Stidmatt

I just wrote a post examining which countries are democratic enough that we should seriously consider extending visa-free travel to them. I identified 27 different countries where there is no good reason why they shouldn’t be allowed to travel to the US and Canada without a visa, and I think we need to update our visa policy to reflect the reality of the modern world.

There are some countries that came close to joining my list but have some issues which left them off. Here are the honorable mentions which if things go well should be democratic enough for visa-free access to North America by the end of the decade. Senegal and Malaysia scored high enough on the three indicators they performed well on that they only missed one metric (and by a significant margin) of the indicators I tested. 7 other countries performed well on half of the indicators I tested while failing on two of them, those countries are Georgia, Tunisia, Montenegro, Peru, Armenia, Dominican Republic, and India.

So for these 9 countries which almost get to the qualifications of being very democratic, having low corruption, and a lot of freedom, what barriers are in the way?

Armenia

Armenia scores poorly on Freedom in the World and the Democracy Index.

The functioning of Government, Political Culture, and Civil Liberties are components of the Democracy Index which need to be improved.

Dominican Republic

The Dominican Republic scores poorly on Corruption Perceptions and Freedom in the World.

The functioning of Government and Political Culture are the two main components of the Democracy Index which need to be improved.

Georgia

Georgia scores poorly on Freedom in the World and the Democracy Index. One of the major issues in Georgia is the abuse of prisoners. There are also cases of police attacking the free press.

The functioning of Government and Political Culture are the two main components of the Democracy Index which need to be improved. Voter intimidation is a serious problem among other barriers to a free and fair election. The surveillance of journalists needs to end. Georgia would benefit from implementing jury trials to help counteract corruption in the judiciary.

India

India scores poorly on corruption and press freedom. Bribery runs rampant, and money that is supposed to help people is stolen by corrupt officials. Corruption is an endemic problem that is going to take years to fix.

Political Culture and Civil Liberties need to be improved. Issues of intimidation of professors, demonstrators, and the limitation of strikes are worrying trends.

Malaysia

Malaysia scores poorly on the Freedom in the World Index. Part of this is probably due to Sharia Law being enshrined in the constitution.

Political Culture and Civil Liberties need to be improved.

The most obvious fix for Malaysia’s issues is ending Sharia law. They need to improve the freedom of the press, particularly regarding legal constraints. The monarch needs to no longer be allowed to suspend parliament. Freedom of religion is non-existent.

Despite these barriers, Malaysia scores well on other indexes.

Montenegro

Montenegro scores poorly on Freedom in the World and the Democracy Index. Djukanovic abused his power as President. he has been removed from power and hopefully corruption will decrease over time, and Dukanovic will be democratically removed from office soon.

The Political Culture of Montenegro is abysmal. They need new pro-Western leadership to end a culture of corruption.

Peru

Peru scores poorly in the Democracy Index and the Corruption Perceptions Index. Nonetheless, it scores high on social freedom and has a high growth rate. There are serious issues with public officials taking bribes, which will be a barrier to visa-free travel.

The political culture of Peru is abysmal. They need increased transparency in government contracts, and other legal tools to hold politicians accountable.

Senegal

Senegal has an average Democracy Score. Homosexuality is illegal in Senegal, and from this, we can see there are serious human rights violations. They have an anti-corruption office who are appointed by the President.

Political participation in Senegal is low. There are barriers to freedom of assembly, the judiciary is not independent, and major barriers exist in the justice system. These hold Senegal back, and hopefully, there can be reforms in these two major areas. Freedom House

Tunisia

Tunisia scores poorly on Freedom in the World and the Democracy Index.

Tunisia scores poorly on the functioning of government. Their president suspended parliament last year and consolidated power. Tunisia would benefit from a separation of powers in its federal government.

 

These barriers these 9 countries face are not unique to these countries. The establishment of a transparent open government, a fair judiciary, and a secular state can be a real challenge, but through reforms and hard work, I believe these 9 countries are the most promising in the world to emerge as functioning democracies in the next 10 years.

All of these changes have to come from the ground up in these countries by the people. Foreign experts can help advise, but ultimately, democracy can only come from within.

 

References:

Freedom in the World 2022

Democracy Index

Corruption Perceptions Index

Press Freedom Index

I just deactivated my twitter account. I’m not going back.

Here’s why:

1. I am pretty sure they are hiding my posts. I had over 2800 followers and I got maybe 100 impressions per tweet.
2. It clearly didn’t show my tweets to the people who actually interacted with me.
3. I had time off work and I decided to unfollow people who weren’t following me back (mostly Dixiecrats). So it decided I couldn’t follow people, like tweets, they were basically slowly deactivating my account while still showing me ads.

I didn’t post hate speech. I didn’t harass people. I didn’t post racist tirades (unlike some foreign presidents I can name) yet it deactivated my account for being active?

Twitter sucks. Facebook sucks. If you find people you like, use an RSS feed like www.feedly.com

I’m done with Twitter.

A common misconception is that trade unions are a critical part of Marx’s theory of revolution. I’m here to convince you that is not the case, and the presence of unions in the First International was merely a temporary and doomed-to-fail alliance of convenience.

The First and Second Internationals

The International was formed on 28 September 1864 as an alliance between a wide array of left-wing statist, mutualist, and anarchist organizations. These three competing visions had many disagreements throughout the organization’s history. While there were some victories, such as the 8-hour work day, Baukinin accused Marx of being an authoritarian, and Marx believed Baukinin was naive. They split 8 years later into two different organizations, one following Baukinin and the other following Marx.

There was a major split between different unions, some followed Baukinin, and some followed Marx following the collapse of the First International.

They tried to come back together again during the Second International, but there was such a large divide between reformists and revolutionaries which led to many reformist organizations leaving in 1896.

These Internationals could never have continued to exist for a long period of time. The Reformists and anarchists (particularly Baukanin) believed Marxism would inevitably lead to totalitarianism, while Marxists believed they had the only real answer.

Where Trade Unions fit in Marxism

There are precious few quotes about trade unions in Marx’s writings. Perhaps the most notable one is:

Trade unions work well as centres of resistance against the encroachments of capital. They fall partially from an injudicious use of their power. They fail generally from limiting themselves to a guerrilla war against the effect of the existing system, instead of simultaneously trying to change it, instead of using their organised forces as a lever for the final emancipation of the working class, that is to say the ultimate abolition of the wages system.

Which fits in with the rest of his writings. The abolition of the wage system is Marx’s goal of working with unions. The goal of unions is to improve wages and working conditions. As working conditions improve (the goal of labor unions), fewer people are going to be interested in a violent revolution. For this reason, these two goals are incompatible.

Marx saw unions as a convenient way to bring people over to his school of thought because if he had been able to change their methods towards revolution instead of incrementalism, he would have been able to spread his ideas around the world.

At the end of the day, the majority of trade unions are inherently incrementalist in their nature and theoretically opposed to Marxism. Marx’s attempt to bring unions over to his side failed, and the two sides have never joined again.

 

References:

Marx, Karl. “Value, Price, and Profit.” Economic Manuscripts: Value, Price and Profit, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1865/value-price-profit/ch03.htm.

Pretty much everyone knows about the beginning of civilization. Around 4000 BCE different civilizations started to pop up in a few river valleys in Africa and Asia.

Sumer was organized as an early dynasty around 4500 BCE.

The Indus valley civilization appeared around 3300 BCE. It remained stable for 2000 years.

China was established as a state around 3162 BCE.

Egypt appeared as a dynasty around 3150 BCE. It was led by local kings until 744 BCE when it was briefly conquered by the Nubians. There were a few rebellions, but it didn’t overly concern people outside of the Nile River. The Late Period saw alternating leadership by native Egyptians and Persian and Greek pharaohs.

For this post, I am going to focus on Western Civilization.

First Era, Sumer

For the first 2000 years of civilization, the Indo-Aryan civilization was fairly isolated, China broke up into multiple kingdoms in the 8th century BCE. There are interesting stories to tell here, of ancient monarchies ruling their empires, and they stayed mostly to themselves.

In the Middle East, there was the foundation of several kingdoms with distinct languages and cultures, unlike any other part of the world starting around 2200 BCE with the fall of Ur when it fell to the Akkadian Empire. This was the first cradle of civilization to truly fall, and you see the beginning of international relations in what resembles a fairly modern form in this region. Ur was restored as the Third Dynasty of Ur in 2112 BCE, and it lasted for 100 years before it fell to the Elamites.

This is the end of the first clear chapter of Western Civilization, around 2004 BCE

2: Isin-Larsa Period, 2004-1763 BCE

For around 300 years there was no clear dominant power in the Middle East. Isin and Larsa were the biggest poles of the region at this point until they were conquered by Hammurabi.

3: Babylonia and Assyria, 1763-911 BCE

The Old Babylonian Empire dominated the Middle East until 1595 BCE when it was replaced by the Kassite Empire.

In the 1400s Assyria started to grow, and between 1400 and 1000 BCE  the Hittites were in Asia Minor, Egypt conquered the Levant, and the Fertile Crescent was balanced between the Assyrians and Kassites.

You see the foundation of Israel and Judah after the Egyptians leave the area in the 11th century BCE.

4. Neo-Assyrian dominance, 911-609 BCE

The Neo-Assyrian Empire was founded in 911 BCE. It steadily grew to encompass the entire fertile crescent, conquering everywhere from Babylon to Judah by 700 BCE.

5. Formation of Modern dynasties with the Neo-Babylonian empire, 609 BCE – Present

The Assyrian Empire fell in 609 BCE to the Neo-Babylonian Empire led by Nabopolassar. This was a war of conquest, and it changed history forever. The Neo-Assyrian Empire influenced all subsequent cultures to the point of being mentioned multiple times in the Bible and significantly impacting Jewish theology.

The Neo-Babylonian Empire is extremely significant because of its genealogical relationship with every later modern dynasty in the region.

King Nabopolassar was the grandfather of Shahanshah Astyages of Media, who was the grandfather of King Cyrus of the Achaemenid Empire.

Even though the Neo-Babylonian Empire had a short life, it had a profound impact on the world through the descendants of its kings, along with Lydia, and Medes and their kings are also all ancestors of King Cyrus the Great. This might be the first time in history where you see major marriages between political families in different countries as a form of political relations.

The Neo-Babylonian Empire was followed by the Achaemenid/First Persian Empire of Cyrus the Great and his descendants.

The fall of the Neo-Babylonian Empire was of incredible significance for the history of the world. King Darius’ son-in-law Alexander the Great created the largest empire in history (up to that point in time) and when he died there was no clear line of succession.

After the throne fell to Alexander the Great’s brother-in-law Cassander, the throne went to many different dynasties, and multiple kingdoms were created following the end of the Macedonian empire.

The Seleucid Empire is of particular interest because the Basileus Antiochus Theos was the great-nephew of King Cassander. His grandson Megas Basileus Antiochus was the great-great-grandfather of King Phranaces of Pontus.

King Phrnaces of Pontus was the grandfather of King Aspurgus of the Bosporus.

King Aspurgus was the ancestor of King Aspacures of Iberia. Iberia was a Georgian kingdom, and the Kings of Iberia are the descendants of the Kings of Georgia.

 

In short, King Nabopolassar of the Neo-Babylonian Empire was the direct ancestor of a wife of Alexander the Great. Alexander the Great was the brother-in-law of King Cassander. King Cassander is an uncle of every monarch of Georgia.

It is clear to see that this era was massively historically to see on the map of the time as well. The Assyrian Empire was the largest empire to date, particularly in the region, but the Neo-Babylonian, Median, and Lydian empires were particularly large compared to preceding empires as well. Those monarchies are all ancestors of King Cyrus the Great of Persia.

 

There have obviously been other times great houses have sprung up since the Neo-Babylonian Empire, but I think it is really interesting how there is a clear genealogical relationship between the kings of the Neo-Babylonian Empire and every European royal family in the last 1000 years through marriage.

View the full genealogical path here:

http://www.stidmatt.com:2317/dare?em=R;ei=83116;et=S;color=;p=nabopolassar;n=of+akkad

Abortion is now illegal in at least some cases in all but 6 states.

Miranda Rights have been effectively repealed.

Voter ID laws have been upheld.

Public money must be given to private religious schools if parents request it.

Clarence Thomas has stated that they might repeal Obergefell v. Hodges.

All of this paints a very clear picture of where America is headed right now.

• Privacy from the government is ending.
• Religious organizations are entitled to public tax dollars.
• All science-based policy is at risk if it conflicts with religious dogma.
• Voter discrimination is being enshrined back into law.
• Travel is being restricted with the expansion of visas, which started in the aftermath of the PATRIOT ACT.

To me all of this makes a very clear picture. The Republican Party has become a far-right party that does not believe in democracy. They believe that all of your personal data belongs to the State, the State gets to determine whether you participate in a religious practice or not and that their personal religious dogma needs to be followed by everybody.

If they win an election it is legitimate, if they lose an election, it is not. Doesn’t matter if there is any proof or not, elections today are only legitimate in the eyes of Republicans when they win.

They are making it difficult for groups that do not vote for Republicans to vote at all.

The Republican Party is a Fascist Party. It is past time to treat it as one.

A trick to leadership is to under promise and over deliver. Don’t promise something and then fall through, that’s when people become disappointed. Promise something you know you can and will accomplish, just enough to get elected, and then do more than you promised.

Another important part of leadership is to try to fire up your base more than you upset the people who didn’t vote for you.

There will always be some voters who are either significantly uninformed or ideologically opposed to you who will never vote for you. Don’t specifically work on bringing people over to your side, you will not succeed.

If you can push for policies which will positively impact your supporters without impacting people who won’t support you, you should pass those policies quickly to encourage your base and gain your political capital.

This does not mean that a leader was ethical.

Examples of leaders who did this include

• At the end of Thomas Jefferson’s presidency the Federalist Party was extremely weak, and his Democratic-Republican Party dominated politics until the split between Jackson and Adams.
• Abraham Lincoln. He embraced the values of the Republican Party (of the time), and didn’t alienate the abolitionists. Through this action the south seceded. The emancipation proclamation strengthened his support among Republicans, and it was the right thing to do. The most controversial president of his lifetime (the only one who had to face a rebellion) he is now seen as one of America’s greatest presidents. Republicans dominated the Presidency for the next two decades.
• Theodore Roosevelt expanded American power, his party dominated government during his time in office, and he expanded American power. His successor abandoned Roosevelt’s policies which l
• Franklin Delano Roosevelt launched the New Deal and won almost every state in 1940. He didn’t try to keep the more radical Republican elements happy, and was put on our money because of his success.

In the United States presidents have two goals in office, first is to pass the policies which they were elected to do, and also to keep and grow power while in office, ideally to leave office with their policy more powerful than when they entered. Very few presidents succeed in this.

There have only been two times in American history where a party has maintained control of both houses of congress for more than 10 elections in a row.

I believe it is possible to have the Democrats dominate politics for the next twenty years, the reasons are numerous. First of all, while values on issues have swung strongly liberal on major issues, the Republican party platform is still stuck in the past on LGBT, gender, and other issues regarding different groups. There is no major social value where the majority of Americans agree with the Republican Party. Even when it comes to economic values, even Republicans voters balk at the idea of ending social security because they see those programs as that they have “earned them”. A majority of voters support ending student loans, and the majority support a more progressive tax code.

Which brings us to where American politics needs to go in the future. The politics of moderating Democratic policies to improve voter turnout is not going to work anymore. Millennials are adults now, and we got really excited about the candidacy of Sanders over the last two Presidential elections. In the 2020 Presidential primaries, Biden won only 3% of voters between 17 and 29, and only 5% of voters between 30 and 44. If more Millennials had voted, there is a high probability Sanders would have won the election. As long as more of us vote, eventually we will be the key demographic politicians need to win in order to carry the Presidency.

The key to successful leadership over the next twenty years will be to get as many millennials out to vote as possible. The Democratic party needs to endorse ranked voting, which is key to electing politicians who the majority of Americans will support. We need to elect our candidates using ranked voting who can then encourage as many voters as possible to vote in the general election.

If the Democratic Party does this we can succeed on a large number of issues the majority of Americans care about, and then voters will turn out, and we will continuously win elections until the Republicans stop being so extreme in the future.

We cannot afford future Republican governments. They are bad for civil rights, they are bad for economic growth, they have killed jobs, and they are bad for the stock market. There is no good reason to vote for the Republican Party in this era. There are only two reasons to vote Republican nowadays, either you are brainwashed, or you are racist. There’s no other reason.

Democrats need to play hard ball, fight to win, and then pass the legislation our country needs to deal with the major issues which our nation is dealing with.

References:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/primaries-caucuses/entrance-and-exit-polls/iowa/democratic