US faces new era of political violence as threats against lawmakers rise | House of Representatives | The Guardian


Members of the House will now get up to $10,000 to upgrade their home security as experts warn such threats endanger the health of US democracy

============================================

It should be, without saying that violence of any nature should never be condoned and especially violence to anyone doing their job of work.

However, these days violence appears to be coming a ‘norm’, when it should never be. This appears to be occurring in all countries, be it left or right wing factions and everyone should be working against this trend continuing, especially those in some area of leadership and power of influence.

But, it appears America, to some extent, is an instigator of violence, with some persons in legislator areas, both past and present, actively encouraging violence to persons who don’t represent the same views of them without any apparent fear of arrest and prosecution. This only creates the impression to those whose reactions to be violent are their prime actions to do so. This has to be wrong completely and if allowed to continue will certainly lead to escalation of violent actions leading to eventual disintegration of Law and Order.

Yes, there is freedom of speech, but not to the extent of creating violence to others.

America holds the belief that it is the ‘land of the free’, but it should be free within restrictions so that the human rights of all concerned are respected and not just for the most powerful.

Democracy and Liberty for everyone not just a stated few.

Source: US faces new era of political violence as threats against lawmakers rise | House of Representatives | The Guardian

The Spanish state has launched an offensive against exiled Catalan MEPs


Just shows how, currently, undemocratic Spain is, one would believe that Franco is still in authority.

Josep Goded

The Spanish state via unionist parties has launched an offensive against Catalan exiles and MEPs. The Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament, led by Adrián Vázquez from Spain’s extremist party C’s, announced that it could not verify the MEP credentials of exiles Carles Puigdemont, Clara Ponsatí, Toni Comin, as well as Jordi Solé. He asked for Spain’s Electoral authority, which is under influence of the far-right, to make a decision on the matter. However, Vázquez himself admitted that, for the time being, practical problems would not be an issue for them to continue doing their jobs as MEPs.

“The European Parliament has yet to receive any notification and documentation from Spain to prove the four civilians meet the requirements to get the credentials,” he said

The most surprising part of Vázquez’s explanation is that the decision of what should happen to the four MEPs is in the hands…

View original post 101 more words

Leaders like Trump fail if they cannot speak the truth and earn trust : The Conversation


The absence of trust in a nation’s leader and government jeopardizes an effective response to a health crisis. It also creates a political crisis, a loss of faith in democracy.

Source: Leaders like Trump fail if they cannot speak the truth and earn trust : The Conversation

Opher talks to Opher about Democracy and Government.


What is actually being said, is that no form of Government is totally good, so make the best of what you have.

I also agree that the party system is not fit for purpose as when there is a Party it has been formed for a reason, but in time the way the party is may not be totally in tune with the original reasons for which it was created.

Why is this?

Well situations could change with the passage of time and the changes that have taken place, within the country, Society, the population, etc could mean that the original reasons are no longer relevant.

Or perhaps, the persons in control of the Party are no longer wishing to abide by the original reasons

or other reasons and maybe a mixture.

For myself I do not agree totally with any current Party and with some, virtually nothing they stand for.

I also query the political system for what or whom do we vote for.

Do we vote for a Party or a persons, well currently, it appears both for when it suits it could be a Party or a person.

If we vote for a person then the winner, the MP is supposed to be the MP for all the constituents irrespective of whether they voted for the MP or not, and not just the people you voted for the MP. For the result depends on a number of things, like turnout, percentage of turnout who voted for each candidate.

Turnout could be between say 50% to 70% , so a MP could win a vote by much less than 50% of the total persons in the constituency.

Also not all constituencies are of equal numbers of eligible voters.

So, that is another problem as not all persons within a constituency will be eligible to vote.

None of this shows who voted for the Party and who for the individual candidate and why they voted. Did they like the look of the candidate, like their views and were the views theirs or the Parties.

When people vote did they read the parties manifestos, if so, did they understand then or agree with everything within the manifesto of whom they voted for.

Should the party system be abandoned for voting for MPs and maybe just used for electing a Prime Minister.

Could the Government then consist of the best people for each Ministerial position, irrespective of the Party they belong to.

Just some points to consider.

Opher's World

You don’t like Democracy do you?

No I don’t. I used to but not any more.

Brexit – with all its lies, division and propaganda has clearly demonstrated the flaws. The wealthy elite and those with vested interests ran the show. I do not believe the majority understood what they were voting for. They were carried along on a nationalist narrative fuelled by xenophobia and racism.

Propaganda won.

Why is that?

Well I used to have faith in people but I don’t any more. I guess that I think that half the population have an IQ below a hundred and are much too influenced by the media. They are largely ignorant on many matters, poorly educated and gullible.

The problem with democracy is that the vote of a stupid and ignorant person is exactly the same as that of an intelligent and knowledgeable person.

That’s harsh. I thought you valued…

View original post 449 more words

Amber Rudd resigns from Cabinet and quits Tory party as she hits out at Boris Johnson’s purge | Daily Mail Online


  • Rudd said there was ‘no evidence’ to suggest Johnson was seeking an EU deal 
  • She said she ‘could not stand’ for the dismissal of 21 Tory rebels last week
  • Ms Rudd called the exiles ‘good, strong conservatives with progressive values’
  • In addition to quitting Cabinet she stood by them by surrendering the whip

Cabinet Minister Amber Rudd resigned from the Tory Party last night in protest at Boris Johnson’s sacking of the rebel Tory MPs who voted last week to block a No Deal Brexit.

In a devastating parting salvo, the Pensions Secretary — one of only a handful of Remain supporting Ministers in Mr Johnson’s Cabinet — said she thought there was ‘no evidence’ that Mr Johnson was trying to strike a deal with Brussels.

Announcing that she would be standing as an independent Conservative in her Hastings and Rye constituency, Ms Rudd attacked the Prime Minister’s decision to deselect 21 Tory rebels as an ‘assault on decency and democracy’.

Ms Rudd was criticised by her former Remain allies after pivoting to sign up to Mr Johnson’s Cabinet and backing his pledge to leave the EU ‘do or die’ and had been under huge pressure over her ‘pivot.’

 

Source: Amber Rudd resigns from Cabinet and quits Tory party as she hits out at Boris Johnson’s purge | Daily Mail Online

On Brexit Maneuvers, Boris Johnson Has Badly Miscalculated – Bloomberg


After just 43 days in office, U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has gotten himself into a dire fix. Unfortunately, there’s no easy way out — for him or for the country he nominally leads.

Thanks to a series of miscalculations, Johnson’s party is cracking up, his government is collapsing, and his political strategy is backfiring. This week, he ejected 21 rebels from the parliamentary Conservative Party after they joined the opposition to stop him from forcing the country out of the European Union without an exit agreement. To restore his authority and a workable majority, the prime minister then called for a prompt general election — and lost that vote as well, failing to muster the necessary two-thirds support.

 

Source: On Brexit Maneuvers, Boris Johnson Has Badly Miscalculated – Bloomberg

Jailed Catalan leaders ease position on post-election coalition talks – Reuters


Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is forecast to win the most seats in the vote, but could need Catalan separatists’ backing to form a government. A unionist, rightist coalition winning a majority is another possible scenario.

The Catalan leaders’ call, made in a letter in Saturday’s edition of La Vanguardia newspaper, said separatists should enter talks with potential coaltion partners as long as they refused to rule out an independence referendum as a “possible solution” for the region.

That marked a softening of their previous stance and raises the possibility of compromise on an issue that has vexed past coalition talks.

 

Source: Jailed Catalan leaders ease position on post-election coalition talks – Reuters

Laws are chipping away at democracy around the world : The Conversation


Democracy seemed ascendant after the rivalry between communist and democratic states subsided in the wake of the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991. As elected governments replaced many toppled totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, number of democracies rose.

Yet with rare exceptions, authoritarian leadership and other undemocratic governments have been the norm throughout human history. So perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising that democracy seems to be losing ground after its post-1991 surge. The rise of Recep Tayyip Erdoğanin Turkey, Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, and Donald Trump in the U.S. are among the most visible examples.

As a human rights attorney completing my Ph.D. in international relations, I’m researching why democracy appears to be declining around the globe. In addition to the growing number of far-right, authoritarian-leaning leaders who certainly bear responsibility, lawmakers in historically strong democracies are proposing and passing legislation that adds new layers of red tape, restricts access to foreign financial support, and makes it harder and riskier to engage in peaceful protests.

From India to Poland to Israel, legislators are limiting the freedom of independent nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations. Many of these groups are responsible for holding governments to account, standing up for minority rights and providing services to the indigent, among other critical roles.

New restrictions

My research focuses on the spread of undemocratic civil society laws in historically democratic states. These laws include bills that impose new restrictions on forming, operating and funding civil society

 

Source: Laws are chipping away at democracy around the world : The Conversation

The Who’s Roger Daltrey Calls Out the EU As a “F**king Mafia”


Remainers need to understand that being in the EU is not a democratic process as the European Commission is the power base, not the European Parliament.

The remainers are arguing for a democratic process to remain in the EU, which itself is undemocratic.

A referendum is a pure process of a democratic process, but not only are the Remainers failing to stand by the result, they are actively going against it. Is that not the opposite of a democratic process, but a dictatorship.

Say we did have ANOTHER Peoples Vote and it was still in favour of Leave, would Remainers demand another and another until they got a result they wish for.

But then what is to stop Leavers enacting the same process, this could go on to infinity.

Is this similar to the SNP in Scotland?

We need to leave the EU, which means the ‘Single Market and the Customs Union’ and see how it goes. For only then will it be possible to ascertain who lied the most, be it Remain or Leave. For both did lie or bend the truth.

ukgovernmentwatch

19 March 2019

Roger Daltrey, the lead singer of legendary British rock band, The Who, has compared the European Union to the “f**cking mafia,” after being asked whether Brexit would be “bad for British rock music.”

In an interview with Sky News at Wembley Stadium, Daltrey, who has publicly backed Brexit, became visibly riled at questions on the thorny issue of Brexit.He rejected any notion that leaving the EU would have a negative impact on music bands touring Europe.

“As if we didn’t tour Europe before the f**king EU. Oh give it up! If you want to be signed up to be ruled by a f**king mafia, you do it. Like being governed by FIFA.”

In an interview with the Telegraph in May last year, the 75-year-old singer lashed out at what he sees as the democratic deficit demonstrated by the EU as an institution – insisting that he…

View original post 190 more words

Brexit: Petition to remain in the EU hits one million signatures in just one day | Euronews


The response of Chris Sterry to this Euronews article

So, a Petition has received more than 1 Million signatures, but the 2016 Referendum received more than 17 Million votes. The 17 million were accused of not knowing what they were doing because the information that was produced in support of leaving, was, we are told not completely correct. But neither was the information supporting remain.

It is assumed by persons wishing to remain that if we stay in the EU, that the EU will continue as it is, but what about the threat to proceed to further political union, what will this entail, have we been informed. Will we be in control of our military forces, will we still be able to decide on our own legislation, will taxes and other forms of obtaining finance still be within our control. Will we still have an independent Government, or will it be so depleted to be as Local Government is today.

These are major issues, which currently we have not received any information on, so voting to stay is as much in the dark as voting to leave. I voted in the 1975 referendum and voted to stay within the EEC, now transformed to the EU. Did I vote for the EU, no I did not and nobody did. We could have voted on these issues, but, one, Tony Blair and other Prime Ministers did not allow a public vote. We are now told because of the lies and misinformation we should have a peoples vote, as though the vote in 2016 was not a peoples vote, so what did vote in 2016, were they not people?

We are told there are now people who were too young to vote in 2016, so they should now be allowed to express their vote but was this not the case in 1975. In 1975 there were also lies and untruths, for were we told of the wish or desire to proceed with Political Union, which we are now advised was known in 1975. I voted to stay in the EEC, but not the EU, I and many others have been denied that right since 1975.

All that is being said about the wrongs in 2016 could also be said of the 1975. But there is a major difference, in 1975 the vote was to stay, was this what the Establishment wished for, but in 2016 we voted to leave and that appears to be not what the Establishment wished for. Sour grapes by the losers in 2016, but not the losers in 1975. As 1975 was allowed to stand, so should 2016, whether it be right or wrong, just as in 1975. To say otherwise means that the democratic principles are not being adhered to and that means why should anyone really vote again, as it appears no matter what the result the Establishment will do as they please, is that not the ideals of a dictatorship?

 

Source: Brexit: Petition to remain in the EU hits one million signatures in just one day | Euronews