Debatt i Aftenposten, artikkel av Espen Hammer om "Trump 2.0" - Min kommentar

 Artikkel i Aftenposten av professor i filosofi Espen Hammer, se Kilde:

"Tre uker med Trump 2.0"

"Om det utvikler seg til et fullblods diktatur, vil vi snart få vite."

Min kommentar 12. februar 2025

Jan Marton Jensen

for to timer siden

I USA vises nå farene for et demokrati ved å ha en direkte-valgt president med store fullmakter.

Kombiner dette med et polariserende 2-parti-system, og vi ser resultatet nå.

Putt ubegrenset med penger inn i valgkampen, og likeledes inn i "tenketanker", og du har den miksen som har levert USA Donald Trump.

Skudeneshavn    12. februar  2025

Jan Marton Jensen

Kilde:
11. februar 2025
https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikk/i/JbXKQ7/trump-20-om-det-utvikler-seg-til-et-fullblods-diktatur-vil-vi-snart-faa-vite

Israel har nedfelt i lovs form hva som er lovlig på frihetsdagen: "Nakba Law".
Dette dsikuteres her:

"The Perils and Limits of Memory Laws: The Case of Israel’s “Nakba Law” (2011)"

Skudeneshavn  17. mars 2024

Jan Marton Jensen

 

På Twitter:
17. mars 2024
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1769295768609857673

Kilde:

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-94914-3_11

"Folkets vilje" versus Domstoler?

 Paul Taylor i The Guardian 30. januar 2024 skriver om land og politikere som vil overstyre det landets domstoler avgjør.

Han sender et varsko om at et demokrati må et selvstendig rettsvesen.
Lenke til artikkelen under Kilde.

Her er overskrift og innledning.:

From Germany to Israel, it’s ‘the will of the people’ v the rule of law. Which will win?

 In liberal democracies, populists are setting two core principles at odds – and putting freedom and human rights in danger

Paul Taylor har en rekke eksempler på land der politikere vil la "folket" avgjøre saker.
Og der selvstendige domstoler da svekkes.

Skudeneshavn  30. januar 2024

Jan Marton Jensen

 

Kilde:
30. januar 20234
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/30/germany-israel-rule-of-law-democracy-populists

Militære ledere i Pakistan fester grepet - Hvor har de støtte?

Uro i Pakistan.
BBC melder:
"Pakistan: Election likely to be delayed in latest political crisis"
(BBC 9. august 2023, se Kilde)

Valget i landet er utsatt.
Man må ha ny folketelling, angis det.

For noen dager siden ble tidligere president Imran Khan arrestert, fengslet, og utelukket fra poltisk virksomhet i 5 år (BBC 8. august 2023, se Kilde)

BBC angir:
"As former senator Afrasiab Khattak told the BBC, there are two systems of government operating in parallel. Now, "the unsanctioned, de facto force wants to take over the parliamentary process," said Mr Khattak. "Pakistan's military has always been powerful, but they want more powers so that their unsanctioned rule is not challenged either by politicians, activists, or journalists."

Pakistans militære ledere er tydeligvis redd for å få svekket innflytelse.
Da må søkelyset settes på ... de militære ledere.
Og på hvor de finner støtte internasjonalt.

Skudeneshavn   11. august  2023

Jan Marton Jensen

 

Kilde:
9. august 2023
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-66446957

8. august 2023
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-66445010

Lærebok i hvordan autokrater overtar et demokrati - Eksempel fra Israel

Artikkel i Haaretz, som egentlig er en bokanmeldelse om "Lærebokfor autokrater".
Forfatterene er professor Kim Lane scheppele.
Den beskriver trinnene ved en autokrats overtakelse av ledelsen av et land ved "lovlige" former i et demokrati.

Bokens tillel er "Autocratic Legalism" og ble publisert i 2018.
Artikkelforfatteren i Haaretz bruker boken som bakgrunn for denne artikkelen:

"The Book Israelis Must Read Today to Understand Their New Reality"

"Prof. Kim Lane Scheppele's 'Autocratic Legalism' – which explains how modern-day tyrannies gradually weaken the gatekeepers – will buoy the battle for Israel's democracy"

Utdrag:

Om Netanyahu:
"We’ve heard that Netanyahu is a true democrat, amid quotations from the past in which he enthusiastically defended the independence of the courts. Levin, meanwhile, has been portrayed as someone who sat in a forest hideout for 20 years working on a bomb to destroy democracy. But these depictions conceal the truth: Netanyahu is an authoritarian leader, heart and soul.

He palled around with populists like Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, and maintained close relationships with shameless dictators like Orbán and Vladimir Putin. The judicial overhaul we’ve been experiencing for nearly seven months is just the tip of a long process that has been pursued – fortunately for us – incautiously. There has been plenty of strutting, hubris and eye-poking, but the process has been Netanyahu’s goal for many years, even before he was indicted."

Om utdannelse:
"Forgive us, Israeli children, for we have been inattentive. The struggle over education has been neglected; it’s as if the ultra-Orthodox schools were part of a different country. The religious-Zionist community has an independent education system, and if that weren’t enough, there’s the long tradition of religious-Zionist politicians demanding the education portfolio in order to influence children of secular families as well." 

............................

Konklusjon:

Leseverdig informasjon, med tydeliggjøring av en prosess som har pågått lenge.
Og om Netanyahus langsiktige plan, samt om et flerdelt skolevesen.

Skudeneshavn  24. juli 2023

Jan Marton Jensen


Kilde:
24. juli 2023
https://www.haaretz.com/life/books/2023-07-24/ty-article-magazine/.premium/the-book-israelis-must-read-today/00000189-8265-db55-abfb-e27dacce0000

Apartheid i Israel 2013 versus 2023 - Og om kampen for demokrati

Fagartikkel fra 2013 om:

Apartheid, International Law, and the Occupied Palestinian Territory

John Dugard, John Reynolds

European Journal of International Law, Volume 24, Issue 3, August 2013, Pages 867–913, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/cht045

Published:

25. September 2013

Sitat fra siste del av konklusjonen:
"With the dual system of law that currently prevails in the occupied Palestinian territory best understood as the derivative of an ongoing settler colonial process, logic dictates that Israel will inevitably reach the tipping point at which it is forced to confront its own racial realities vis-à-vis the Palestinians. While the shape that such a transformation ultimately takes will depend primarily on social attitudes and political craft, international law may retain a role through the light that it shines on the normative issues to be resolved in this context."
...........................

Artikkelen er 10 år gammel.
Den viser at konklusjonen den gang var riktig mht utvikling av apartheid.

Dagens politiske situasjon i Israel viser et sterkt engasjement der store deler av samfunnet er i stand til å stå opp tydelig for demokratiet.
Men enn så lenge bare for israelere.

Dette engasjementet er et sterkt signal ...  og positivt ... at demokrati er viktig.
Da er der en basis for et politisk lederskap i Israel til å løfte blikket, og bokstavelig: Se over muren.

EDIT 13. juli 2023
Artikkel i Haaretz (se Ny Info) med intervju av israelsk okkupasjonsmotstander har samme konklusjon:

"Protest’s Lesson for Anti-occupation Left: Mobilize Israelis, Not International Community"
"Over the past six months there’s been a great deal of soul-searching within what’s left of the Israeli anti-occupation left over their role, if any, in the protest movement against the judicial overhaul.

Det er håp i Israel når så store masser kan stå opp for demokrati.
Da kan også Israels okkupasjon bli en sak som vekker folket.

Skudeneshavn   10. juli 2023 / 13. juli 2023

Jan Marton Jensen

På Twitter:
14. juli 2023
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1679770155079852032

Ny Info:
13. juli 2023
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023-07-13/ty-article-opinion/.premium/protests-lesson-for-anti-occupation-left-mobilize-israelis-not-international-community/00000189-509c-de0f-afbb-7cbcf5600000

Kilde:
25. september 2013
https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/24/3/867/481600?login=false

Peter Beinart:" - You Can’t Save Democracy in a Jewish State"

 Peter Beinart kommenterer den politiske sistuasjonen i Israel, der det nå protesteres mot Netanyahus regjering ... "for å berge demokratiet"

Benhart er klokkeklar:
"You Can’t Save Democracy in a Jewish State"

 Beinhart påpeker at palestinernes situasjon og okkupasjonen IKKE er inkludert i protestene.
Og han gir en rekke eksempler på dette.

Beinhart konkluderer slik:
"Ultimately, a movement premised on ethnocracy cannot successfully defend the rule of law. Only a movement for equality can."

Skudeneshavn  19. februar 2023

Jan Marton Jensen


Kilde:
19. februar 2023
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/19/opinion/israel-democracy-protests.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

HELE artikkelen i NY Times 19. februar 2023:

You Can’t Save Democracy in a Jewish State

By Peter Beinart

Mr. Beinart is a journalist and commentator who writes frequently about Israel.

Protesters in Tel Aviv hold placards that say “Israeli students fighting for democracy” and “Without democracy there is no academy.”Credit...Jack Guez/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

The warnings come every day: Israeli democracy is in danger.

Since Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government announced plans to undermine the independence of Israel’s Supreme Court, hundreds of thousands of Israelis have demonstrated in the streets. All of Israel’s living former attorneys general, in a joint statement, have warned that Mr. Netanyahu’s proposal imperils efforts to “preserve Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.” Liberal American Jewish leaders are cheering on the protests. Earlier this month, Alan Solow, the former head of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said he and other American Jewish notables “share the concerns of tens of thousands of Israelis determined to protect their democracy.” In a public declaration, Mr. Solow and 168 other influential American Jews warned that “the new government’s direction mirrors anti-democratic trends that we see arising elsewhere.”

On the surface, the battle between Mr. Netanyahu and his critics does indeed look familiar. In recent years, from Brazil to Hungary to India to the United States, anti-government protesters have accused authoritarian-minded populists of threatening liberal democracy. But look closer at Israel’s political drama and you notice something striking: The people most threatened by Mr. Netanyahu’s authoritarianism aren’t part of the movement against it.

The demonstrations include very few Palestinians. In fact, Palestinian politicians have criticized them for having, in the words of former Knesset member Sami Abu Shehadeh, “nothing to do with the main problem in the region — justice and equality for all the people living here”

The reason is that the movement against Mr. Netanyahu is not like the pro-democracy opposition movements in Turkey, India or Brazil — or the movement against Trumpism in the United States. It’s not a movement for equal rights. It’s a movement to preserve the political system that existed before Mr. Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition took power, which was not, for Palestinians, a genuine liberal democracy in the first place. It’s a movement to save liberal democracy for Jews.

The principle that Mr. Netanyahu’s liberal Zionist critics say he threatens — a Jewish and democratic state — is in reality a contradiction. Democracy means government by the people. Jewish statehood means government by Jews. In a country where Jews comprise only half of the people between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, the second imperative devours the first.

To understand just how illiberal the liberal Zionism championed by Mr. Netanyahu’s leading opponents is, consider the actions of Yair Lapid, his predecessor as prime minister. Last month, Mr. Lapid penned a nearly 2,000-word essay in which he wrote, “If this Netanyahu government does not fall, Israel will cease to be a liberal democracy.” It didn’t include the word “Palestinian.”

That becomes less surprising when you realize that as foreign minister, in 2021, Mr. Lapid implored the Knesset to renew a law that denies Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip who are married to Palestinian citizens the right to live with their spouses inside Israel proper. The law is blatantly discriminatory; Jews can immigrate to Israel and gain immediate citizenship whether they have relatives in the country or not. And far from denying the legislation’s discriminatory nature, Mr. Lapid celebrated it. The law, he explained in a tweet in July 2021, “is one of the tools meant to ensure the Jewish majority in the State of Israel.”

When Tucker Carlson and Viktor Orban employ this kind of logic — when they promote policies designed to ensure that the percentage of white Christians in their countries doesn’t dip too low — American Jewish liberals recognize it as anathema to the principle of equal citizenship on which liberal democracy rests. Yet many now see Mr. Lapid as liberal democracy’s champion because he opposes Mr. Netanyahu’s judicial reforms.

Another major figure in the anti-Netanyahu movement is former defense minister Benny Gantz, who last month urged Israelis “to protest for safeguarding Israeli democracy.” But as defense minister in 2021, Mr. Gantz designated six leading Palestinian human rights groups as terrorist organizations in what the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem called “an act characteristic of totalitarian regimes.” Israeli troops later forced their way into the organization’s offices, seized documents, and then welded shut the doors. Do those sound like the actions of someone interested in “safeguarding” democracy?

The problem runs deeper than just these politicians. When American Jewish leaders like Mr. Solow express solidarity with those “Israelis determined to protect their democracy,” they are not only deluding themselves about Mr. Netanyahu’s leading opponents. They are deluding themselves about Jewish statehood itself.

A protester holding a Palestinian flag in Tel Aviv at a demonstration against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government.Credit...Tsafrir Abayov/Associated Press

For most of the Palestinians under Israeli control — those in the West Bank and Gaza Strip—Israel is not a democracy. It’s not a democracy because Palestinians in the Occupied Territories can’t vote for the government that dominates their lives. When Mr. Gantz sends Israeli troops to shut down their human rights groups, West Bank Palestinians can’t punish him at the ballot box. They can complain to the Palestinian Authority. But the P.A. is a subcontractor, not a state. Like other Palestinians, its officials need Israeli permission even to leave the West Bank. In Gaza, too, Israel determines, with help from Egypt, which people and products enter and exit. And Gaza’s residents, who live in what Human Rights Watch calls “an open-air prison,” can’t vote out the Israeli officials who hold the key.

This lack of democratic rights helps explain why Palestinians are less motivated than Israeli Jews to defend Israel’s Supreme Court. As the Israeli law professors David Kretzmer and Yael Ronen note in their book, “The Occupation of Justice,” “in almost all of its judgments relating to the Occupied Territories, especially those dealing with questions of principle, the Court has decided in favor of the authorities.” Enfeebling the court would undermine legal protections that Israel Jews take for granted but most Palestinians did not enjoy in the first place.

To be fair, roughly 20 percent of the Palestinians under Israeli control enjoy Israeli citizenship and the right to vote in Israeli elections. Yet it is often these Palestinians who protest most vociferously against Israel’s democratic credentials. In 2009, Palestinian Knesset member Ahmad Tibi quipped that Israel was indeed “Jewish and democratic: Democratic toward Jews, and Jewish toward Arabs.” To many liberal Zionists, that might sound churlish. After all, Mr. Tibi has now served in Israel’s parliament for almost 25 years. But he understands that the Jewish state contains a deep structure that systematically denies Palestinians legal equality, whether they are citizens or not.

Consider how Israel allocates land. Most of the land inside Israel proper was seized from Palestinians during Israel’s war of independence in the late 1940s, when more than half the Palestinian population was expelled or fled in fear. By the early 1950s, the Israeli government controlled more than 90 percent of Israel’s land. It still does. The government distributes that land for development and leases it to citizens through the Israel Land Authority. Almost half the seats on its governing council are reserved for the Jewish National Fund, whose mission is “strengthening the bond between the Jewish people and its homeland.”

This helps explain why Palestinians comprise more than 20 percent of Israel’s citizens but Palestinian municipalities, according to a 2017 report by a variety of Palestinian and Israeli human rights groups, encompass less than 3 percent of Israel’s land. In 2003, an Israeli government commission found that “many Arab towns and villages were surrounded by land designated for purposes such as security zones, Jewish regional councils, national parks and nature reserves or highways, which prevent or impede the possibility of their expansion.” Unable to gain permission, many Palestinian citizens build homes illegally — which are therefore subject to government demolition. Ninety-seven percent of the demolition orders in Israel proper between 2012 and 2014, according to the 2017 report, were against Palestinians.

This isn’t an accident. It’s the logical outgrowth of Israel’s self-definition. Israel is not a “state for all its citizens,” a concept Mr. Lapid said in 2019 that he has opposed “my entire life.” In 2018, when several Palestinian lawmakers introduced legislation “to anchor in constitutional law the principle of equal citizenship,” the Knesset’s speaker ruled that it could not even be discussed because it would “gnaw at the foundations of the state.” That same year, the Knesset passed legislation reaffirming Israel’s identity as the “nation-state of the Jewish people,” which means that the country belongs to Jews like me, who don’t live there, but not to the Palestinians who live under its control, even the lucky few who hold Israeli citizenship. All this happened before Mr. Netanyahu’s new government took power. This is the vibrant liberal democracy that liberal Zionists want to save.

Some Jews may worry that by advocating genuine liberal democracy — and thus exposing themselves to accusations of anti-Zionism — Mr. Netanyahu’s critics will marginalize themselves. But if they widen their vision they’ll see that the opposite is true. By including Palestinians as full partners, Israel’s democracy movement will discover a vast reservoir of new allies and develop a far clearer moral voice. Ultimately, a movement premised on ethnocracy cannot successfully defend the rule of law. Only a movement for equality can.

Peter Beinart (@PeterBeinart) is a professor of journalism and political science at the Newmark School of Journalism at the City University of New York. He is also editor at large of Jewish Currents and writes The Beinart Notebook, a weekly newsletter.

 

 Analyserende artikkel i Haaretz 9. januar 2023:

"What We Can Learn From Netanyahu's 'Wonderful Friendship' With Bolsonaro"

"When it comes to protecting democracy around the world, Biden is on one side, while Netanyahu huddles with Trump, Putin and Bolsonaro"
(HELE artikkelen nederst under Kilde) 

Artikkelen plasserer Netanyahu i det politiske bildet internasjonalt ... og nevnes sammen med Trump, Bolsonaro og Putin.

Skudeneshavn   9. januar 2023

Jan Marton Jensen

HELE artikkelen i Haaretz 9. januar 2023:

What We Can Learn From Netanyahu's 'Wonderful Friendship' With Bolsonaro

When it comes to protecting democracy around the world, Biden is on one side, while Netanyahu huddles with Trump, Putin and Bolsonaro

Netanyahu and BolsonaroCredit: Palácio do Planalto / Wikimedia Commons, Stringer/ Reuters, Ronen Zvulun/AP, Anastasia Shub

Amir Tibon

Jan 9, 2023 7:10 pm IST

The videos emerging from Brazil’s parliament, Supreme Court and presidential palace on Sunday night were horrifying, but not surprising. The country’s former president, Jair Bolsonaro, has been planting the seeds for months, calling the election that took place in October "rigged" and refusing to accept the victory of his rival, President Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva.

These images call to mind another video, which appeared in early October on Bolsonaro’s social media accounts – immediately before the first round of voting in Brazil. A man in his early 70s is seen facing the camera. When he starts to talk, he endorses Bolsonaro’s reelection campaign, which by that point was already undermining Brazil’s democracy and spreading dangerous lies and conspiracy theories.

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1576379329017413633

“Thank you, president Bolsonaro, for your leadership and for strengthening the alliance between our countries,” says the man in the video. “I wish you all the best and thank you again for your wonderful friendship.”

The name of the speaker is Benjamin Netanyahu. Back then, he was the leader of Israel’s opposition. As prime minister, he will have to work with Lula, the socialist leader who defeated his "wonderful friend" Jair.

The Bolsonaristas' coup attempt in Brasilia is an obvious continuation of the January 6 insurrection in the United States, which was inspired and encouraged by another close friend of Netanyahu’s, former U.S. President Donald Trump. Bolsonaro is currently staying in Florida, and according to media reports, members of his circle were consulting with some of Trump’s top advisers in the lead-up to yesterday’s violent attack on his country’s institutions.

Netanyahu’s warm embrace of Trump and Bolsonaro, combined with his new government’s stated intention to avoid any criticism of Putin’s war in Ukraine, paints a clear picture of Israel’s place in today’s global battle over democracy. In fact, as of Monday afternoon, almost a day after the drama in Brasilia, no Israeli official has condemned the violence, even not in the face of direct questions on the subject from Israeli journalists.

The Biden administration, perhaps due to outdated and exaggerated political fears, is pretending not to notice, but the truth is evident and hard to ignore: when it comes to protecting democracy around the world, Biden is on one side, while Netanyahu, together with his buddies Trump and Bolsonaro, is on the other.

 

- Uber Files viser at de store teknologiselskapene må begrenses

Avsløringene om Uber mange tvilsomme grep avslørt i de såkalte "Uber Files" gjør det aktuelt  å se på hele spekteret av de store teknologiselskapene. Det mener kommentator Rafael Behr i The Guardian 11. juli 2022:

"The Uber files tell a simple truth: democracy depends on curbing mercenary tech giants."

Sterke ord: Demokratiet avhenger av å begrense disse selskapene.
Og det er avslørt at mange politikere har engasjert seg til støtte for Uber.
Denne lobby-virksomheten har vært omfattende ... og ukjent.

Innlegget i the Guardian avsluttes slik:

"The revelation of Uber’s sharp practices tells a simple truth about the tech revolution. It is the same one that is told by the arduous working conditions in an Amazon warehouse and the poisoned reservoirs of public debate where Facebook discharges hatred and misinformation. The cost of innovation might be invisible to the consumer, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there. And the job of democratic politicians is to be guardians of public interest, not the lubricants to private gain."

"Jobben til demokratiske ledere er å være voktere av flertallets interesser, og ikke smøre private interesser".

Skudeneshavn  11. juli 2022

Jan Marton Jensen

 

På Twitter:

 
11. juli 2022
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1546551392801800201

Kilde:

11. juli 2022
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/11/uber-files-democracy-silicon-valley

10. juli 2022
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/10/uber-files-leak-reveals-global-lobbying-campaign

1. mai 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opinion/uber-ipo.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

10. april 2019
https://itavisen.no/2019/04/10/uber-og-lyft-kommer-til-norgeuber-og-lyft-kommer-til-norge/

Trusel mot demokratiet: Fragmentering i politikken senker beslutningsevnen

Tankevekkende artikkel i NY Times 29.12.2021 (se Kilde):

"Why So Many Democracies Are Floundering"
" We pay too little attention to delivering effective government as a critical democratic value."
(Les videre under Kilde)

 

Fragmentering i politikken ... mange partier ... vanskeligå sikre stabilt demokratisk flertall som kan styre effektivt.

Mange mekanismer som nye media  åpner for særinteresser.

 

Viktig å erkjenne denne tilstanden som truer demokratiet.

Og for politikere med ansvar:

- Tørre å ta avgjørelser der dette er viktig.

 

 

Skudeneshavn  6. januar 2022

Jan Marton Jensen

 

 

Kilde:

 

29. desember 2021
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/29/opinion/democracy-fragmentation-america-europe.html

Angrep av Trump og Republikanerne på demokratiet i USA

 Angrepene på den amerikanske valgordningen fortsetter i USA.
Det Trump ikke fikk til ... det tar nå de republikansk ledede delstatene fatt på ... endrer valgordningene og adminstrasjonen av opptelling av valgene på delatstsnivå.

Her er to ferske advarsler:

21. oktober 2021
Innlegg av David Brock:
"I Was Wrong About Donald Trump"

1. januar 2022
Lederartikkel i NY Times:
"Every Day Is Jan. 6 Now"

Det haster med å sikre demokratiet skriver NY Times i sin ferske lederartikkel av. 1. januar.

 

En skremmende utvikling ... som amerikanerne selv må ordne oppi.

Men det skader ikke å fokusere på dette internasjonalt ... ja kanskje det hjelper.

Og så er der lærdom å hente om hvor skamløse ytre-høyre-politikere kan bli.

Skudeneshavn   2. januar 2022

Jan Marton Jensen

På Twitter:

3. januar 2022
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1477942266232717314

5. januar 2022
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1478674091309776898

 

Ny Info:

3. januar 2022   Advarsel fra Canada
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/03/us-rightwing-dictatorship-2030-trump-canada

 

Kilde:

1. januar 2022 
Lederartikkel i NY Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/01/opinion/january-6-attack-committee.html

21. oktober 2021
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/21/opinion/donald-trump.html

"Democracy Dies in the Dark" - "Demokratiet Dør i Mørke"

Hemmelighold av politiske beslutninger og grep tatt på bakrommet ... det er gammelt nytt.
MAKTA vil ikke alltid vise hva makta GJØR ... spesielt hvis det ikke tåler dagslys.
Og det er DA det er viktig å være på vakt.

Utsagnet... "Demokratiet dør i mørke" ... det er et godt begrep i slike situasjoner.
Ja, til bruk i ALLE tider.

Opprinnelig stammer det fra dommer Damon Keith  (1922-2019) fra Detroit.
Og det er tatt i bruk som hovedmotto av Washington Post i 2017 som "Democracy dies in Darkness":

Uttalelsen kom dommer Keith med under rettsaker i USA etter 11. september 2001 om hemmelig utsendelse av muslimer og arabere fra USA:

"After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the U.S. Justice Department began deporting Arab and Muslim immigrants in secret court proceedings, which The Detroit Free Press, The Detroit News, the ACLU, and U.S. Rep. John Conyers challenged in federal court, arguing it was a violation of the First Amendment to close immigration hearings to the public.

In his decision, Keith wrote that "Democracy dies in the dark." 

The phrase was later adopted by The Washington Post for use as its slogan, who tweaked it to "Democracy Dies in Darkness" in 2017.

https://www.metrotimes.com/news-hits/archives/2019/04/28/detroit-judge-damon-keith-who-coined-democracy-dies-in-the-dark-dead-at-96


HVER GANG det skjer at politikere IKKE vil fortelle hele sannheten ... da passer det å påtale:
-Demokratiet dør i mørke!


Skudeneshavn  1. oktober 2019

Jan Marton Jensen

På Twitter 1. oktober 2019:
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1179110657393905664

Kilde:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damon_Keith

https://www.metrotimes.com/news-hits/archives/2019/04/28/detroit-judge-damon-keith-who-coined-democracy-dies-in-the-dark-dead-at-96

Demokratiet angripes. Fra ytre høyre

Demokratiet er under angrep i flere land:

USA:
- Gerrymandering ... kunstig grensedragning av stemmekretser
- Utnevnelse til Høyesterett
- Trump blokkerer det innsyn Kongressen har krav på

UK:
-  Boris Johnson nærmest "avsetter" Parlamentet

India:
- Modi

Ungarn
Polen
Israel

Metodene er tydelige ... og går igjen:
Nasjonalisme, Populisme, Førsøk på å overta/politisere domstolene, Angrep på den frie presse ...

Det er ytrehøyre-kreftene som står for dette.
De har penger og ideologi i ryggen.
Og er skamløse i sin framferd ... jfr Trump i USA og Boris Johnson i UK.

Det som hjelper er EKSPONERING ... og diskusjon.
Så man kan ta valget ved neste valg.
Heldigvis har vi nettopp sett Boris Johnson i fri dressur ... helt uten  hemninger i ord og handling.

Da vet vi hva vi må se opp for.
Også i Norge ... for der har vi sett noen av ordene ..


Skudeneshavn  29. september 2019

Jan Marton Jensen

Bok:    16. januar 2018       "How Democracies Die"
https://www.amazon.com/How-Democracies-Die-Steven-Levitsky/dp/1524762938


På Twitter:
29. september 2019:
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1178416960528359424

23. januar 2020    Om Modi og India
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1220472188408492033 

10. januar 2022
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1480595975693606912

5. januar 2023
https://twitter.com/janmarton/status/1611052513939054593


Ny info:

13. februar 2022
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/02/11/history-patriotism-right-wing-politics/

10. januar 2022    Om Boris Johnsons lovforslag i UK
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/opinion/boris-johnson-britain-bills.html


Kilde:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

26. september 2019
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/26/boris-johnson-brutish-parliamentary-performance-democratic-dignity-mps


20. september 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/20/opinion/republicans-democracy-play-dirty.html


20.september 2019
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/20/west-democracy-narendra-modi-donald-trump-america 


29. august 2019
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/08/29/how-viktor-orban-hollowed-out-hungarys-democracy?cid1=cust/dailypicks1/n/bl/n/20190830n/owned/n/n/dailypicks1/n/n/E/300833/n

21. januar 2019
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/jan/21/this-is-how-democracies-die

Kommune-sammenslåing gir flere byråkrater og færre folkevalgte

Ferske tall fra SSB (Statistisk Sentralbyrå) viser at veksten i antall byråkrater i sammenståtte kommuner er omtrent dobbelt så stor som i andre kommuner:

 Konklusjonen er likevel at byråkratiet har vokst dobbelt så mye i sammenslåingskommuner.
«Hvis man antar at alle kommunene påvirkes likt av den nye metoden, viser tallene at byråkratveksten siden 2015 var dobbelt så stor i kommuner som skal slå seg sammen som i andre,» skriver Stine Bakke fra SSB i en e-post til Klassekampen. (Klassekampen 6. juli 2019).

Dette mens antall folkevalgte selvfølgelig går ned når 2 kommuner blir til 1.
I Holmestrand ... sammenslått med Sande ... er antall byråkrater økt med 47%.
Mens antall folkevalgte er halvert .... fra 69 til 35.

Kommunereformen gir altså mindre demokrati og høyere kostnader.
De partiene som går for dette har mye å svare for.
Hadde man gitt sluttpakker ville kostnadene eksplodert.
Nå skal man seigpines  over år ...

Skudeneshavn  10. juli 2019

Jan Marton Jensen



Ny info:

21. august 2019
https://www.h-avis.no/debatt/leserinnlegg/meninger/gi-oss-politikere-med-sjoltillit/o/5-62-861969

Kilde:

6. juli 2019
https://www.klassekampen.no/article/20190706/ARTICLE/190709977