sentiment was associated at the time with McCarthyism in the U.S., led by an administration aiming to push for selective immigration to preserve national security.  Since then, there have been very few cases where similar powers were cited in deportation proceedings under the Act.  Its current use would certainly be difficult to defend in the courts.

While some search warrants may be related to an ongoing campus vandalism investigation, few of the campus police seizures have actually resulted in charges being laid.  Indeed, without just cause I would argue that such search and seizure practices by campus police endanger free speech and the civil liberties of those affected university students.  As was the case in the 1930s Nazi Germany, today it’s students, but tomorrow it could be anyone; including those living, studying and working legally in the U.S.  This new reality certainly meets the definition of a police state.

Civil Liberties Donald Trump Education in U.S. Federal Government Judicial System Social Media US

Leave a comment »
Jan 5

Elon Musk May Be More Dangerous Than Trump

by bcurry

From a Canadian perspective, president-elect Donald Trump’s recent declarations about Canada’s sovereignty and the imposition of a 25% tariff on the country’s imports are bad enough.  What is even more worrisome is the rise of Elon Musk’s influence in Trump’s circles.  During the election, all of Musk’s posts traveled further and resounded more widely than ever. Mr. Musk’s X account began to dominate the platform, effectively making him the host of his own social media site.  More recently, he has a perch as Trump’s apparent right-hand man, even weighing in on his possible Cabinet choices and joining his conversations with global leaders.  One has to wonder what the role of J.D. Vance will be?

Internationally, Musk has begun an on-line and in-person campaign to try to influence foreign political parties’ policies.  Most notably, he has posted support for the policies of far-right and extremist figures in Europe, criticizing for example the current governments of Britain and Germany.  Recently, Musk has turned his attention to the northern neighbor, praising an interview with Pierre Poilievre, a populist firebrand who leads Canada’s Conservative Party and is expected be the country’s next Prime Minister.  In addition, his financial influence is everywhere because of his companies and investments in the U.S. and Europe.  In some instances, this has led to questions about potential conflicts of interest in light of his many business interests, especially in any future Trump administration.  For example, he once again in a tweet raised Britain’s Online Safety Act which will take effect in March 2025.  The British law requires social media companies like X to prevent children from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content and to give adults more control over what they want to see online.  Companies that run afoul of the law can face fines of up to 10 percent of their global revenue.

Experiences with Trump’s past foreign policies had been troublesome, especially when it comes to NATO, the Middle East and relations with Canada and Mexico.  The involvement of Elon Musk in positioning the next president with respect to foreign policies is a major concern.  Originally, Trump appeared to want Musk to concentrate primarily on improving efficiencies and policies within federal departments and agencies, obviously leading to potential reductions in services, employees and regulations.  Now, reports are indicating that Musk is attempting to also influence Trump’s future foreign policies, including attempts to have an impact on the domestic politics of several European countries and Canada.  Needless-to-say, American interference in other countries’ governance will not be appreciated by their current governments.

The U.S. has been very vocal about any covert foreign interference in its governance and its elections, and rightly so.  Although Elon Musk is not an elected official at this time, he is expected to be part of Trump’s administration in some official advisory capacity.  Any attempt by Musk to influence or represent the foreign policy of the next administration is totally inappropriate.  That is the role of the Secretary of State.  What is especially dangerous is the opportunity presented to Musk to influence the future president on foreign matters by having his ear on a daily basis.  If I were the next Secretary of State, I’d be very concerned.  It’s one thing for Musk to involve himself in U.S. governance and domestic matters, it’s a whole other concern if he attempts to do so in matters related to foreign affairs and dealings with America’s allies!

Donald Trump Elon Musk Foreign Policy Protectionism Social Media US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Nov 21

Angry Young Males Revolt In America

by bcurry

Back in 2013, I read a very interesting book by Michael S. Kimmel entitled: “Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era.”  In it, he described an increase in anger in the seismic economic, social and political shifts that have so transformed the American landscape among young white men.  Downward mobility, increased racial and gender equality, and a tenacious clinging to an anachronistic ideology of masculinity left many white men feeling betrayed and bewildered.  “Angry white male” is a term for white men holding conservative or right-wing views. Today, the term is often used when talking about the politics of the U.S. The term mostly refers to a group which emerged in the early 1990s. They reacted to what they thought were injustices created by “affirmative action.”  An angry white male is opposed to anti-discrimination policies (such as affirmative action) that benefit racial minorities and women.  Supporters of Donald Trump are sometimes said to largely include angry white men.  Today, one might add young Black and Hispanic men to their numbers, especially now that affirmative action is no longer in play.

Back in the 1960s, when activists pushed for laws to equalize opportunities for women, girls had been much less likely than boys to graduate from college.  However, a recent study indicated that by 2015, the situation had flipped.  Boys were much less likely than girls to make it through college and reap the premium jobs that came with degrees.  Young men were not just getting lower-paying jobs than young women, they were also more likely to leave the job market altogether.  This left many of them living with their parents and gave them lots of free time to spend on video games and in chat rooms.  One research team looked at national time-use surveys and found that young men between the ages of twenty-one and thirty spent 12 percent less time on paid work in 2015 than they had ten years earlier — a much sharper drop than was seen in any other demographic group. The newly freed-up time was spent largely in front of a computer.  The amount of time that men under thirty dedicated to video games and “recreational computer time” rose to 520 hours a year in 2015, 99 hours more than what it had been ten years earlier; a significantly greater amount of time and a sharper increase than was seen among older men and women of all ages.1

Even when it comes to investing and playing the markets on-line, young men dominate the scene, preferring to gamble in day trading in order to possibly become wealthier as well as clearly attaining a high out of risk-taking.  Normally, these men are between 20 and 30 years old and live at home with a lot of time on their hands.2  This phenomenon was particularly exasperated by the pandemic, which also continued to have negative impacts on men with respect to  the post-pandemic labour market and low wages.

The results of the American elections illustrated a clear statistical divide between more educated males and lesser educated males, with the majority of the prior supporting Kamala Harris and the latter Donald Trump.  In particular, young men in the so-call working and middle classes are unhappy with the way the economy has gone for them.  They are also still angered over what they perceive to be as unfair and unequal treatment when it comes to women, whether real or not.  This placed Harris at a clear disadvantage during the election when Democrats obviously failed to address the issue.  The Republicans used conservative social media effectively to appeal to the grievances of young working, unemployed and underemployed men.  Policies pushed by the Democrats, including reproductive rights and gender-based ones, did not appeal to most young men.

Canada is not immune to the lure of conservative policies which tend to attract young Canadian males to their political thinking, all of which will have a direct impact in the federal election expected to happen next year.  Unless there is a drastic change in the economy and labour market, one can expect a similar backlash against the current Liberal government whose social policies will no doubt be a major target by conservative groups.

1. Richard V. Reeves and Ember Smith: “Boys Left Behind: Education Gender Gaps Across the US” (The Brooking Institution, October 12, 2022)  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/boys-left-behind-education-gender-gaps-across-the-us/.

2. ”The Trolls of Wall Street (How the Outcasts and Insurgents are Hacking the Markets)”: Nathaniel Popper (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, N.Y., 2024) p. 53

Affirmative Action Conservative Political Groups Donald Trump Labor Force Presidential Election 2024 Republican Party Social Media US

Leave a comment »
Jun 24

What Millennials And Generation Z Have In Common

by bcurry

Over the last decade, a lot has been written about today’s younger generation, most notably the so-called millennials and Gen Zers.  As you are aware, millennials are between 28 and 43, and Gen Z generally refers to those ages 12 to 27.  Some observers believe that millennials had it bad financially, but Gen Z may have it even worse.  Millennials did go through two recessions, including the Great Recession of 2008.  Many struggled to get jobs, particularly following the Great Recession, when the nation’s unemployment rate hovered around 10 percent for over a year. Their wages took a massive hit, too.  On average, millennials lost about 13 percent of their earnings between 2007 and 2017.  Gen Z has gone through the recent pandemic, and came out seeing a totally different labour market, especially for recent college graduates.  Both the millennials and Gen Zers have faced tough labour market conditions, making it harder to get good paying jobs, especially among blue-collar workers.  Now, they are facing ever increasing debt loads and tough housing costs, making it difficult to purchase that important first home.  Indeed, Gen Z is the first generation where recent college grads are more likely to be unemployed than the general population.  In addition, both groups left college with significant student loan debts.

Why is this scenario important?   First of all, millennials were the largest generation group in the U.S.
in 2023, with an estimated population of 72.7 million.  Millennials recently surpassed Baby Boomers as the biggest group, and they will continue to be a major part of the population for many years.  Add in Gen Zers, who made up 61.3 million of the American population, these two groups now represent a major, if not the biggest voting block in the U.S. They will play a key role in the upcoming American elections next November, something both the Democrats and Republicans are well aware of.

Can President Biden appeal to the youth vote?  Biden and the Democrats have relied heavily on their vote in the past.  However, with the current inflationary economy and difficult employment situation, I wouldn’t count on it.  Since they may not necessarily favour former President Trump, they may instead simply decide not to vote.  Such an outcome would have a major impact on both political parties.  Among women in both groups, there may be more hope for the Democrats in light of the Republican stance on abortion, particularly in Republican led states.  This has yet to be seen.

Although Trump’s popularity among young adults, aged 18 to 34, plummeted as he tried to overturn the 2020 election, Gallup’s 2023 surveys of U.S. adults indicated that his popularity has rebounded since.  Forty-two percent of young adults saw him favourably in October 2020, but that dropped to 28 percent in January 2021.  His favorability bounced back to 42 percent by December 2023, especially among young Hispanics and Blacks.  Younger voters, under the age of 30, feel worse about the economy than older cohorts.  Not surprisingly, in the latest New York Times/Sienna poll, for example, Black voters feel as bad about the economy as their white counterparts and Latino voters feel even worse.  Will his recent conviction have an impact?

What is also interesting is the fact that following the January 6, 2021 assault on the Hill, Trump’s popularity took a significant dip among younger voters.  However, the improvement in Trump’s favorability now can be partly attributed to the fading memories of January 6 and the tumultuous year that was 2020.  As in the case of the last election, social media will once again play a significant role in influencing the views of younger voters more than any other age group.  The question becomes whether younger voters will believe everything posted on social media or will also look to main stream media sources for their information?

There is little doubt that bread and butter issues will dominate the electoral scene this year more than any other issue.  How millennials and Gen Zers view the economic platforms of both political parties will more than likely determine the final outcome of the election.  With so much in common, both parties will have to take major steps to win over their votes.

Donald Trump Joe Biden Presidential Election 2024 Social Media The American Dream US Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Dec 19

Impact of Social Media on How We Perceive Foreign Wars

by bcurry

A very recent poll by the New York Times indicated that American youth are more inclined to oppose President Biden’s handling of the Israeli-Hamas conflict in Gaza.  For example, the poll noted that voters between 18 and 29 years old, traditionally a heavily Democratic demographic, jump out.  Nearly three quarters of them disapprove of the way Mr. Biden is handling the conflict in Gaza.  On the other hand, older voters were far more sympathetic to Biden’s efforts.  Fifty-two percent of registered voters 65 years and older approve of Biden’s actions on Israel, 12 percentage points more than those who disapprove.  Biden’s administration has refused to officially call for a cease fire, while pushing Israel to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza.

In Canada, the governing Liberal Party under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has take a more moderate stance, now calling for a cease fire to allow more aid for Palestinians into the devastated region along with the release of the hostages held by Hamas.  In either case, there is no win-win scenario for President Biden or Prime Minister Trudeau.  Pro-Palestinian protests in both countries are continuing, with a good deal of growing support on university and college campuses.  One of the main factors influencing the youth in both countries is the daily rapid access to scenes in the war zone, especially violent imagery of civilian casualties and hospital bombings, often through social media such as TikTok and Instagram.  Young people who use social media primarily to get their news find such images as being horrific and merciless. 

The same result can be seen in the Ukraine-Russia conflict.  Besides mainstream media, social media is also being used by both sides to influence our opinions of the war.  In some cases, recorded events are most likely going to be used to support allegations of war crimes against the Russian forces.  News media tends to slip between both conflicts, reporting mainly on the most significant and often horrendous events involving loss of life and mass destruction.  Everyday, terrible scenes of innocent civilians fleeing the war zone are propelled across our television screens and onto our tablets and cellphones.  At no other time in history has so much instant coverage occurred, influencing viewers and policy makers alike.  The most affected of course are young people who did not live through 9/11 or the Iraq war.

As more time goes on, the initial causes behind conflicts are often forgotten and become less important than the most recent revelations of atrocities and humanitarian crisis.  The longer the conflicts continue, support for current foreign policy positions will take a hit.  We see this among European Union countries, most notably Hungary, where support for Ukraine may be waning and opposition growing.  The same can be said for the Israeli-Hamas conflict which increasingly is turning into a broader conflict with the Palestinian population, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank.  Israel still retains healthy allegiances in the U.S.  However, as the above noted poll indicated, the future of such sentiments is unclear.  Among young voters, 46 percent sympathize more with the Palestinians, against 27 percent who favour Israel.

There is little doubt that the opposing parties will continue to use social media in order to win over support their causes.  Especially by young people, it’s 24/7 and it’s readily accessible and most often not authenticate or corroborated.  Whether or not you think that it’s a form of propaganda, the use of social media will continue to play a very important role.

Foreign Policy Israel Justin Trudeau Media Social Media The Middle East The News Media US

Leave a comment »
Aug 9

Political Polarizations Has Increased Mistrust in Many of Our Public Institutions

by bcurry

The New York Times in a very recent article (August 7th) notes that Republican (G.O.P.) contenders in the presidential primaries are bent on feeding voter distrust in public institutions such as the courts, schools and the military.  Obviously, most appear to be following the lead of Donald Trump who, for example whenever he has the chance, publicly attacks the U.S. Justice Department and the F.B.I.  During the pandemic Trump even disparaged the Surgeon General, the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Resources.  Now, facing a barrage of indictments by the Justice Department, Trump has further accelerated his personal attacks on these major institutions.  Unfortunately, several other G.O.P. candidates have followed suit in an apparent attempt to appease Trump’s core followers.

All of the rhetoric, including that disseminated by social media and right-wing media, has created an environment where recent polls show that Americans’ trust in their institutions has apparently fallen to historical lows.  Feeding on voters’ already deeply embedded scepticism might have once been seen as politically risky, but social media and the right-wing media have helped change that.  The Republican governor of Florida and a candidate, Ron DeSantis, has led the charge against what he sees as a biased and liberal-influenced education system in his state.  Not to be outdone, another G.O.P. candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy, has gone on record that he would shut down the F.B.I. and the I.R.S. as part of his fight against the so-called “deep state”.

My primary question is what would replace all these important institutions in a democracy that claims to need independent bodies to deal with issues like law and order, public health, the environment, new technologies and the role of the military?  In a modern society, freedoms are important, but there still has to be some oversight of those matters as they relate to the public good.  Campaign rhetoric perpetuating conspiratorial themes does not help to ensure a rational and knowledge-based debate on many of the challenges that, as a democracy, we face daily.  It’s easy to argue that things should be eliminated, but no one Republican has yet rationally put forward any ideas about how one would go about replacing these institutions — and with what.

The Republican Party, just as the Conservative Party in Canada, has long stood for “smaller government in size and role” going back to the days of Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.   However, the current G.O.P. extreme rhetoric goes far beyond the past political stances of Republican presidents, from Richard Nixon to the Bushes.  As the Times article notes: “The proliferation of attacks has alarmed both Republicans and Democrats who worry about the long-term impact on American democracy.  Public confidence in core institutions — from the justice system to voting systems — is fundamental to a durable democracy, particularly at a time of sharp political division.”

Just as I am certain that there are a good number of moderate Republicans in the U.S. and conservatives in Canada who oppose such extreme rhetoric, I am hoping that cooler heads will prevail among our electorates in both countries.  Our democracies are closely watched by countries around the world, and defending our democratic institutions has never been more important in the face of the growth of autocratic regimes globally.  These institutions are essential to defending our democratic values and promoting the public good.  We need to strengthen them rather than knock them down as the result of excessive political polarization.  It’s one thing to push for smaller government influence in our lives, it’s another to suggest that one can simply eliminate or emasculate its influence in highly complex modern societies.  Doing so would just replace democracies with autocracies by centralizing political and economic powers under one regime.  We now have checks and balances, including the courts and justice system, to prevent this from happening.  Unfortunately, the Republicans appear more than willing to minimize such oversight.  Ultimately, the current split in their party, led by Donald Trump’s extremism, could greatly weaken their platform in the eyes of the American electorate, and particularly those of independents.

Donald Trump Judicial System Media Populism Populism in Canada Republican Party Social Media US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jun 12

The Rise of Conspiracy Theories in the U.S. and Canada

by bcurry

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a “conspiracy” as a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.  “Conspiracy theory” is defined as a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for an unexplained event.  Of course, in 2017, influencial QAnon surfaced with its origin in the American far-right political sphere.  QAnon centers on fabricated claims made by an anonymous individual or individuals known as “Q”.  According to Wikipedia, the core QAnon conspiracy theory is that a cabal of Satanic, cannibalistic child molesters were operating a global child sex trafficking ring, led by the Democratic Party and in particular former President Barack Obamak Hillary Clinton, and George Soros.  They were alleged to have conspired against former U.S. President Donald Trump prior to and during his term in office.  According to Media Matters for America, as of August 20, 2020, Trump had amplified QAnon messaging at least 216 times by retweeting or mentioning 129 QAnon-affiliated Twitter accounts, sometimes multiple times a day.  An article in The Atlantic in February 15, 2022 wrote that QAnon followers came to refer to Trump as “Q+”.  QAnon followers also had emerged in Canada, often accusing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and members of his Liberal government as part of the same global movement.

Most recently, an ecoterrorist conspiracy theory emerged that accused environmentalists of setting recent wildfires in Canada in order to make a point about the impact of climate change in North America.  While totally ridiculous and contradictory in nature, this conspiracy theory emerged in social media and notably among certain ultra-right groups.  Maxime Bernier, a former Conservative federal foreign minister-turned fringe party leader of the People’s Party of Canada, said in a June 5 tweet: “I bet a good portion of the wildfires raging across the country were started by green terrorists who want to give their climate change campaign a little boost.” This conspiracy theory is nothing new as, for example, in California in 2021 some people claimed online that arsonists were behind several wildfires — but there was no evidence that environmentalists were pushing a climate change agenda.  Moreover, officials of provincial agencies investigating the causes of wildfires in Quebec, Nova Scotia and Alberta have more or less determined such theories are bogus.  They note that there are several which are caused by humans, but these are almost always accidents and that recent lightning strikes were to blame for many of the wildfires.  Unless lightning is involved, a blaze classified as human-caused normally can be accidental, intentional or undetermined.  This does not exclusively mean arson.

Most recently, former President Trump is facing numerous federal charges that include willfully retaining national defense secrets in violation of the Espionage Act, making false statements and a conspiracy to obstruct justice.  Trump has repeatedly characterized the investigation as being politically motivated, and in recent weeks his lawyers have sought to raise what they say are issues of prosecutorial misconduct.  His defence is implying that there is a conspiracy within the Justice Department and the F.B.I., spearheaded by the White House and the Democrats, to go after him in order to prevent him from running for president in 2024.  Trump continues to refer to the investigation by federal officials as a “witch hunt”, for which there is currently no evidence to support his claims.  Although the evidence against Trump appears to be overwhelming, a majority of his supporters state their belief that there is a conspiracy against the former president aimed at preventing him from running in the next presidential election.

Unfortunately, Donald Trump is the main culprit purposely promulgating conspiracy theories and continues to have the support of a large base of rank and file members of the Republican Party.  Even some notable members of the Party, including Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, Republican Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Matt Gaetz of Florida, have backed Trump’s conspiracy theory regarding what is often referred to as “the weaponization of federal law enforcement.”  When it comes to governance today, there appears to be no shortage of conspiracy theories, ludicrous or not.  What’s worst, a large percentage of Americans and Canadians appear to be accepting such theories as gospel.

Canada Elections Judicial System Republican Party Social Media US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Mar 30

No Democracy Today Can Avoid Being Tested By Political Turmoil

by bcurry

President Joe Biden recently visited Canada for what became a real love-in with his opposite Justin Trudeau, the Canadian Prime Minister.  In his speech to Parliament, Biden frequently related to the close relationship to Canada, including our democratic values and institutions.  However, all is not well in both countries.  The U.S. had last year’s violent January 6th insurrection at the Capital and Canada had the truckers’ 3-week illegal occupation of streets within Ottawa’s parliamentary precinct.  Observers claim that a lot of these events are related to what is perceived by some Americans and Canadians as a lack of trust in police, the courts and government at all levels.  What’s worst, in the U.S. you had a former president who refused to accept the results of the last presidential election and today continues to espouse to his followers that the election was stolen.

This past week, President Biden delivered remarks at the second White House-led Summit for Democracy, but at a time when several democracies are under duress of some kind.  One can refer to political conditions in so-called significant democratic countries such as Israel, Mexico, India and Brazil.  Democratic setbacks have also occurred in West Africa, where there have been coups in Mali and Burkina Faso in recent years.  For example, in Nigeria, a country of 220 million people, experts say that the presidential election last February appeared suspect.  At the above noted summit, two notable members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Hungary and Turkey, were excluded in light of fact that their autocratic political systems have grown no less repressive during Mr. Biden’s tenure.

Underlying all this issue is the fact that dictatorships such as Russia and China have been trying to increase their economic and political influence in countries, particularly in Africa and South America.  Both the governments of Russia and China have been accused of having meddled in recent American and Canadian electoral processes.  Dealing effectively with these countries needs to be done in order to avoid any foreign influence in democratic processes.

In the U.S., even the fundamental right of Americans to vote is being challenged in some states where various forms of new voting restrictions or requirements have being implemented or considered, notably by Republican states.  In some cases, such restrictions will especially affect voting by minority groups, college students and marginalized persons. 

Unfortunately, much of political turmoil has been the result of extreme divisions within our societies and large amounts of misinformation and disinformation being spread through on-line social media.  Mainstream media sources, fundamentally important to supporting democratic processes, are continuously under attack.  Journalists themselves have been verbally and physically attacked by extreme politicized groups, both right and left.

Human and civil rights are in danger of being weakened in democratic countries.  Many of the important gains achieved by LGBTQ groups in the last couple of decades are increasingly coming under attack, especially by religious right-wing segments of our societies.  Organized local protests have even occurred against school boards in both countries, and appear to be gaining strength.  Elected school board representatives have increasingly come under attack when it comes to school policies protecting the rights of LGBTQ youth and education regarding sexual orientation.

Generally, trust and confidence in our democratic institutions has to be restored in order to maintain our taken-for-granted freedoms.  Civility has to return to how we conduct our affairs and the rule of law has to be strengthened.  Otherwise, we will only see more and more serious threats to democracies, either here in Canada, the U.S. or abroad.  Words and platitudes are all fine, but actions are now needed.

Canada Civil Rights Elections Extremism Extremist Groups Joe Biden Leadership Mainstream Media Social Media US

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Blog at WordPress.com.