Connect with us

Features

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for the People VS Donald Trump for the Virus

Published

on

by Rajan Philips

Four years ago, a minority of American voters unwittingly perpetrated a fraud on their country. In November this year, the American people will have the opportunity to vote wisely and retake their country. In 2016, a technically ill equipped and morally debased candidate won the presidential election thanks to the chicanery of an electoral college system against an eminently qualified but cruelly maligned candidate. Hillary Clinton who lost the election to Donald Trump, would have made history as the first female American President if she had prevailed in the electoral college vote just as she won the popular vote. But having a woman succeed an African American President was too much for America’s mastodons. Pundits blamed it on the Clinton baggage that the American right and the national media had piled on her and her erratic genius of a husband over 40 years of their conjugal public life. This time there is no excuse for a repeat blunder. The Democratic nominee Joe Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris carry no baggage. The only darts that can be flung at them are – he is too old, and she is too bi-racial. There is no other political stump for Donald Trump to stand on. Except fraud.

And fraud is what Trump seems to be banking on for this election. If it was covert and indirect fraud in 2016, Trump is now ready for direct and blatant fraud. From the time he became candidate for the 2016 election, Trump has been calling the American electoral system a fraud and basing it on the canard that the voting system is manipulated in favour of minorities and illegal immigrants. The reverse is, in fact, the case. What is fraudulent about the American electoral system is the systemic voter suppression targeting minorities and marginalized communities through any means possible. But that is not Trump’s concern. His reason for crying fraud is to prepare his base to reject the November election results which he fears will go against him. Every day he is pulling a new trick from outside the rule book to subvert the system and extend his stay in office even after an electoral defeat.

In his latest detour last Thursday, he was reaching to a new ally in the right wing nut organization called QAnon. The organization operates on the theory that “there is a worldwide cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles who rule the world,” and that these Satan-worshippers have infiltrated the American “deep-state” and are plotting against their President Donald Trump and his supporters. Even as Trump was signalling this organization to rile up his base, Facebook was taking down thousands of groups and accounts sharing QAnon messages on its platforms. In another poetic setback, Steve Bannon, the creator of far-right Breitbart News who went on to become the CEO of Trump’s 2016 campaign down its home stretch, and later White House Chief of Staff for political strategy, was arrested on Thursday for allegedly defrauding “We Build the Wall” campaign that was set up to raise private funding and build sections of Trump’s border wall against Mexico.

Trump will dismiss every indictment as a deep state ploy against him, and use it to reinforce his core white American support and retrace his 2016 victory path. His difficulty this year is that he has to defend his record in office, especially his terrible failure to contain the new coronavirus, whereas in 2016 he had the advantage of projecting himself as the new outsider marching on Washington to take down the establishment. To ‘drain the swamp in Washington,’ was his clarion call in the last election. Now, the Trump swamp stretches all over America and spills over beyond its borders.

 

No certainty

There is no certainty of a Democratic victory given the electoral college system which can thwart the verdict of the popular vote as it did in 2016. If they were to falter again similarly, it would be the third time this century that the Democrats would have won the popular vote but lost the election. Trump’s popularity and approval ratings are at the historically low at the 30-40% levels, but they are disturbingly high compared to other western democracies where governments and leaders with similar performance could hardly have their popularity upwards of 20%. Trump’s 30-40% ratings are indicative of the deep divisions in American politics, which Trump irresponsibly aggravates at every opportunity.

However, these numbers might be deceptive to Trump the same way they were deceptive to Hillary Clinton in 2016. Hillary Clinton’s consistent but narrow leads in national polling concealed her vulnerability in the handful of swing states which she eventually lost by small margins. Only a few pollsters, perhaps only one among them as far I know, consistently commented on this vulnerability. In 2020, Trump’s national polling between 30-40% is concealing his vulnerability in the same swing states that he snatched from the Democrats in the last election. Biden is currently leading Trump in these states by a healthy margin. But no one is making any final prediction for sure. Adding to the shock of the last election is the uncertainty of Covid-19, and no one is rushing to predict the outcome.

Demographically, going by Pew Research Centre’s comparison of voting patterns from 1972 (when Nixon won his short second term), Republicans have always obtained a majority of white voters since 1972, while Black and Hispanic voters have overwhelmingly supported the Democratic party. There was no gender gap until the 1988 election, and only in 1992 (with Bill Clinton’s first win) women’s vote started breaking decisively for the Democrats while men’s vote stayed with the Republicans. Until this century, the more educated sections voted Republican while those with less education supported the Democrats. Traditionally, potential Democratic voters did not show up to vote except in the four elections won by Bill Clinton (1992 and 1996) and Barak Obama (2008 and 2012). Bill Clinton in his two wins and Obama in his first made significant inroads into white voters, while Obama won 90% of the black vote and in large numbers in his two victories.

Hillary Clinton maintained the same voter demographic profile as Obama but with a slightly lower voter turnout. Yet, her vote tally of 65,850,000 is second only to Obama’s 69,500,000 (2008) and 65,915,000 (2012) in American history. More significantly, the racial, gender and educational, as well as regional, gaps between the voting bases of the two parties widened the most in 2016 unlike in any previous election. More non-white, female, educated and urban Americans voted Democrat, while their white, male, less educated and rural counterparts voted Republican. Inasmuch as the turnover of the swing states was seen as being due to white working-class votes moving from Democrats to Trump, winning them back became the immediate strategy of Democrats for the 2020 election.

This was also the premise on which Joe Biden launched his presidential bid based on his working class roots in Scranton, Pennsylvania, the state Democrats lost to Trump in 2016. He projected himself as a moderate candidate. After awkward stumbles in the early primaries, Biden’s campaign took off taking advantage of his strong support among African Americans. With Bernie Sanders, unable to regenerate the enthusiasm he achieved against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 primaries, Biden easily sealed the Democratic Party nomination weeks before the pandemic hit America. He would have run a cautious campaign and tried to win back the lost white working class votes in Midwestern States, but for Trump’s disastrous handling of the pandemic, and the public outrage at the slow killing of George Floyd, on May 25, under a police knee on a public road in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

 

Obama’s rebuke

There is nothing cautious now about the Democratic 2020 campaign. Democrats have turned the campaign into a referendum on Trump and they are betting on the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris ticket as an appealing restorative alternative to the Trump sickness. The Party’s convention held last week was historic not so much because it was the virtual political convention ever to be held, but really because it was the first when a sitting President was roundly condemned by the opposing Party as being crass, callow, lazy, incompetent, unempathetic and immoral.

Michelle Obama, the former First Lady, led off on the first day with a blistering attack on Trump for his incompetence. Former President Bill Clinton blasted Trump the next day for spending time watching TV and tweeting while letting America with 4% of the world’s population end up having 25% of the world’s Covid-19 cases and deaths. The third day belonged to what the western media has called “boundary breakers” – Hillary Clinton, the first female Presidential candidate; Nancy Pelosi, the first female Speaker of the House; Barak Obama, the first African American President; and Kamala Harris, the first woman of colour to be nominated as Vice Presidential candidate.

Obama’s convention speech was hugely unconventional. Speaking live from the Museum of the American Revolution in Philadelphia with the words of American Constitution inscribed on the walls behind him, Obama tore into Trump and his record in office, showing anger, scorn and even fear – fear for American democracy should Trump win a second term. Incumbent American Presidents are never publicly criticized by their predecessors. Obama’s scathing rebuke of Trump is a speech for history and perhaps a more consequential speech than his no less historic speech on race delivered in 2008 as a first-time presidential candidate. “Donald Trump hasn’t grown into the job because he can’t,” said Obama nonchalantly, and appealed to the American voters to vote for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and stop Trump from winning a second term.

Joe Biden was Obama’s Vice President for two terms over eight years (2008-2015), and sat out the 2016 election when Hillary was the overwhelming favourite to carry the Democratic torch that year. Before becoming Vice-President, Biden was the US Senator from Delaware for 36 years, and made quite a few unsuccessful attempts to win nomination as the Party’s presidential candidate. Now Biden has a good shot at defeating Trump and continuing Obama’s legacy as President. His selection of Kamala Harris is as historic, as it is a repetition of the Obama-Biden ticket, for Kamala Harris with her Jamaican-African and South Indian ancestry is often touted as America’s female Obama.

In her acceptance speech as Vice-Presidential candidate, Harris recalled the first time she uttered the words “Kamala Harris for the people”, as a young Prosecutor in San Francisco. She went on to become the District Attorney in San Francisco, Attorney General for the State of California, and US Senator from California. Now she is making the case for the American people against the Trump presidency. “It is an open and shut case”, she has asserted. Biden and Harris have 72 days to convince the jury.



Features

Recruiting academics to state universities – beset by archaic selection processes?

Published

on

by Kaushalya Perera

Time has, by and large, stood still in the business of academic staff recruitment to state universities. Qualifications have proliferated and evolved to be more interdisciplinary, but our selection processes and evaluation criteria are unchanged since at least the late 1990s. But before I delve into the problems, I will describe the existing processes and schemes of recruitment. The discussion is limited to UGC-governed state universities (and does not include recruitment to medical and engineering sectors) though the problems may be relevant to other higher education institutions (HEIs).

How recruitment happens currently in SL state universities

Academic ranks in Sri Lankan state universities can be divided into three tiers (subdivisions are not discussed).

* Lecturer (Probationary)

recruited with a four-year undergraduate degree. A tiny step higher is the Lecturer (Unconfirmed), recruited with a postgraduate degree but no teaching experience.

* A Senior Lecturer can be recruited with certain postgraduate qualifications and some number of years of teaching and research.

* Above this is the professor (of four types), which can be left out of this discussion since only one of those (Chair Professor) is by application.

State universities cannot hire permanent academic staff as and when they wish. Prior to advertising a vacancy, approval to recruit is obtained through a mind-numbing and time-consuming process (months!) ending at the Department of Management Services. The call for applications must list all ranks up to Senior Lecturer. All eligible candidates for Probationary to Senior Lecturer are interviewed, e.g., if a Department wants someone with a doctoral degree, they must still advertise for and interview candidates for all ranks, not only candidates with a doctoral degree. In the evaluation criteria, the first degree is more important than the doctoral degree (more on this strange phenomenon later). All of this is only possible when universities are not under a ‘hiring freeze’, which governments declare regularly and generally lasts several years.

Problem type 1

Archaic processes and evaluation criteria

Twenty-five years ago, as a probationary lecturer with a first degree, I was a typical hire. We would be recruited, work some years and obtain postgraduate degrees (ideally using the privilege of paid study leave to attend a reputed university in the first world). State universities are primarily undergraduate teaching spaces, and when doctoral degrees were scarce, hiring probationary lecturers may have been a practical solution. The path to a higher degree was through the academic job. Now, due to availability of candidates with postgraduate qualifications and the problems of retaining academics who find foreign postgraduate opportunities, preference for candidates applying with a postgraduate qualification is growing. The evaluation scheme, however, prioritises the first degree over the candidate’s postgraduate education. Were I to apply to a Faculty of Education, despite a PhD on language teaching and research in education, I may not even be interviewed since my undergraduate degree is not in education. The ‘first degree first’ phenomenon shows that universities essentially ignore the intellectual development of a person beyond their early twenties. It also ignores the breadth of disciplines and their overlap with other fields.

This can be helped (not solved) by a simple fix, which can also reduce brain drain: give precedence to the doctoral degree in the required field, regardless of the candidate’s first degree, effected by a UGC circular. The suggestion is not fool-proof. It is a first step, and offered with the understanding that any selection process, however well the evaluation criteria are articulated, will be beset by multiple issues, including that of bias. Like other Sri Lankan institutions, universities, too, have tribal tendencies, surfacing in the form of a preference for one’s own alumni. Nevertheless, there are other problems that are, arguably, more pressing as I discuss next. In relation to the evaluation criteria, a problem is the narrow interpretation of any regulation, e.g., deciding the degree’s suitability based on the title rather than considering courses in the transcript. Despite rhetoric promoting internationalising and inter-disciplinarity, decision-making administrative and academic bodies have very literal expectations of candidates’ qualifications, e.g., a candidate with knowledge of digital literacy should show this through the title of the degree!

Problem type 2 – The mess of badly regulated higher education

A direct consequence of the contemporary expansion of higher education is a large number of applicants with myriad qualifications. The diversity of degree programmes cited makes the responsibility of selecting a suitable candidate for the job a challenging but very important one. After all, the job is for life – it is very difficult to fire a permanent employer in the state sector.

Widely varying undergraduate degree programmes.

At present, Sri Lankan undergraduates bring qualifications (at times more than one) from multiple types of higher education institutions: a degree from a UGC-affiliated state university, a state university external to the UGC, a state institution that is not a university, a foreign university, or a private HEI aka ‘private university’. It could be a degree received by attending on-site, in Sri Lanka or abroad. It could be from a private HEI’s affiliated foreign university or an external degree from a state university or an online only degree from a private HEI that is ‘UGC-approved’ or ‘Ministry of Education approved’, i.e., never studied in a university setting. Needless to say, the diversity (and their differences in quality) are dizzying. Unfortunately, under the evaluation scheme all degrees ‘recognised’ by the UGC are assigned the same marks. The same goes for the candidates’ merits or distinctions, first classes, etc., regardless of how difficult or easy the degree programme may be and even when capabilities, exposure, input, etc are obviously different.

Similar issues are faced when we consider postgraduate qualifications, though to a lesser degree. In my discipline(s), at least, a postgraduate degree obtained on-site from a first-world university is preferable to one from a local university (which usually have weekend or evening classes similar to part-time study) or online from a foreign university. Elitist this may be, but even the best local postgraduate degrees cannot provide the experience and intellectual growth gained by being in a university that gives you access to six million books and teaching and supervision by internationally-recognised scholars. Unfortunately, in the evaluation schemes for recruitment, the worst postgraduate qualification you know of will receive the same marks as one from NUS, Harvard or Leiden.

The problem is clear but what about a solution?

Recruitment to state universities needs to change to meet contemporary needs. We need evaluation criteria that allows us to get rid of the dross as well as a more sophisticated institutional understanding of using them. Recruitment is key if we want our institutions (and our country) to progress. I reiterate here the recommendations proposed in ‘Considerations for Higher Education Reform’ circulated previously by Kuppi Collective:

* Change bond regulations to be more just, in order to retain better qualified academics.

* Update the schemes of recruitment to reflect present-day realities of inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary training in order to recruit suitably qualified candidates.

* Ensure recruitment processes are made transparent by university administrations.

Kaushalya Perera is a senior lecturer at the University of Colombo.

(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

Talento … oozing with talent

Published

on

Talento: Gained recognition as a leading wedding and dance band

This week, too, the spotlight is on an outfit that has gained popularity, mainly through social media.

Last week we had MISTER Band in our scene, and on 10th February, Yellow Beatz – both social media favourites.

Talento is a seven-piece band that plays all types of music, from the ‘60s to the modern tracks of today.

The band has reached many heights, since its inception in 2012, and has gained recognition as a leading wedding and dance band in the scene here.

The members that makeup the outfit have a solid musical background, which comes through years of hard work and dedication

Their portfolio of music contains a mix of both western and eastern songs and are carefully selected, they say, to match the requirements of the intended audience, occasion, or event.

Although the baila is a specialty, which is inherent to this group, that originates from Moratuwa, their repertoire is made up of a vast collection of love, classic, oldies and modern-day hits.

The musicians, who make up Talento, are:

Prabuddha Geetharuchi:

Geilee Fonseka: Dynamic and charismatic vocalist

Prabuddha Geetharuchi: The main man behind the band Talento

(Vocalist/ Frontman). He is an avid music enthusiast and was mentored by a lot of famous musicians, and trainers, since he was a child. Growing up with them influenced him to take on western songs, as well as other music styles. A Peterite, he is the main man behind the band Talento and is a versatile singer/entertainer who never fails to get the crowd going.

Geilee Fonseka (Vocals):

A dynamic and charismatic vocalist whose vibrant stage presence, and powerful voice, bring a fresh spark to every performance. Young, energetic, and musically refined, she is an artiste who effortlessly blends passion with precision – captivating audiences from the very first note. Blessed with an immense vocal range, Geilee is a truly versatile singer, confidently delivering Western and Eastern music across multiple languages and genres.

Chandana Perera (Drummer):

His expertise and exceptional skills have earned him recognition as one of the finest acoustic drummers in Sri Lanka. With over 40 tours under his belt, Chandana has demonstrated his dedication and passion for music, embodying the essential role of a drummer as the heartbeat of any band.

Harsha Soysa:

(Bassist/Vocalist). He a chorister of the western choir of St. Sebastian’s College, Moratuwa, who began his musical education under famous voice trainers, as well as bass guitar trainers in Sri Lanka. He has also performed at events overseas. He acts as the second singer of the band

Udara Jayakody:

(Keyboardist). He is also a qualified pianist, adding technical flavour to Talento’s music. His singing and harmonising skills are an extra asset to the band. From his childhood he has been a part of a number of orchestras as a pianist. He has also previously performed with several famous western bands.

Aruna Madushanka:

(Saxophonist). His proficiciency in playing various instruments, including the saxophone, soprano saxophone, and western flute, showcases his versatility as a musician, and his musical repertoire is further enhanced by his remarkable singing ability.

Prashan Pramuditha:

(Lead guitar). He has the ability to play different styles, both oriental and western music, and he also creates unique tones and patterns with the guitar..

Continue Reading

Features

Special milestone for JJ Twins

Published

on

Twin brothers Julian and Jason Prins

The JJ Twins, the Sri Lankan musical duo, performing in the Maldives, and known for blending R&B, Hip Hop, and Sri Lankan rhythms, thereby creating a unique sound, have come out with a brand-new single ‘Me Mawathe.’

In fact, it’s a very special milestone for the twin brothers, Julian and Jason Prins, as ‘Me Mawathe’ is their first ever Sinhala song!

‘Me Mawathe’ showcases a fresh new sound, while staying true to the signature harmony and emotion that their fans love.

This heartfelt track captures the beauty of love, journey, and connection, brought to life through powerful vocals and captivating melodies.

It marks an exciting new chapter for the JJ Twins as they expand their musical journey and connect with audiences in a whole new way.

Their recent album, ‘CONCLUDED,’ explores themes of love, heartbreak, and healing, and include hits like ‘Can’t Get You Off My Mind’ and ‘You Left Me Here to Die’ which showcase their emotional intensity.

Readers could stay connected and follow JJ Twins on social media for exclusive updates, behind-the-scenes moments, and upcoming releases:

Instagram: http://instagram.com/jjtwinsofficial

TikTok: http://tiktok.com/@jjtwinsmusic

Facebook: http://facebook.com/jjtwinssingers

YouTube: http://youtube.com/jjtwins

Continue Reading

Trending