Connect with us

Features

Surpassing neoliberal fictions towards mission-oriented state

Published

on

by Dr Amali Wedagedara

In Sri Lanka, public policy lost in the neoliberal haze treats the market as a cure for all ills. Not only is the market omnipresent, but it is also omniscient and omnipotent. The charm of the ‘market’ that research and advocacy lobbyists are creating is so alluring that only a few wonder what abyss the neoliberal pied pipers are leading Sri Lanka into.

We have resorted to market solutions out of desperation. Starting from the Balance of Payment crises in the 1960s and 70s to ‘pani kuppi’ at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, to pyramid schemes in want of quick cash, to microfinance to drive financial inclusion and eradication of poverty, we have a plethora of experiences in seeking market-based solutions.

Walking at the edge of economic bankruptcy, we are also entertaining market-fostering surgical operations to transform failing State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) into thriving private enterprises with the hope of earning quick dollars. On the side lines, a few wonders where selling national assets will lead us. What are we going to sell next when everything sellable is sold? Is privatisation the correct strategy to take the Sri Lankan economy out of the crisis? What alternate policies should be adopted so that a second default and chronic dependence on debt can be averted?

This article invites the readers to revisit dominant narratives on the market and business. While historicising the dominant narratives on the market and industry along with the local and global examples, the article builds a case for repurposing the Sri Lankan State towards the mission of steering the economy out of the crisis. Economic theories and frameworks do not stand alone in the history.

They evolve and adapt to changing circumstances. The Internet and mobile phones, built through government-funded projects, offer a vast pool of knowledge and wisdom at our fingertips. So, we need not act as if we are trapped in a time capsule of a bygone era where information was scarce, and people lived in isolation and disconnected.

Markets work; govts don’t

Contrary to popular belief, markets cannot exist by themselves. They need to be created. From the point of creating necessary legal frameworks for the markets to exist, governments regulate them to ensure democratic control of the market. Government investments in technology, IT, medicine, and biotech have been fundamental to modern miracles like the Internet and the iPhone.

In times of crises, markets fail. Countless examples from the post-World War II, 9/11, the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 illustrate the proactive role played by the governments in resurrecting the markets. Governments built markets from scratch, injected extra cash into troubled industries, provided concessional loans and subsidies or simply bailed them out.

Governments from the US, the UK, and Sri Lanka used public money to correct the market failures even when the markets were at fault. The best example is the Global Financial Crisis in 2008. After the Easter Bomb attack in 2019, the Government of Sri Lanka provided concessional loans to exporters and hoteliers using public money. Yet, many evade or dodge tax payments. In that sense, markets are parasites seeking benefits and externalising social costs.

‘Trickle down’ is the common belief that justifies lower taxes to the corporate sector. Even though it’s proven wrong innumerable times, pro-corporate policymakers and research and advocacy lobbies still hold onto it. For example, the non-implementation of a tax on bondholders who did not participate in the Domestic Debt Optimisation (DDO) in Sri Lanka was commended by saying it would have become a ‘revenge tax’ and discourage investments.

An incalculable number of tax holidays and concessions given to BOI companies, big agribusinesses, and others in the corporate sector to encourage private sector-led growth in Sri Lanka for decades have not nurtured a robust private sector economy. In an article in the New York Times in 2010, Paul Krugman compared the belief in trickle-down to “old voodoo economics – the belief, refuted by study after study, that tax cuts pay for themselves.

” Instead of trickle-down, tax relief to the rich ‘vacuums up’ the income and wealth of the working people. Wealth segregation in the upper echelons of income groups is the outcome. The UNDP Report in 2023 identified Sri Lanka as one of the four Asian countries having the highest wealth inequality.

Markets are efficient; govts are not

‘Efficiency and productivity’ of the markets are another idea blown out of proportion by the market pundits. They forget that the markets are heterogeneous, differing from the goods and services they exchange. There are rice markets, shoe markets, toothpaste markets, fuel markets, education markets, health markets, organ trading markets and many more. Governments are better placed to provide some goods and services. For example, the government is the most efficient and productive provider of public goods and services such as health care, education, infrastructure, social security, energy, and R&D.

The Nobel Laureate economist Kenneth Arrow, in 1963, argued that private healthcare markets were inefficient due to uncertainty related to risks of illness and information. Adverse selection pushes the cost of health insurance up, excluding many who cannot afford to pay. According to OECD statistics, the per capita cost of health care is much lower and people are healthier in countries with a more significant government role in public health care services than in countries with private health care, such as the USA.

Free markets and perfect competition

The market is neither free nor perfectly competitive. Well-connected and big market players create information asymmetries that enable them to take advantage. The notorious Bond Scam in Sri Lanka is a good example. Cartels and oligopolistic control, hoarding and artificial scarcities, corporate lobbying, and shell companies are all about corporate corruption and market manipulations.

Apart from the bond scam, our day-to-day lived existences are heavily affected by corporate corruption. Take the sugar, cigarette, and forex scam at the height of the economic crisis. Even the immunoglobulin fraud unravelling. The private market players are equally at fault as the politicians involved. The same goes for privatising SOEs. Each privatising project, past and present, has involved significant corruption.

A creative and innovative government is crucial in a crisis, even for a market-led economy. A government that parrots enunciations of the multilateral lending institutions such as IMF and World Bank is at the risk of becoming a puppet of global and local capital and will end up deepening the crisis while killing the local economy.

In contrast, a visionary mission-oriented government will take swift actions to alleviate the pain of crisis on the public, nurture agriculture and local industries to ensure that the local economy will not suffer in the short and medium term, use SOEs efficiently and effectively to drive economic growth in the medium and long run. Instead of short-termism, a mission-oriented government will focus on the optimal use of resources while enhancing the capabilities of the State.

Mission-oriented govts

The history of governments (or states) illustrates how imaginative and creative governments have led the economy and society towards progress. Be it the US government in 1800 mired in a Civil War, in the aftermath of the Great Depression, Japan in the post-World War II, or poverty-stricken South Korea in the 1980s, or poverty-stricken Taiwan also faced with an existential crisis in 1950s or poverty-stricken China, or our own neighbour India, governments near and afar have shown that they have a central role in leading the economy forward. These governments, encountering their respective challenges, underwent radical transformations to deliver impressive outcomes.

They undertook high-risk investments in technology, infrastructure, manufacturing, and pharmaceutical industries while orienting business towards a social purpose through market regulations. Public agencies in Europe, Japan, Taiwan, China, Singapore, and South Korea, public banks in Europe and Germany, and multiple arms of the Department of Defence in the US (Defence Advanced Research Projects, CIA, US Navy) have been the bedrock of subsequent technological and manufacturing revolutions that these countries are known for. These breakthroughs functioned as stimulants for private businesses and were open to take advantage.

SL Developmental state and SOEs

The bold post-colonial State in Sri Lanka gearing national resources for innovation and change necessary to drive the industrial policy to advance development established SOEs in critical sectors of the economy. Mindful of the national sovereignty as a newly independent small State and accounting for the need for equitable development as a Third World country, foreign-held industries in energy and banks were nationalised. It was a with futuristic vision, courageous to withstand the risk of facing backlash from countries in the Global North which owned these industries.

SOEs have played a vital role, from fostering domestic industries while creating the domestic market to expanding electrification beyond income barriers and driving domestic production of textiles and manufactured goods. Even in their dilapidated form due to long-term neglect and purposeful undoing, SOEs remain valid and critical for post–crisis growth today. SOEs represent the necessary infrastructure that enables Sri Lanka to break free from debt dependency and move forward as an innovative and industrialised economy.

The market Pied Pipers argue that privatising SOEs will bring in quick dollars to finance the budget deficit. Privatising SOEs will appease the IMF and World Bank. While privatising SOEs would be the easiest, and most lazy public policy position that the government could assume, there are many other ways to lead market reforms and bridge budget deficits. SOEs should not be the scapegoats for lacklustre political leaders and unimaginative and mundane policymakers.

Privatising SOEs is a costly affair. Leave alone the cost of transforming SOEs into sellable enterprises and listing them in the Stock Market. The social cost, including the distributional cost of privatisation, is immense. For example, how long did it take the Ceylon Electricity Board to expand the electrification in Sri Lanka to include low-income households?

Tariff revisions over a few months have undone years of hard work by denying over 500,000 households their right to electricity. What is the social and distributional cost of 500,000 households going dark? Spillovers of denial of electricity to children, their education, and small and medium industries have a generational effect in regressing into history. Going back to the dark ages!

What reforms do the SOEs need? This is a valid question that we should mull over.

Political reforms should lead the way. It’s common knowledge that the use of SOEs as avenues to create employment for political clientele is at the root of the deterioration of SOEs. All the ministers holding public office since 1977 are guilty of overstaffing SOEs and appointing mediocre managers and CEOs. Not even a private business would survive such mismanagement. While creating employment opportunities is essential, it needs far-sighted approaches linked to the distribution of wealth, a better education system, and a balanced approach to the agriculture, manufacturing, and services sectors of the economy.

Organisational reforms should follow political reforms. Reorienting SOEs for their public purpose and holding the management accountable to the mandate of respective SOEs is essential. It could be harnessed with incentives to reward managers and employees for their contributions to enhance efficiency, productivity, and public service.

Create a mechanism to monitor SOEs. Ministerial oversight on SOEs as practised in Sri Lanka now is not working. Often, the Minister and the bureaucracy neither have the expertise nor information to supervise and monitor SOEs. As much as SOEs should generate quarterly and annual reports on their performance, the oversight agency should have the necessary skills to monitor and supervise them. Mariana Mazzucatto, influenced by examples from Italy, Spain, the UK, Sweden, and France, introduces the idea of a ‘State Holding Company’ as an overarching oversight agency to supervise and monitor SOEs.

To locate the idea in the SOE landscape in Sri Lanka would roughly be as follows: (See chart)

Rather than attempting to be prescriptive or to plant models from elsewhere, I want to expand the debate beyond the privatisation discourse. Democratic ownership and control of SOEs is not limited to Sri Lanka. It is a successful model which benefits the public, including private businesses. An entrepreneurial State could be the engine of growth, navigating society and the economy out of the crisis.

The writer is a feminist political economist.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Buddhist Approach to Human Challenges

Published

on

Life, by its very nature, invariably presents a myriad of challenges that are fundamental to the human experience. The various social ills that afflict humanity cannot be understood without recognizing the profound human dynamics at play. Navigating these challenges according to Buddhism involves shifting from attempting to control external circumstances to mastering one’s internal responses. Central to these challenges are certain detrimental drives stemming from pernicious distortions in the functioning of the human mind.

According to Buddhism, human suffering—both on a personal and societal level—arises from three unwholesome roots: greed, hatred, and ignorance or delusion. These roots manifest primarily as the unbridled proliferation of these negative states, serving as the foundation for our conduct. The Buddhist perspective offers profound insights for confronting these difficulties by emphasizing the nature of suffering, known as dukkha. Buddhism teaches that suffering (dukkha) is an inevitable part of life and is fueled by greed, hatred, and ignorance or delusion. This approach promotes mental transformation through mindfulness, ethical living, and the cultivation of wisdom, empowering individuals to confront their struggles with clarity and resilience.

Furthermore, accepting that suffering and difficulty are inherent parts of the human experience—while expecting life to be free of challenges—is, in itself, a cause of suffering. It is also important to recognize that all situations, whether good or bad, are temporary. This understanding helps reduce anxiety when facing difficult times, as these will eventually pass, and it prevents possessiveness during happy moments. Cultivating mindfulness (sati) and living in the present moment without dwelling on the past or worrying about the future is essential.

Understanding that all things—emotions, situations, relationships, and physical bodies—are constantly changing and in a state of flux helps reduce the fear of loss and provides comfort during difficult times, ensuring that we know pain will pass. Moreover, recognizing that the self, or ego, is not a fixed entity minimizes selfish grasping, arrogance, and the tendency to perceive challenges as personal attacks.

At the core of many human challenges lie the three unwholesome mental qualities identified by Buddhism: greed (raga), hatred (dovesa), and ignorance or delusion (avijja or moha). These states of mind serve as obstacles to spiritual progress and underlie a spectrum of harmful thoughts and actions. The Buddha employed powerful metaphors to illustrate these forces, referring to them as the three poisons or fires that ignite suffering and trap beings in the cycle of samsara.

Greed leads to insatiable desires that obscure our awareness of others’ needs, creating a cycle of frustration. Greed encompasses all forms of appetite, such as desire, lust, craving, and longing, manifesting in both physical and mental forms. It embodies the concept of grasping, leading to clinging and an inability to let go. As an unwholesome mental state, greed can become insatiable and inexhaustible. People are often drawn to pleasant things, and no amount of forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, or mental objects can satisfy their desires. In their intense thirst for possession or gratification of desire, individuals may become trapped in the wheel of samsara, overlooking the needs of marginalized groups based on religion and ethnicity (as noted by Piyadassi Thera). Those who overcome greed realize that all mundane pleasures are fleeting and transient. In a society driven by consumerism, people may find themselves endlessly chasing after things of little value, becoming enslaved by them.

Hatred is another unwholesome mental state that fosters division and conflict, distancing us from genuine relationships. It encompasses unwholesome mental states such as ill will, enmity, hostility, and prejudice. Hatred can be subtle, lying dormant in a person’s mind until it finds expression in unexpected moments. This destructive emotion can degenerate into mass-scale violence and bloodshed within society. Today, hatred and hostility against minorities based on religion and ethnicity are prevalent in many countries. People are often targeted by bigotry and hate, leading to a rise in antagonistic and derogatory behavior toward certain religious and ethnic groups. Hatred, enmity, and retaliation do not foster spiritual well-being; rather, they vitiate our own minds. Buddhists are encouraged to cultivate metta (loving-kindness). Greed and hatred, coupled with ignorance, are the chief causes of the evils that pervade this deluded world. As noted by Narada, “The enemy of the whole world is lust (greed), through which all evils come to living beings. This lust, when obstructed by some cause, transforms into wrath.”

The most profound of these afflictions, ignorance (avijja) or delusion (moha), clouds our judgment and obscures our capacity for understanding, causing us to harm ourselves and others through misguided actions. Addressing bhikkhus, the Buddha declared, ” I do not perceive any single hindrance other than the hindrance of ignorance by which mankind is obstructed, and for so long as in samsara, it is indeed through the hindrance of ignorance that humankind is obstructed and for a long time runs on, wanders in samsara. No other single thing exists like the hindrance of ignorance or delusion, which obstructs humankind and make wander forever. This unwholesome mindset generates negative speech, actions, and thoughts, perpetuating our own suffering. As stated in the Dhammapada, “All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; if one speaks or acts with an evil mind, suffering follows.”

Buddhism urges us to go beyond merely addressing the symptoms of our problems. Instead, it invites us to explore the roots of our suffering and examine how greed, hatred, and ignorance manifest in our lives. By uncovering these sources of distress, we can cultivate essential qualities such as compassion, loving-kindness (metta), and acceptance. These virtues are crucial for ethical engagement with significant societal issues, including environmental challenges and social inequality.

In a world marked by material prosperity and emotional chaos, many individuals may feel lost or overwhelmed. The teachings of the Buddha remain relevant today, reminding us that the origins of our struggles often reside within our own minds. By practising ethical self-discipline and steering clear of destructive emotions like jealousy, anger, and arrogance, we can transform our experiences and relationships.

Buddhism teaches that cultivating wholesome mental qualities is essential for spiritual advancement. The positive counterparts to the three unwholesome states are non-greed (alobha), non-hatred (adosa), and non-delusion (amoha). These virtues represent not merely the absence of negativity but also the active presence of beneficial qualities such as generosity (dana), loving kindness (metta), and wisdom (panna). Each of these six mental states serves as a foundation for both personal growth and societal harmony.

Human beings are often tempted by moral transgressions rooted in unwholesome qualities. Actions driven by greed, hatred and ignorance require wisdom and mindful awareness to overcome them, allowing us to see the interconnectedness of all beings and act accordingly.

As we strive to abandon these unwholesome states of mind and cultivate awareness, we contribute positively to our lives and the broader world. By embracing Buddhist teachings, we learn that transforming our minds can significantly impact our experiences and the lives of those around us. Through this mindful practice, we can aspire to create a more compassionate, harmonious existence, transcending the limitations of unwholesome mental states and fostering a deeper connection with ourselves and others.

by Dr. Chandradasa Nanayakkara

 

Continue Reading

Features

How does the Buddha differ?

Published

on

Buddhism, perhaps, is not a religion if the definition of religion is strictly applied. However, by an extension of that definition, as well as by consensus, Buddhism is considered a religion and is the fourth largest religion with about half a billion followers worldwide. Of the four great religions in the world, Christianity is still way ahead with 2.6 billion adherents, followed by Islam with 1.9 billion and Hinduism with 1.2 billion followers. In most Western Christian countries church attendances are on the decline whilst the numbers following Islam are increasing with Islamic youth displaying signs of increasing religious ardour. There are recent reports that Buddhism has also joined the ranks of shrinking religions. Is this cause for concern? Is this happening by the very nature of Buddhism?

Hinduism, the world’s oldest living religion rooted in the Indus Valley Civilization and dating back at least four millennia, is considered to have evolved from ancient cultural and religious practices than being founded by a single individual, unlike the other three religions. The Buddha differs from Jesus Christ and Prophet Mohammed in many ways, the most important being that there is no higher power involved in what the Buddha discovered.

Jesus Christ is considered the ‘Son of God’ and Christianity is built on the life, resurrection and teachings of Christ with emphasis on the belief in one God expressed through the Trinity: God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, there is no room for questioning the words of the Almighty passed through the Son.

Islam, with its Five Pillars of faith, frequent daily prayers, charity, fasting during Ramadan and pilgrimage to Mecca, is founded on revelations made by Almighty God, Allah, to Mohammed, the last of his Prophets, which are recorded in verse in the Holy Book, Quran. Muslims consider the Quran to be verbatim words of God and the unaltered, final revelation. This leaves even less room for questioning.

In contrast, the Buddha achieved everything by himself with no help from any higher source. Rebelling against some of the practices in the religion to which he was born and seeking a solution to the ever-pervading sense of dissatisfaction, Prince Siddhartha embarked on a journey of discovery that culminated in Enlightenment, under the Bodhi tree on the full moon day of the month of Vesak.

Hinduism, or Sanatana Dharma as traditionally referred to by followers, encompasses the concepts of Karma, Samsara, Moksha and Dharma with a creator Brahma, preserver Vishnu and destroyer Shiva. In addition, there are multitudes of gods serving various functions and there are ritual practices of Puja (worship), Bhakti (devotion), Yajna (sacrificial rites) in addition to meditation and Yoga. The one thing that has blighted Hinduism, on top of sacrifices, is the caste system. The uncompromising attitude of Brahmins led to the formation Sikhism as well, long after the establishment of Buddhism.

Prince Siddhartha studied under eminent teachers of the day, of which there were many, but realised the limitations of their knowledge. Having already given up the extreme of luxury, he went to the other extreme of self-deprivation which after a search for six years, he realised also was not the solution to the problem. Exploring through his mind he realised the truth and came up with the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. He shunned extremes and proposed the Middle Path which seems to hold sway in many spheres of life, even today.

Buddha’s greatest achievement was the analysis of the mind and scientists are only now establishing the accuracy of the concepts the Buddha elucidated, not with the help of supernatural powers or sophisticated machinery at the disposal of modern-day scientists but by the exploration of the mind by turning the searchlight inwards.

Having discovered the cause of universal dissatisfaction and the path to overcome it, the Buddha walked across vast swathes of India, most likely barefoot, preaching to many, in terms they could understand, as evidenced by the different suttas illustrating the same fact in different ways; to the intelligent it was a short explanation but for others it was a more detailed discussion.

In sharp contrast to all other religious leaders, the Buddha encouraged discussion and challenge before acceptance. What the Buddha stated in the Kalama Sutta, acceptance only after conviction, laid the foundation for scientific thinking.

The Buddha, being a human not supernatural, never claimed infallibility as evidenced by his agreement with his father King Suddhodana that ordaining his son Rahula without permission was a mistake and took steps to ensure that this did not happen again. In fact, the entire Vinaya Pitaka is not an arbitrary rule book laid down by the Buddha, but are the rules the Buddha laid down for the Sangha, based on errant actions by Bhikkhus. Long before the legal concept of retroactive justice was established, the Buddha implemented it in the Vinaya Pitaka.

In an interesting video on YouTube titled “Nature of Buddhism”, Bhante Dhammika of Australia (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY8WfGJq2FI) discusses some unique aspects of Buddhism. Some religions are ‘high demand’ religions where the followers are required to strictly adhere to certain rules which is not the case in Buddhism and he opines that this has led to the gentleness of Buddhists, at times leading to even being lackadaisical! Interestingly, as a widely travelled person, he describes his personal experience of the change of people’s attitudes on going from places with Buddhist influence to others. Speaking of Sri Lanka, where he spent many years, he commends the traditional hospitality as well as lack of cruelty to animals. He refers to “Law based religions” where some things are compulsory whereas in Buddhism there is no compulsion. Buddha was not a lawgiver but recommended good behaviour, giving reasons why and encouraged thinking. Some religions are exclusivist, claiming that there is nothing in other religions. Buddhism is not and Bhante Dhammika refers to an incident where the Buddha encouraged a disciple who converted from Jainism to continue to give alms to his former Jain colleagues.

Have all these strengths of Buddhism become its weakness and the reason for the shrinking number of followers? Had Buddhism demanded more from followers would it have flourished better? Is the numbers game that important? These are interesting questions to ponder over and I am sure, in time, researchers would write theses on these.

Whilst total numbers may diminish in traditional Buddhist areas, more people in the West are recognising the value of the philosophy of Buddhism. Mindfulness, a concept the Buddha introduced is gaining wide acceptance and is increasingly applied in many spheres of modern life. Perhaps, what is important is not the numbers that practise Buddhism as a religion but the lasting influence of the Buddha’s concepts and foundations he laid for modern scientific thinking and analysis of the mind!

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Continue Reading

Features

Political violence stalking Trump administration

Published

on

A scene that unfolded during the shooting incident at the recent White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington. (BBC)

It would not be particularly revelatory to say that the US is plagued by ‘gun violence’. It is a deeply entrenched and widespread malaise that has come in tandem with the relative ease with which firearms could be acquired and owned by sections of the US public, besides other causes.

However, a third apparent attempt on the life of US President Donald Trump in around two and a half years is both thought-provoking and unsettling for the defenders of democracy. After all, whatever its short comings the US remains the world’s most vibrant democracy and in fact the ‘mightiest’ one. And the US must remain a foremost democracy for the purpose of balancing and offsetting the growing power of authoritarian states in the global power system, who are no friends of genuine representational governance.

Therefore, the recent breaching of the security cordon surrounding the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington at which President Trump and his inner Cabinet were present, by an apparently ‘Lone Wolf’ gunman, besides raising issues relating to the reliability of the security measures deployed for the President, indicates a notable spike in anti-VVIP political violence in particular in the US. It is a pointer to a strong and widespread emergence of anti-democratic forces which seem to be gaining in virulence and destructiveness.

The issues raised by the attack are in the main for the US’ political Right and its supporters. They have smugly and complacently stood by while the extremists in their midst have taken centre stage and begun to dictate the course of Right wing politics. It is the political culture bred by them that leads to ‘Lone Wolf’ gunmen, for instance, who see themselves as being repressed or victimized, taking the law into their own hands, so to speak, and perpetrating ‘revenge attacks’ on the state and society.

A disproportionate degree of attention has been paid particularly internationally to Donald Trump’s personality and his eccentricities but such political persons cannot be divorced from the political culture in which they originate and have their being. That is, “structural” questions matter. Put simply, Donald Trump is a ‘true son’ of the Far Right, his principal support base. The issues raised are therefore for the President as well as his supporters of the Right.

We are obliged to respect the choices of the voting public but in the case of Trump’s election to the highest public position in the US, this columnist is inclined to see in those sections that voted for Trump blind followers of the latter who cared not for their candidate’s suitability, in every relevant respect, and therefore acted irrationally. It would seem that the Right in the US wanted their candidate to win by ‘hook or by crook’ and exercise power on their behalf.

By making the above observations this columnist does not intend to imply that voting publics everywhere in the world of democracy cast their vote sensibly. In the case of Sri Lanka, for example, the question could be raised whether the voters of the country used their vote sensibly when voting into office the majority of Executive Presidents and other persons holding high public office. The obvious answer is ‘no’ and this should lead to a wider public discussion on the dire need for thoroughgoing voter education. The issue is a ‘huge’ one that needs to be addressed in the appropriate forums and is beyond the scope of this column.

Looking back it could be said that the actions of Trump and his die-hard support base led to the Rule of Law in the US being undermined as perhaps never before in modern times. A shaming moment in this connection was the protest march, virtually motivated by Trump, of his supporters to the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021, with the aim of scuttling the presidential poll result of that year. Much violence and unruly behaviour, as known, was let loose. This amounted to denigrating the democratic process and encouraging the violent take over of the state.

In a public address, prior to the unruly conduct of his supporters, Trump is on record as blaring forth the following: ‘We won this election and we won by a landslide’, ‘We will stop the steal’, ‘We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen’, ‘If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.’

It is plain to see that such inflammatory utterances could lead impressionable minds in particular to revolt violently. Besides, they should have led the more rationally inclined to wonder whether their candidate was the most suitable person to hold the office of President.

Unfortunately, the latter process was not to be and the question could be raised whether the US is in the ‘safest pair of hands’. Needless to say, as events have revealed, Donald Trump is proving to be one of the most erratic heads of state the US has ever had.

However, the latest attempt on the life of President Trump suggests that considerable damage has been done to the democratic integrity of the US and none other than the President himself has to take on himself a considerable proportion of the blame for such degeneration, besides the US’ Far Right. They could be said to be ‘reaping the whirlwind.’

It is a time for soul-searching by the US Right. The political Right has the right to exist, so the speak, in a functional democracy but it needs to take cognizance of how its political culture is affecting the democratic integrity or health of the US. Ironically, the repressive and chauvinistic politics advocated by it is having the effect of activating counter-violence of the most murderous kind, as was witnessed at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Continued repressive politics could only produce more such incidents that could be self-defeating for the US.

Some past US Presidents were assassinated but the present political violence in the country brings into focus as perhaps never before the role that an anti-democratic political culture could play in unraveling the gains that the US has made over the decades. A duty is cast on pro-democracy forces to work collectively towards protecting the democratic integrity and strength of the US.

Continue Reading

Trending