This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
China has refrained from commenting on the U.S. election, insisting it is its internal affair, and called on Wednesday for respect and cooperation but its state-controlled media has reflected concerns and hopes, with one newspaper calling for the new president, whoever it may be, to stop a deterioration in ties.
Foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told a press briefing, as reports indicated that former president Donald Trump was heading for victory, that China’s policy towards the United States was consistent.
“We will continue to view and handle Sino-U.S. relations in accordance with the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation,” Mao said.
But the China Daily, in a commentary titled “Onus on new US president to improve ties,” expressed frustration with “U.S. hawks” for the deterioration in Sino-US relations.
“No matter who wins the election, the result will have a far-reaching impact on the world, not least because the winner will decide the U.S.’s China policy,” Chinese academics Fu Suixin and Ni Feng wrote in the commentary.
Both of the U.S. presidential candidates had played the “China card” to win votes, the academics said.
While U.S. voters “generally do not understand or care about foreign policy, the country’s elites have always formulated the foreign policy and shaped public opinion,” they said.
“Both Democrats and Republicans make China a scapegoat for the U.S. domestic mess,” they wrote. “The voters have to pay the cost of the deteriorating China-U.S. relations.”
“The new U.S. administration, therefore, should give up the illusion of having a consensual China policy, and reflect on the costs of undermining Sino-U.S. relations over the past eight years — and honestly tell the American people the truth about China,” they said.
The China Daily published an opinion piece on China-U.S. relations on Tuesday written by the former prime minister of Kyrgyzstan, Djoomart Otorbaev, titled “Rebuilding Sino-US trust crucial for world.”
Otorbaev said in recent years hostility between the U.S. and China “has escalated to the point where the possibility of not just a cold war but even a hot war is becoming threateningly real.”
“Beijing and Washington are competing with each other in nearly all economic fields,” Otorbaev wrote, adding that their growing rivalry prevents the world’s two largest economies from working together.
While not directly referring to the U.S. presidential election, Otorbaev called on the U.S. and China to “agree to coexist peacefully and engage in fair competition,” as well as manage friction and confrontations calmly and avoid conflict.
“The primary issue between Beijing and Washington is mutual distrust, making short-term cooperation unlikely. Nevertheless, both sides should prioritize discussions and swiftly implement effective confidence-building measures and start doing it as soon as possible,” Otorbaev wrote.
The Global Times, the sister publication of the Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece People’s Daily, warned of fears of violence and unrest, and the impact of that on global financial markets.
RELATED STORIES
At media summit, China blasts Western coverage of Uyghurs
US urges China to use influence amid ‘destabilizing’ action by North Korea, Russia
EXPLAINED: What is China’s United Front and how does it operate?
Edited by Mike Firn
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
“For so long, we’ve assumed that when the climate crisis got bad enough, everybody would just wake up, come together, and solve it in some grand ‘kumbaya’ moment — and that’s not necessarily how the story will go. When crises get worse and scarcity gets worse, sometimes it gets harder to love your neighbor. And there is no doubt in my mind that the empathy and respect we will need for our fellow citizens in order to address the climate crisis can only exist in a healthy democracy.”
— Nathaniel Stinnett, executive director of the Environmental Voter Project
Climate change poses a threat to democracy. That threat has manifested in some immediate ways this year, with freakishly strong hurricanes ripping through the southeastern U.S., damaging roads and polling places and interrupting mail service. Researchers have also found that the impacts of climate change could provide fertile ground for authoritarianism.
On the flipside, participating in democracy is crucial for ambitious climate policy. You’ve almost certainly heard it before: One of the single most important things you can do to make your voice heard and stand up for the issues you care about is vote.
“I think it is worth stressing that we have an absurdly large number of solutions to all of the climate problems we are faced with,” said Nathaniel Stinnett, the executive director of the Environmental Voter Project. “We just have politicians who don’t want to enact those solutions — and that lack of political will to force politicians to lead on climate is a real problem.”
He founded the Environmental Voter Project to address that problem, by identifying environmentalists who don’t vote and using behavioral science to try and turn them into more consistent voters — creating a stronger voting bloc for the climate. “At the end of the day, politicians always go where the votes are because they love winning elections,” Stinnett said. “That, more than any other reason you can come up with, is why anybody who cares about climate change needs to show up and vote, because it’s power just sitting there waiting for us to grab it.”
The organization is driven by data — and it’s already seeing some promising results for 2024. According to a press release shared on Monday, over 214,000 first-time climate voters have already cast ballots in the U.S. presidential election, across the 19 states the organization works in. And in some key swing states, climate-identified voters generally seem to be outperforming other early voters. In Pennsylvania, for instance, 12.8 percent of registered voters had already cast ballots, and 21.7 percent of climate voters had, Stinnett told me when we spoke last week.
Still, participating in democracy remains easier for some than others. Voter suppression is alive and well in 2024, as some groups, fueled by the conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen, are ramping up efforts to purge voter rolls, among other tactics. And those efforts hurt the climate movement.
“Laws have been put in place that are designed to make it harder for young people and people of color to vote,” Stinnett said. “And this has been historically the case — there’s nothing shocking or new about this — but we continue to see in our data that young people and people of color are the heart of the modern environmental movement. And so these laws disproportionately impact the climate and environmental movements.”
The pernicious thing about voter suppression, he said, is that it seeps into cultural consciousness. When people believe that voting is complicated — or when they are aware that it is, in fact, more difficult for them than for others — they may simply opt out.
The Environmental Voter Project is one organization working to combat this, by sharing information to demystify the process and helping people make a plan to vote.
You, too, can help make it easier for more people to cast their votes — in some low-key (and even fun!) ways. If you’re feeling an ever-increasing sense of anxiety and dread in these waning days before the 2024 election (hi! same!), getting involved may be one way to quell those feelings. Read on for five ways you can help get out the vote.
Environmental Voter Project has opportunities for volunteers looking to make calls to voters, specifically targeted to non-active voters who list the environment as their top concern. “Just over the last five days of the election, so November 1 through November 5, we’re looking to fill 4,825 phone-banking shifts,” Stinnett said. Modern phone-banking technology enables volunteers to do this from a computer, using a system that automatically dials the target numbers and shows the calls as coming from the organization, shielding the individual volunteer’s phone number. Find out more here.
The organization also has canvassing opportunities for environmental voters in Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Austin, Texas; and Tucson, Arizona. If you’re in any of those cities and interested in going door-to-door to get out the vote, you can sign up here.
Lead Locally is another organization working to rally the environmental vote, by focusing on building support for down-ballot candidates with strong climate platforms. It has two more “Calls for Climate” events before election day — one is today, October 30, and another is Monday, election eve. You can learn more and sign up here.
Do you have an electric car? And do you live in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, or Wisconsin? If so, you can volunteer to give people rides to the polls with ChargeTheVote, a nonpartisan initiative to boost voter turnout and slash transportation emissions on Election Day. Learn more here.
If you don’t drive an EV, there are still ways to help out with transportation. Look for groups in your area — for instance, Drive Your Ballot is one nonprofit operating in Pennsylvania, coordinating volunteer drivers as well as volunteers who can help organize ride dispatches. Check it out here.
And you can always take a more personal approach, too: Plan a voting carpool with friends, family, coworkers, etc. Studies have shown that something as simple as making a plan with someone can increase the likelihood that a person will follow through on their intention of voting.
Beyond simply getting there, a long line at the polls can be a formidable barrier for many — and, historically, voters in Black and brown neighborhoods face longer wait times on Election Day. Having access to food and water can help ease some of the burden of having to wait. Pizza to the Polls coordinates pizza deliveries (it also has a food truck program) to places where there are long lines. Anyone can report a crowded polling location online and then help coordinate the pizza delivery. There’s also an option to preorder, for nonprofits and other groups planning events for voter registration and turnout.
Do keep in mind that every state has some form of restrictions on the activities that can take place near voting locations, and for some, that extends to offering sustenance (sometimes known as “line warming.”) For instance, in Georgia, it’s illegal to offer free food or water within 150 feet of a polling place. Still, local groups are finding ways around these restrictions.
What about the bigger picture, you might ask? There are, of course, many ways that states and the national government could make it easier for people to vote. One idea is to make Election Day a federal holiday, so that working people would be able to make it to the polls more easily.
If you like that idea, and if you’re the sort of person who calls up your representative in Congress (or if you’re even curious about calling up your representative in Congress) you could do so to express support for the Election Day Holiday Act, a bill introduced by California Representative Anna Eshoo this year.
If you’ve made it this far in the newsletter, you probably care at least a little bit about voting, and ensuring that others are able and motivated to vote, too. A final, very simple action you can take to encourage those around you to vote is to let them know that you have.
“Often the best thing you can do is be loud and proud about the fact that you are a climate voter,” Stinnett said. “We think it’s so satisfying when we can rationally convince people to do things. But the truth is we’re more social animals than we are rational animals.”
He cited a 2012 study published in Nature, which found Facebook users were more likely to vote when they received a message about voting that included profile pictures of their friends who had already voted. It may sound silly, Stinnett said, but human beings are constantly looking at one another to figure out what behavior is good and appropriate. Don’t waste time (and emotional labor) trying to craft the perfect argument to convince somebody to vote, he said. “If you, on social media or in real life, make it very clear that you are a voter because that’s integral to who you are as an environmentalist, or as a good neighbor, or as a good child, or as a good parent, then anybody else who wants to be those things will say, ‘Oh, I wanna be a good environmentalist, so I should vote, too.’”
— Claire Elise Thompson
In the spirit of being a loud and proud voter, here is a picture of me (and my dog) dropping off my own ballot yesterday in Seattle! I did it! As is the way in Washington state, the ballot showed up in my mailbox a couple weeks ago, and the drop box was a mere 15-minute walk from my house. (I also could have put it in the mail, with no postage required.)
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline 5 ways to get out the vote for climate in the final days before the U.S. presidential election on Oct 30, 2024.
This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Claire Elise Thompson.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Will the BRICS economic and political alliance change the world’s U.S.-centered balance of power? As the annual BRICS summit wraps up in Russia, we host a debate between American economist Richard Wolff and South African sociologist Patrick Bond over the significance of the conference. This year, the nine BRICS countries invited 13 new “partner states” into their alliance, which Wolff calls “historic” and “a serious economic competitor to the United States and its role in the world.” Bond, on the other hand, argues that BRICS should be considered a “subimperial” formation, which expands and legitimates the existing world economic system rather than truly disrupting it.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
As human rights groups continue to call out war crimes committed by the Israeli military, we speak to the only U.S. diplomat to publicly resign from the Biden administration over its policy on Israel. We first spoke to Hala Rharrit when she resigned from the State Department in April, citing the illegal and deceptive nature of U.S. policy in the Middle East. “We continue to willfully violate laws so that we surge U.S. military assistance to Israel,” she says after more than a year of Israel’s war on Gaza. Rharrit says she found the Biden administration unmovable in its “counterproductive policy,” which she believes has gravely harmed U.S. interests in the Middle East. “We are going to feel the repercussions of that for years, decades, generations.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Israel announced Thursday it had killed Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar in Gaza, releasing a video allegedly showing Sinwar’s final moments before his death after Israeli forces in Rafah attacked the building he was in. After the announcement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared “this is not the end of the war in Gaza.” In Tel Aviv, Israeli families called for Netanyahu to refocus efforts on negotiating a deal to free the hostages. “They are torn because they are clever enough to understand that the killing of Sinwar does not mean the release of their loved ones,” says Gideon Levy, award-winning Israeli journalist and author, who says Netanyahu will continue to act through sheer force as he sets his sights on Iran with the full support of the United States.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Israel announced Thursday it had killed Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar in Gaza, releasing a video allegedly showing Sinwar’s final moments before his death after Israeli forces in Rafah attacked the building he was in. After the announcement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared “this is not the end of the war in Gaza.” In Tel Aviv, Israeli families called for Netanyahu to refocus efforts on negotiating a deal to free the hostages. “They are torn because they are clever enough to understand that the killing of Sinwar does not mean the release of their loved ones,” says Gideon Levy, award-winning Israeli journalist and author, who says Netanyahu will continue to act through sheer force as he sets his sights on Iran with the full support of the United States.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) joined eight human rights and digital rights organizations on October 15 to provide comments to the U.S. Commerce Department in response to its proposed rules to strengthen surveillance technology export regulations.
The joint comments assess and offer recommendations for the Commerce Department to help curb the proliferation of such surveillance technologies.
The comments also note the U.S. government’s use of export controls to protect human rights, including through the Joint Statement on Efforts to Counter the Proliferation and Misuse of Commercial Spyware and the Export Controls and Human Rights Initiative.
While these actions are welcome, the United States and other governments around the world must do more to curb the abuse of surveillance technologies.
CPJ has repeatedly documented the use of surveillance technology, including spyware, to undermine press freedom and journalist safety around the world.
Read the joint comments here.
This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
São Paulo, October 10, 2024—CPJ welcomes the civil complaint filed in a U.S. court against Mario Adalberto Reyes Mena, one of several Salvadoran military officers alleged to be connected to the March 17, 1982 ambush and killing of Dutch TV journalists Jan Kuiper, Koos Koster, Joop Willemsen, and Hans ter Laag in Chalatenango, El Salvador, during their coverage of the Salvadoran Civil War.
“This lawsuit shows the determination of victims’ families to seek truth, memory, and justice and offers some hope for even the most egregious cases of impunity for the killing of journalists,” said Cristina Zahar, CPJ’s Latin America Program Coordinator. “The attacks many journalists face today reflect the impunity of the past, and accountability is essential to creating the conditions for democratic deliberation and the rule of law.”
The U.S.-based Center for Justice and Accountability filed the complaint on behalf of Gert Kuiper, Jan’s brother, in collaboration with human rights groups Fundación Comunicándonos and ASDEHU of El Salvador, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, where Reyes Mena lives.
The four Dutch journalists were with leftist rebels when they were killed in 1982. A report issued by the United Nations Truth Commission in 1993 concluded that colonel Reyes Mena participated in planning the ambush of the journalists.
After 42 years, three accused, including a former minister of defense and two military officers, will face trial in El Salvador, according to news reports.
The court will now process the complaint and issue a summons, which will be delivered to Reyes Mena.
This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.