Can't imagine seeing something like this unfolding in the USA :unsure:

South Korea is the worst instincts of capitalism in a political system. You have essentially their Trump declaring himself the supreme arbiter of the law and the military have backed him, I wish it were as simple as the parliament saying no. Not got much hope that this has a happy ending.

 

He's not particularly popular but if anything they have a worse right-wing cult than America, if you've seen the stats on how South Korean men view feminism it makes for incredibly sobering reading.

 

They were basically created by American military might so no surprise there!

So after the LEFT winning the elections in France, the LEFT putting forward their candidate for prime minister, including ones that might be a bit more center-left and acceptable to parts of Macron's coalition, Macron just goes ahead and appoints Michel Barnier, from the 4th-placed right-wing Republicans, as PM.

 

Acceptable to the center, and the right, and not censured by the extreme right is their strategy. Where's the left, idk, they're not important. God I hate Macron.

 

*gestures vaguely at the New Popular Front leading the election results, literally saving Macron from having a Le Pen led majority in his Parliament*

 

Macron's masterful strategy of ignoring the left and saying 'f*** them specifically' going well I see.

pretty cool to see Romania cancelling their presidential election results, it's good for the Russians buying elections to know that democratic forces can step in to stop them so they'll just get less egregious

Seems a bit like sour grapes, only democracy when it goes a certain way for some so called western nations.

Seems a bit like sour grapes, only democracy when it goes a certain way for some so called western nations.

 

If that certain way is avoiding the election being corrupted by Russian interference, a persistent problem in the undermining of liberal democracy, then yes.

It’s clear we increasingly live in a moment where 'democracy' is no longer about majority rule via ballot, but the 'consensus' of elite institutions (media, courts, security services, NGOs).

 

Romanian elections can be suspended at the behest of the security services. If your security services, and courts, can suspend an election - you are not a democracy. We wouldn't allow it in the UK, why is Romania different?

 

In Georgia a President who is unelected by the public thinks they have more authority than elected government.

 

If there is a consensus among media, NGOs, political elite that something isn't good then it is automatically 'undemocratic'.

It’s clear we increasingly live in a moment where 'democracy' is no longer about majority rule via ballot, but the 'consensus' of elite institutions (media, courts, security services, NGOs).

 

Romanian elections can be suspended at the behest of the security services. If your security services, and courts, can suspend an election - you are not a democracy. We wouldn't allow it in the UK, why is Romania different?

 

In Georgia a President who is unelected by the public thinks they have more authority than elected government.

 

If there is a consensus among media, NGOs, political elite that something isn't good then it is automatically 'undemocratic'.

 

There's one very good way why Romania might be different, they're close enough to Russia to be used by them in geopolitical maneuvers, and this Russian asset who won the first round poses a threat. Meanwhile the Georgian elections are entirely non-credible and full of anti-democratic practices by those in the country who want to make it a Russian satellite state. Very telling that exactly the two elections currently under major scrutiny from the international community due to being influenced by Russia are your examples.

 

But more broadly, don't be so obtuse. It's quite clear that voters can be influenced, the media in our own countries is damaging enough to democracy and they're ostensibly operating within the bounds of the law. Election results can be faked, or are the democratic results in your favourite nations Russia and Syria also sacred? It's not about declaring what the western consensus (media, courts, security services, NGOs, NATO, central banks, the Illuminati) doesn't like to be undemocratic, it's about recognising the threats that autocratic nations outside the liberal sphere pose to the liberal system and stopping them in their tracks.

But all that changed in the final two weeks before the Nov. 24 first round of the presidential election. Some 25,000 pro-Georgescu TikTok accounts burst into action, in what Romanian analysts say was a coordinated attempt to sway the election in his favor.

 

President Iohannis, who hails from another center-right party, received evidence from the secret intelligence services indicating that both state and nonstate actors had interfered in the election, and named Russia as responsible for a series of aggressive hybrid attacks. The United States upheld findings of Russian involvement.

 

Acting on the intelligence, Iohannis declassified secret files that alleged Georgescu had unlawfully benefited from extensive electoral promotion during periods when campaigning was prohibited. The documents alleged his campaign had received foreign financial support, despite the fact he declared he’d spent nothing on it.

 

I suppose democracies should just roll over, shrug their shoulders and say 'look, the votes are unquestionable' when shit like this happens.

Georgescu was trailing badly in all the polls. Polls can, of course, be wrong, but the result obviously raises suspicions. Furthermore, he declared campaign expenses of precisely zero, yet there are allegations that TikTok posts supporting were promoted after someone paid for that to happen.

But at the same time do people not still think for themselves and vote for who they want?

 

Also, is your arguement that any country geopolitically close to Russia shouldn’t have free elections then just incase they vote the wrong way and maybe show more in common with Russia and not US global capitalist economic powerhouses?

But at the same time do people not still think for themselves and vote for who they want?

 

Also, is your arguement that any country geopolitically close to Russia shouldn’t have free elections then just incase they vote the wrong way and maybe show more in common with Russia and not US global capitalist economic powerhouses?

 

?? Of course not. Sure, some people, mostly engaged voters, are ideologically coherent and are voting for whatever political force will best advance their interests. But most people are not that - they don't care about politics anywhere near as much as they should, which means they are prone to emotional arguments, which anyone, from media barons to billionaires to Putin, will take advantage of to influence their vote. Of course, part of that is part of the game of politics, it's always been well known you can buy elections, but generally better democracies have financial limits on this sort of thing - and emergency legal procedures might be a stopgap in Romania, before disaster strikes.

 

I generally view it as objectionable when people, influenced by bad actors, whoever those are, vote against their own interests. Not enough to say democratic results are illegitimate, but that's why stronger safeguards around democratic elections are necessary, so there isn't this questioning of the vote later.

 

Now as to this Romanian election, it may well be that has happened in several elections where a perceived anti-democratic action was taken, that it will be a boon to Georgescu and his momentum. Or people realise how close it was. But with everything that surrounded it, it was the right choice. Perhaps if the same had happened re other certain elections countries might have been spared economic pain.

 

My argument is that geopolitical realities in Eastern Europe mean that Russia has a vested interest in interfering, which in turn means if, as any democratic independent country should, they ban foreign interference in elections, then this breaks their laws. Pull your head out of Western diabolism, it's interfering with your analysis. Because, and I'm going to say it straight so you stop dancing around it, Russian imperialism, warlordism and expansionism is far more dangerous to peace and people living well and free than the collection of powerful liberal democracies in North America and Western Europe, who despite the harms of capitalism that they spread around the world, have some of the highest living standards in history and for their power as states are remarkably benevolent. It is not good that over the last decade and a half more and more countries outside of the US-Europe sphere have been experiencing severe democratic backsliding and/or falling to autocrats. Some within that sphere too.

There’s a lot of good information in this article which articulated a lot of my position here about how the far right isn’t even necessarily pro Russian, the relationship in this area with the geopolitical power is quite complex especially considering the history in Moldova.

 

https://t.co/BCbC8l9jhX

There’s a lot of good information in this article which articulated a lot of my position here about how the far right isn’t even necessarily pro Russian, the relationship in this area with the geopolitical power is quite complex especially considering the history in Moldova.

 

https://t.co/BCbC8l9jhX

 

Sure, and that is an interesting article. It's not so much about whether they're pro-Russian for me but whether Russia would find them the most acceptable option (and therefore boosted them), and the Russians know that divisive nationalism is far better for them than the states of Europe being outward looking. For instance, uniting Romania with Moldova would be a boon to Russia as that's the disappearance of a currently pro-Western state just beyond the border of Ukraine.

That’s a perfectly ok position to take and it’s again the reason why the state of Transiternia exists in Moldova but yes the Russian state is authoritarian and but you can believe that and also believe the west are hypocrites in their foreign policy which has resulted in thousands of deaths over this century so far and many more following their decisions. In short a hierarchy of good to bad doesn’t stop 45k people dying in Palestine of the thousands who died in Iraq. And in that belief then believe it’s worth it for democracy to be ignored because it doesn’t go the way you believe is morally correct within that heirarchy of neo-con foreign policy doctrine people in the west follow.

Edited December 8, 2024Dec 8 by Steve201

I legitimately cannot even take you seriously. You have such tunnel vision on what you perceive as "crimes of the west" (that read as Russian propaganda 101, like did you get your talking points directly from TASS or did you let RT filter them first?), that you are blind to actual real threats. You're preoccupied by ghosts and yet the highest death toll of recent times is the Syrian civil war that was dragged out for as long as it was because of Russia and Iran - the two countries you are suspiciously silent on.

 

 

I don't understand how anyone with more than 1 functioning brain cell can be a tankie in 2024. Honestly, you'd have to be thicker than the average Trump voter and their IQ is measured in single digits.

What a lovely post from yourself to someone with a different opinion than you. No critical analysis or debate just ignorance and personal insults (which do come with a lot of your posts when you don’t agree with someone) says it all about you tbh. Grow up you joker!

Edited December 9, 2024Dec 9 by Steve201

But you are always very harsh on the west and very quiet on Iran, China, Rusdia... so it raises quesrions on where you're getting your informstion.

 

I recommend you switch to the Canary and Humanist Report

I’ve tried critical analysis and debate, in fact the first paragraph contains plenty of it. Instead, as usual with you, it’s whataboutism and deflection to avoid having to look yourself in the mirror and hold yourself accountable for your blind spots.

 

That’s meant to be critical analysis?? Ok then it must include being patronising and ignorant then which maybe reflect ts more about yourself tbf.

 

Me and Iz were able to have a debate and it didn’t defend into accusations and ignorance until you entered the debate. People can agree and disagree without that nonsense.