Connect with us

Features

Trump, on January 6 insurrection: The others (law enforcement) had guns, WE didn’t have guns

Published

on

Trump’s former Chief of Staff, General John Kelly: Trump needs generals loyal to him, like Hitler did

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

The political landscape in the United States of America has changed beyond recognition since Donald J. Trump was elected to the presidency in 2016, with a minority in the popular vote, but a win in the Electoral College.

The Electoral College is an archaic system of voting, by which the president of the United States is not determined by the popular vote but by votes cast by the Electoral College, a system unknown anywhere else in the world. Even nations like North Korea and Russia have electoral systems by which the head of state (president, dictator, supreme leader, call him what you like) is “elected” by the popular vote, even if the total vote is often rigged to exceed 100% of the total electorate!

The first term of Trump’s presidency, while showing distinct signs of authoritarianism, didn’t meet the definition of a cult. After his electoral defeat in 2020, though, the Republican Party may have shown signs of gradual transformation to a white supremacist cult, especially after the insurrection of January 6, 2021 and the subsequent sporadic violence thereafter.

On January 7, 2021, Trump said that the insurrectionists who engaged “in acts of violence and destruction do not represent our country. Those who broke the law will pay”. Even though the evidence that he incited the insurrection was overwhelming.

However, his tune has changed drastically since. At a Univision TV forum last week, Trump called January 6 “a day of love”, that “there were no guns down there. WE didn’t have guns. “The others” (Capitol law enforcement who were fighting off the insurrectionists) had guns”. Trump incriminated himself by including himself with those who engaged “in acts of violence and destruction against our country….who will pay”. And pay he must.

Republican members of both houses of Congress remain disgustingly, fearfully loyal to him, giving the most ridiculous explanations, or refusing to explain his increasingly maniacal behavior and rhetoric.

Last Saturday, at a rally in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, the birthplace of deceased golf legend Arnold Palmer, Trump memorialized his “old golfing friend” (who, according to Palmer’s daughter, Peg, despised Trump) with an envy-filled, admiring reference to Palmer’s “giant, stiff-shafted penis”. He then proceeded to describe his rival, Kamala Harris, as a “shit” Vice-President. Profanities have become so commonplace in all his rants that it has become impossible for families to watch TV with their children when he is speaking.

Peg Palmer Wears was “appalled”, saying that her dad, a staunch Republican, would have “cringed” at Trump’s crude comments. However, Republican pundits tend to dismiss such crass comments as “just a joke”. There is no depth of vulgarity Trump could plumb which could shake the devotion of his followers. Their loyalty is to their jobs and political future, never to the constitution and their country.

Trump has always been the undisputed leader of the new Republican Party. Unlikely as it may seem, perhaps his leadership has been usurped by Elon Musk and his ultra-conservative billionaire friends, who may now be the real brains behind the movement. Perhaps they feel that Trump, judging by his recent progressively demented behavior, is becoming unacceptable to all but his most ardent, white supremacist supporters. They may feel he is no longer fit for the job, and decided to groom a replacement, a younger, more persuasive, less vulgar, authoritarian liar? Their first move was to persuade Trump to nominate JD Vance as his running mate.

Vance had been an anti-Trumper, who, as recently as in 2018, called Trump “America’s Hitler”. He had a sudden change of heart in 2022, when Silicon Valley billionaire, Peter Thiel bought him a Senate seat (in Ohio) for $30 million. The nomination of Vance as Trump’s running mate was preceded by the release of the 920-page document, “Project 2025 – Mandate for Leadership”, published by the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation, authored by many members of Trump’s first-term cabinet, with a foreword penned by none other than Vance. Project 2025 describes in detail the agenda of the Republican Party after Trump’s inauguration in January, 2025.

Trumpism is not a cult. It has been a well-planned, ultra-conservative movement, strategized by Christian white supremacists, backed by the billionaire class. They had foreseen the USA moving towards a Socialist Democracy after the election of Democratic President Barack Obama. Donald Trump’s upset election as President in 2016 dramatically slowed down, but has not halted, that movement.

The election of moderate Democratic President Biden in 2020, when he defeated Trump by a landslide, indicated the resumption of the nation’s journey towards a socially and economically just society.

A fact that eludes the imagination of some conservatives, who consider providing free food to kids in schools, enabling their grandchildren reach their full potential and grandparents retire in dignity, and yes, even helping those who have been vulnerable, having invited misfortune into their lives through their own follies – after all, we are all human – is an imminent national degeneration into the hellhole of Communism.

Senior Republicans, members of Trump’s cabinet during his first term, including his Vice-President, Mike Pence, and previous senior Republicans like former President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney have publicly voiced their reservations about Trump’s re-election and announced they will not vote for him. Many have endorsed the presidency of Vice-President Harris. Some, like Liz Cheney, have joined Harris on the campaign trail.

Trump’s former National Security Adviser, John Bolton, who has written many books warning of the dangers to democracy presented by Trump, said on CNN last Tuesday, “When I first met Trump, I thought he had the mentality of an 11-year-old. I was wrong by ten years. He behaves like a one-year-old”.

His former Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Millie has called Trump “a fascist to the core”.

Marine General John Kelly, Trump’s longest-serving Chief of Staff, disturbed at Trump’s recent comments about Democrats being “the enemy within”, told the New York Times in a recorded interview last Wednesday, 13 days before the election, that the former President “falls into the general definition of a fascist, for sure”. Kelly said that Trump admired Hitler, said “Hitler did many good things” and “I need the kind of generals Hitler had”. This certainly seems like, as VP Harris said, a 911 emergency call by General Kelly to the American people.

Trump, the ignorant moron he is, didn’t know that there had been at least 10 failed attempts to assassinate Hitler which involved German generals. For once, I am in full agreement with Donald Trump, that he should have generals around him, like Hitler did. American generals usually get the job done, when their actions serve the nation.

November 5 will provide Americans with some crucial choices as to the ideological path they would choose for the governance of their nation in the future.

The election of center-left Democrat Vice-President Kamala Harris will continue the nation’s path towards the Nordic model of a Socialist Democracy. A model known for an equitable society with high living standards and low-income disparity, espoused by every developed nation in the world.

Trump will be held accountable for the multitude of felonies he has already been convicted and will face trial, and will spend the rest of his life in a mental asylum.

However, corporate greed and Christian white supremacy will not vanish into thin air with Trump’s defeat. Project 2025 will simply be renamed Project 2029.

If Trump wins the presidency, he will be gently eased out of the White House after a couple of years, on the eminently valid grounds that he has reached full-blown lunacy. He has served his purpose. The exercise of the 25th Amendment to oust him will be a legal and medical formality. 40-year-old Vice-President Vance will take over as president. With the two-term limit of the 21st Amendment overturned by a suppliant, corrupt Supreme Court, Vance will begin a long reign as the President of the United States of America for Life, obediently carrying out the instructions of the dark money, billionaire class.

The Shining City on the Hill would be a fantasy, replaced, perhaps permanently, by an authoritarian kleptocracy. On the model of Putin’s Russia.

Unfortunately, there is a third, and the most likely scenario, if Vice-President Harris wins the election by any majority but a landslide.

When Joe Biden won the presidency in 2020, he had an Electoral College majority of 62 votes, which meant that he defeated Trump in multiple battleground states. In spite of this large majority, Trump filed 62 cases, alleging election fraud without a shred of evidence, all of which were thrown out by the courts, including two by the Supreme Court.

If Vice-President Harris wins the election by a small margin in November, as seems likely, Trump will again dispute the results of some swing states and file multiple cases of election fraud. The courts will only need to overturn the results of one or two swing states, to cause disputes in the election.

The climate of the courts, especially the Republican-packed Supreme Court, where the cases will be finally heard, is totally different from that which existed in 2020. We are dealing with the most corrupt Supreme Court in history, with a 6/3 Republican majority, which recently ruled, against the constitution, that an incumbent president is immune from prosecution, totally above the law.

In the event of a close election in November, Trump will not concede the election (he has yet to concede the 2020 election!). The nation will be embroiled in an indefinite constitutional crisis.

Trump has already started the procedure for disputing an election result going against him by manipulating the election procedures in red states, as he attempted in 2020. He is already accusing, without a shred of evidence, the British Labor Party of interfering in the November election. Of course, the interference of Russia on his behalf is a given.

Such a prolonged constitutional crisis will likely be accompanied by post-election violence, which will make January 6, 2021 look like a walk in the park. Fortunately, this time around, the incumbent president will be Joe Biden, who will use the full resources of federal law enforcement to quell the violence. And this time around, it will be Vice-President Kamala Harris (the current president-elect), in her capacity as the President of the Senate, who will perform her constitutional duty of certifying the results of the Electoral College on January 6, 2025 and anoint herself as the 47th President of the United States. But only If that process is allowed, by the courts or by the mobs, to reach the constitutional phase of the electoral process.

To use a well-worn cliché, the only probable post-election scenario in the nation from Election Day till the inauguration of the 47th President on January 20, 2025, or whenever, would be predictable in its unpredictability.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Addressing human rights needs multi-pronged approach

Published

on

Volker Türk

by Jehan Perera

The ongoing 63rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which runs from September 7 to October 7, 2026, in Geneva is important to Sri Lanka. Its outcome will send a signal to other international actors, including the European Union, as to whether Sri Lanka’s reform policy is on track. The written update on Sri Lanka, prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights under High Commissioner Volker Türk and presented by Deputy High Commissioner Nada Al-Nashif, has taken a more holistic approach to the government’s performance over the past year. It acknowledged the progress Sri Lanka has made under the NPP government in relation to accountability for financial fraud and other economic crimes. At the same time, the High Commissioner’s update made clear that progress in relation to economic crime cannot be equated with progress in relation to accountability for grave human rights violations committed during the armed conflict and in other periods of political violence.

The government may have felt sufficiently confident that its response to the High Commissioner’s update could be handled by its representative in Geneva and did not require the attendance of Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath. Sri Lanka’s representative Sumith Dassanayake called for a fundamental review of country-specific mandates within the UN Human Rights Council. Sri Lanka has been facing repeated scrutiny in the form of successive UNHRC resolutions from 2012 onwards. Ambassador Dassanayake argued that such mandates should not continue indefinitely and must be regularly assessed against measurable objectives and tangible outcomes. This may reflect confidence that its record of reform is beginning to receive recognition internationally. The reports and statements at the Human Rights Council acknowledged progress in the government’s efforts to address corruption and economic crime.

The government’s anti-corruption drive has included investigations into allegations involving individuals who held the highest political offices in the country. The arrest of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe in connection with alleged misuse of public funds, and the investigation into the controversial SriLankan Airlines Airbus transaction involving former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s son, are examples of the reach of these investigations. The arrest of SLPP National Organiser and Member of Parliament Namal Rajapaksa in connection with allegations relating to the Airbus purchase scandal has also demonstrated that the government is willing to pursue cases involving politically powerful figures.

Wide Range

The ongoing investigations appear to encompass a wide range of parliamentarians and government members, both past and present. They suggest that accountability for corruption is not being confined to lower-level officials or to individuals who lack political influence. This is precisely the kind of accountability that the public has long demanded and that previous governments have too often failed to deliver. The government is also reaching into the upper levels of the military hierarchies of the past. The case in which 11 young men, most of them Tamil, disappeared after being abducted in Colombo between 2008 and 2009 involved allegations that some families were asked to pay ransoms. The investigation into this case has reached senior military figures. The willingness to pursue such cases is important because it challenges the assumption that those who exercised power during the war are beyond the reach of the law. Such cases would provide a practical test of whether the government’s commitment to accountability for economic crimes is part of a broader commitment to the rule of law.

Success in prosecuting corruption cannot substitute for justice for those who were unlawfully killed, disappeared, tortured or otherwise victimised. The UN report noted that there had been no recognition or accountability for crimes under international law, gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law committed by all parties during the war. The government has yet to establish a credible and effective process to address the many cases of enforced disappearance, extrajudicial killing, torture and other serious violations. The government needs to take the international commitments it has inherited on human rights issues seriously. It needs to adopt a multi-pronged approach and go beyond focusing primarily on financial and corruption-related accountability.

Need Action

As a member of the international community, Sri Lanka has a responsibility to abide by the commitments it has made. It cannot selectively uphold international obligations postponing those that are politically difficult. Also, as a small country, Sri Lanka has a self-interest in ensuring the survival of international law, which is all that it has to protect it from the depredations of the bigger international actors. The erosion of international law by powerful states makes it all the more important that smaller states uphold the principles on which the international system is based. Sri Lanka cannot credibly appeal to international law when it is threatened from outside while disregarding its own obligations within. Sri Lanka also needs to win the confidence of its own population that it is committed to justice and equality for all. Public opinion polls and community-level research have disclosed that ethnic and religious minorities are appreciative of the sense of greater security they enjoy under the present government from ethnic or religious extremists.

But a sense of security is not the same as the fulfilment of rights. As far as the Tamil people are concerned, the government has yet to deliver on several of its specific promises. These include the long-standing problems of missing persons, the release of political prisoners who have been members of Tamil militant organisations, and the return of land taken over for military purposes during the war. The issue of Buddhist statues and archaeological sites found on their properties which are then taken from their control continue to trouble them especially as they see no signs of resolution of those disputes. The issue of pastureland in the east of the country in Mylathamadu is particularly concerning to them as they see orders by successive presidents, both President Ranil Wickremesinghe and President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, being disregarded on the ground. The Mylathamadu pastureland dispute is where traditional Tamil dairy farmers have engaged in multi-year protests against the ongoing encroachment of their ancestral grazing lands by Sinhalese crop cultivators relocated under government development schemes.

The government’s failure to hold Provincial Council elections is particularly troubling. The provincial council system is the only one that can provide the Tamil people and other ethnic minorities the opportunity to wield political power and exercise a measure of self-determination in the areas in which they are the numerical majority. The continued postponement of Provincial Council elections therefore has consequences that go beyond an ordinary electoral delay. It deprives communities of an important constitutional avenue for democratic participation and power-sharing. The ethnic and religious minorities appreciate what the government is doing in the larger national interest, but they must not be made to feel that their special concerns are being ignored. The government cannot resolve Sri Lanka’s entire legacy of rights violations overnight. But it does need to demonstrate that it is willing to move forward on multiple fronts, not only on a few.

Continue Reading

Features

The emptying university: why are academics leaving?

Published

on

by Hasini Lecamwasam

Brain drain in Sri Lanka is at an all-time high. The latest Human Flight and Brain Drain Index for 2024 shows that we are 16th of 175 countries on this count, and first in South Asia. That this is a crisis goes without saying. Brain drain affects all sectors, and is a huge strain on the resources of a developing country. Particularly in Sri Lanka, where considerable public investment is made in the moulding of professionals through the system of free education, this amounts to transferring the resources of poorer countries to richer ones with top migration destinations. It is, therefore, important to consider the push and pull factors behind skilled outmigration, specifically from the public university system of Sri Lanka, a key focus of the Kuppi column.

From frustration to exit

Several bitter realities in our crumbling public university system act as push factors in the migration decisions of academics. Many essays on this column have, over several years, attempted to highlight numerous aspects of this erosion. Perhaps, primary among them is the lack of adequate funding, which has debilitating ramifications for the system: very little investment is made in the up-keep of infrastructure (and even less in its expansion), resulting in serious constraints in accommodating growing batches of students and the wellbeing of the staff (particularly in regional universities); research funding is negligible, severely curtailing academics’ ability to effectively discharge their primary duty of teaching which should ideally be informed by their research (and the research of others, access to which is also, unfortunately, mediated by funding); a funding crunch also means a slash in (or greater constraints on) recruitments, increasing the workloads of academics, currently in service, and eating into the quality of their teaching and research.

What recruitments are done frustrate those with any faith in merit. As many of our interventions in this column have shown, recruitment processes are characterised by archaic selection criteria that place very little weight on a candidate’s postgraduate growth and the advantages of interdisciplinary training. Added to this is the general preference for ‘culturally compliant’ candidates who would not rock the boat too much. The combined effect is that those with the capacity and spirit to try out innovations in education are discouraged from joining or staying on in the public university system. Some, or many, of them may instead seek appointments abroad.

A thread that binds all of these problems together is pervasive hierarchy which, again, many interventions on this column have sought to highlight. It is the interest in preserving hierarchy that leads to the preference for alumni in recruitment processes. Hierarchy within universities can be particularly frustrating for younger faculty and women, who typically have to bear the brunt of the workload of their senior, often male, colleagues. In a context of funding, and, therefore, recruitment, restrictions, this translates into a disproportionate burden being placed on junior (usually female) faculty, seriously hindering their prospects of growing into successful academics due to the time constraints within which they have to operate. Junior academics, therefore, are more likely to look to educational institutions abroad for what they hope would be a different work culture that respects them more.

Ideological ruses

On top of these structural frustrations are also the workings of neoliberal ideology. For one, the nature of relations between the global metropole and peripheral countries like Sri Lanka largely dictates what is desirable and what is not. The apparent lifestyles of Western countries – from food to clothing, housing, appliances, and so on – have continued to lure people from the periphery with the promise of a ‘better’ life, alongside better career advancement opportunities. This, of course, masks much of the struggle that goes on behind the scenes to survive in Western societies. For instance, in most cases highly attractive public infrastructure such as roads, public transport, clean air, quality control of food, and so on belie the astronomical privatised costs of healthcare and education. Health insurance is usually mandatory and steep in most high-income settings, while even subsidised education (for which eligibility criteria are strict) creates a serious dent in household earnings. Of course, the happy images of glossy trams and gleeful international travellers don’t convey this.

A second ideological ruse is the myth of greater opportunities and recognition abroad. While there is no denying that local skilled sectors – be it higher education, health, civil service, or private white-collar positions – are replete with issues that inhibit merit-based professional advancement, the notion that things are fundamentally different in Western countries stems from an uninformed optimism. As is now increasingly known and discussed, Western labour markets are notoriously racialised, and equivalent skills are rarely treated as such. Instead, it is usually demanded that skilled migrants clear certain formal examinations in their host countries. In fields like medicine, this is followed by an interview that may also be racially prejudiced. Once these initial steps are cleared, remuneration reverts to square one irrespective of experience accumulated abroad, not to mention the many subtle aggressions, rejections, and trials one has to go through in the negotiation of everyday life. In the many cases where professional qualifications are used as leverage for a move abroad, sights are set on a better future for one’s children, which again is informed by the misplaced faith in greater opportunities and a lack of awareness of the factors outlined above. Needless to say, in the global swing to the Right, things have become even more challenging. In such a context, considering the few rare cases where skilled migrants live extremely comfortable lives as the norm becomes a dangerous misconception.

The two ideological pull factors mentioned above are complemented by a push factor, which has to do with a highly classed understanding of what a white-collar professional is due in their society. Many of these aspirations are clearly articulated in academic trade union action demanding separate quotas for school entry, increased fuel allowances, winning back the presently stalled vehicle permit scheme, salary hikes, and so on. While working people have every right to agitate for better material conditions, insofar as it remains unconnected to a broader movement for improving the conditions of the lot of the working class, it remains self-serving and very much within the class logic of capitalist society. Since these demands are articulated as a means of maintaining distinction, it is clear that they are not envisaged as part of a class movement. The frustration of not having these needs for distinction satisfied may push some to seek greener pastures abroad, at least financially, (perhaps as a means of social mobility based on it), only to be disappointed on most occasions.

What is to be done?

Addressing the systemic push factors listed above requires, first and foremost, greater allocations for free public higher education. This would immediately translate into more recruitments and less work per academic, and better research and teaching in the long haul. An increase in funding would also ideally lead to greater infrastructural investments, especially including improving the living conditions of those who work in regional universities amid untold hardships. Next, fairer, more creative, and, therefore, more effective recruitment policies are badly needed to attract talented individuals to university positions. Rather than carving out a ‘special category’ for academics to achieve this purpose, which is informed by a classed logic, this needs to be done through fundamental reforms in recruitment processes. Third, a persistent attack on the entrenched hierarchy within universities through internal reform is much called for. Reforming recruitment practices will go a long way towards addressing this. Measures should also be taken to introduce more stringent policies against SGBV (not to mention ragging, even though it is not directly connected to brain drain). Such measures would create a safer, fairer, and more attractive workplace, which would give more reasons for people to stay.

On top of greater allocations, we also need a transformation of our aspirations themselves if this situation is to change. That necessitates a kind of education capable of questioning the ‘paradise’ conception of Western societies, and lays bare their colonial material and ideological dimensions, in both their historical and contemporary manifestations. These colonial understandings of the ‘good life’, moreover, have devastating ecological implications for the planet, not to mention social justice. An education with the ability to transform this mindset would hopefully prove to be more than a mere path to social mobility, rather being a tool of social emancipation that renders mobility moot.

(Hasini Lecamwasam is with the Department of Political Science, University of Peradeniya)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

Continue Reading

Features

Friends favourite Suzi Croner returns for Oktoberfest 2026

Published

on

Charming audiences in Switzerland as Suzi Flückiger, Sri Lanka’s own Suzi Croner is coming home… for a very special occasion.

The bubbly former frontline vocalist of 90s band Friends will take the stage at a popular venue in Colombo for Oktoberfest 2026.

Known in Europe for her country and classic hits, Suzi has remained a much-loved name back home. This will be a rare chance for local fans to see her live and celebrate the voice behind so many Friends memories.

Oktoberfest 2026 in Colombo promises an evening of live music, traditional Bavarian food and beer, colourful dirndls and lederhosen, folk dancing, and plenty of community cheer.

Suzi Croner (Flückiger)

Against this lively backdrop, Suzi will take the stage for a special solo set, featuring her own pre-recorded music. She performed at the event last year too, as a solo artiste, but a German band providing the music.

This year, however she says, it’s a different scene.

“The novel attraction will be the dancers from Germany — all girls, clad in German outfits,” Suzi said. She added that the event will also highlight the activities generally connected with Oktoberfest, which should generate a lot of fun and excitement for those who join her in Colombo next month.

Suzi has become a much-in-demand artiste in Europe, and has even performed Down Under, in Melbourne.

In Switzerland, where she has been based for the past 42 years, she continues to charm audiences with country and classic hits, performing at private events and community nights across Europe.

“My weekends are generally loaded with my work as a singer,” she said. “And I also play tennis three times a week, because I need to keep fit to entertain my audience in an active way.”

Her repertoire is made up mainly of Swiss, German and English songs.

And true to form, Suzi loves springing surprises.

“So watch out when you join me at Oktoberfest 2026, in Colombo!” she said.

Continue Reading

Trending