Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > 'Free Market' Authoritarian Leaders Across the Planet Are Stifling
Dissent and Enriching the Elites
________________________________________
'Free Market' Authoritarian Leaders Across the Planet Are Stifling Dissent
and Enriching the Elites
By Vijay Prashad [1] / AlterNet [2]
May 25, 2016
Earlier this month, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) released its
important World Employment Social Outlook [3] report for 2016. There was
little press coverage. The title is bureaucratic and boring. How does one
make news from this drabness? One of the most significant findings is that
poverty rates have now declined. The ILO finds that this is because of the
immense gains in China and in parts of Latin America-notably Brazil. In
parts of Africa and in other regions of Asia-including India-"poverty
remains stubbornly high." Meanwhile, those who have skipped above the
poverty line "continue to live on just a few dollars per day, often with
limited access to essential services and social protection." Despite the
optimism from the data, the ILO remains cautious. Matters are no-where near
celebration. Economic slowdown in China and the coup in Brazil are
indicators that the slide backwards is possible.
Three barriers prevent-according to the ILO-any significant motion against
poverty. First, most countries in the Global South continue to rely upon the
export of raw materials, whose extraction and transportation increases
growth rates but does little for the population as a whole. In these
countries, the ILO notes, "economic growth actually seems to have
exacerbated poverty." A fitting example is Nigeria. Second, the bugbear of
income inequality "has tended to dampen growth and its impact on poverty
reduction." As the rich devour the gains of production, and as they remain
on tax strike, there are fewer resources to put towards poverty alleviation.
The Central African Republic has one of the highest rates of inequality and
is virtually at the bottom of the human development tables. Finally,
widespread corruption and "limited worker rights" prevents the
implementation of policies to reduce poverty. Democracy withers in the face
of corruption and a disorganized population.
Data from the ILO and the World Bank shows that insecurity defines the life
of the world's peoples. Billions of people live on less than $3.01 per
day-the standard used to define the poverty line. Those billions who live
just above that number are also desperate and vulnerable. No salvation seems
evident from government. The promises of social welfare are now made with
caution-politicians know that there is simply not enough money in the
coffers that they could move from military spending to social spending. They
would be called treasonous if they made such a shift in the priorities of
their countries. Precious resources are used to buy arms. During his trip to
Vietnam, for instance, President Obama allowed that poor country to fall
into its own arms race, the last thing it needs. But this was hailed as
progress.
All politicians say that job creation is a better solution to poverty than
welfare spending. But these are empty words. Jobs are simply not being
created. Although few politicians say so directly, capitalism displaces jobs
by making each worker more productive and integrating workers to machines.
Why hire a teller in a bank, when an ATM can do the job? It is depressing in
grocery stores to see the clerks encourage customers to use the
self-checkout option. They are putting themselves out of a job.
Strong Leader
No wonder that from Egypt to India to Turkey arrives a new phenomenon to
take charge of the crisis. Egypt's Abdel-Fateh al-Sisi, India's Narendra
Modi and Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdoğan are powerful examples of free market,
authoritarian populism. These men are said to be able to solve all
problems-to take a stagnant economy and make it purr, to take joblessness by
the throat and make it cough out jobs. In Cairo's Tahrir Square, an old lady
from the countryside sells me a facsimile of Sisi's identity card. Under
profession it says, "Savior of Egypt." These men have no time for arguments.
Democracy is given lip service. It is an impediment to their ambitions. They
value action. They have nations to save.
Older ideas of austerity take root. It is not for economic growth alone.
That would be too narrow, too closely identified with the blue suits of the
bankers. The austerity of the free market, authoritarian populists is for
the Nation. The people must suffer so that their Nation can thrive.
Patriotism is the incentive for economic activity, not merely the animal
spirits of capitalism. But this patriotism is not to be shared. Its benefits
will be channeled to the large business houses, which are linked to the
political parties of the strong leaders. Impediments to progress must be
cast aside at any cost. The long arm of the law, short of outright military
dictatorship, can smash workers' protests, political protests and arrest
critical journalists for sedition. Violence against democracy is justified
as the mechanism to create jobs. Justification for military rule has made a
comeback. The rhetoric of counter-terrorism and of social instability has
allowed the army to leave the barracks from Egypt to Thailand-with liberal
elites taking refuge in the Generals. Critics ruin the country's brand, it
is said, and they deter investment. Dissent is blamed for poverty. It must
wear that cross.
Human Rights Watch has a new report out on this attack on democracy in
India. It is called Stifling Dissent: The Criminalization of Peaceful
Expression in India [4] (May 2016). The report covers the most egregious
examples of undemocratic action by the State. There is the use of
colonial-era sedition laws against student activists and defamation laws
against journalists, hate speech laws against artists and information
technology laws against professors. The range of legal methods used by the
central and state governments to muzzle dissent of any kind of striking. In
1988, the Indian Supreme Court warned that politicians who "scent danger in
every hostile point of view" should not use the architecture of state
violence to protect themselves. That prescient phrase-scenting danger-has
now come to define politics in countries such as Egypt, India and Turkey. No
journalist or student is safe from prosecution. Any gesture against the
political class is met not with argument but with the gallows. What is new
here is not the muzzle but its tightness. The crackdown is deeper, more
threatening. It skirts at the edge of fascism.
Turkey's celebrated author Orhan Pamuk is bewildered by how ordinary
satirists, teenagers and journalists have been hustled before the courts on
charges of sedition. Since Recep Tayyip Erdoğan became president in 2014,
almost two thousand cases have been brought for insulting him. "This has
nothing to do with insulting the president," said Pamuk. "This is only about
silencing political opposition. This is about intimidating people and
scaring the country so nobody would criticize the government." Much the same
explanation stands for the sensitivity of India's Narendra Modi and Egypt's
Abdel-Fateh al-Sisi. These are men who traffic on machismo. Their jails are
filled with people who criticize them. They personally are the answer to the
Nation's problems; they are therefore immune from criticism.
Human Rights Watch's report argues that dissent is being stifled in India
"because of a combination of overbroad laws, an inefficient criminal justice
system and lack of judisprudential consistency." The report says little
about the character of the crackdown: it is against the Left, against the
journalists, against anyone who wants to challenge the consensus that the
strong leader wishes to establish. In Turkey the State has gone after those
who want to raise questions about their government's war on the Kurds or its
involvement in Syria-forbidden topics in a country convulsed by the
president's tantrums. There are politics here, not merely problems in the
judiciary and the police.
Such reports as come from Human Rights Watch are silent on the politics of
the strong leaders (Modi, Erdoğan, Sisi), who have cultivated a political
base for their free market, populist authoritarianism. These leaders have no
answer to the economic trials of their countries, where decent jobs are hard
to find and where poverty rates creep upwards. They will not go after
corruption or sanctify unions-the two mechanisms suggested by the ILO. For
them, the answer to economic troubles is their virility. Imprisonment for
their rivals is not-to their mind-antithetical to democracy or economy.
Their kind of democracy insists upon adulation of the leader, who can do no
wrong. Even if the leader cannot solve the pressing economic and social
problems, it is this leader's very existence that is the answer to them.
Vijay Prashad is professor of international studies at Trinity College in
Hartford, Connecticut. He is the author of 18 books, including Arab Spring,
Libyan Winter (AK Press, 2012), The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of
the Global South (Verso, 2013) and the forthcoming The Death of a Nation and
the Future of the Arab Revolution (University of California Press, 2016).
His columns appear at AlterNet every Wednesday.
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [5]
[6]
________________________________________
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/world/dissent-egypt-india-and-turkey
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/vijay-prashad
[2] http://alternet.org
[3]
mailto:http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ
/documents/publication/wcms_481534.pdf
[4] mailto:https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/india0516.pdf
[5] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on 'Free Market'
Authoritarian Leaders Across the Planet Are Stifling Dissent and Enriching
the Elites
[6] http://www.alternet.org/
[7] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > 'Free Market' Authoritarian Leaders Across the Planet Are Stifling
Dissent and Enriching the Elites
'Free Market' Authoritarian Leaders Across the Planet Are Stifling Dissent
and Enriching the Elites
By Vijay Prashad [1] / AlterNet [2]
May 25, 2016
AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Google+More
AddThis Share optionsShare to Email
Earlier this month, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) released its
important World Employment Social Outlook [3] report for 2016. There was
little press coverage. The title is bureaucratic and boring. How does one
make news from this drabness? One of the most significant findings is that
poverty rates have now declined. The ILO finds that this is because of the
immense gains in China and in parts of Latin America-notably Brazil. In
parts of Africa and in other regions of Asia-including India-"poverty
remains stubbornly high." Meanwhile, those who have skipped above the
poverty line "continue to live on just a few dollars per day, often with
limited access to essential services and social protection." Despite the
optimism from the data, the ILO remains cautious. Matters are no-where near
celebration. Economic slowdown in China and the coup in Brazil are
indicators that the slide backwards is possible.
Three barriers prevent-according to the ILO-any significant motion against
poverty. First, most countries in the Global South continue to rely upon the
export of raw materials, whose extraction and transportation increases
growth rates but does little for the population as a whole. In these
countries, the ILO notes, "economic growth actually seems to have
exacerbated poverty." A fitting example is Nigeria. Second, the bugbear of
income inequality "has tended to dampen growth and its impact on poverty
reduction." As the rich devour the gains of production, and as they remain
on tax strike, there are fewer resources to put towards poverty alleviation.
The Central African Republic has one of the highest rates of inequality and
is virtually at the bottom of the human development tables. Finally,
widespread corruption and "limited worker rights" prevents the
implementation of policies to reduce poverty. Democracy withers in the face
of corruption and a disorganized population.
Data from the ILO and the World Bank shows that insecurity defines the life
of the world's peoples. Billions of people live on less than $3.01 per
day-the standard used to define the poverty line. Those billions who live
just above that number are also desperate and vulnerable. No salvation seems
evident from government. The promises of social welfare are now made with
caution-politicians know that there is simply not enough money in the
coffers that they could move from military spending to social spending. They
would be called treasonous if they made such a shift in the priorities of
their countries. Precious resources are used to buy arms. During his trip to
Vietnam, for instance, President Obama allowed that poor country to fall
into its own arms race, the last thing it needs. But this was hailed as
progress.
All politicians say that job creation is a better solution to poverty than
welfare spending. But these are empty words. Jobs are simply not being
created. Although few politicians say so directly, capitalism displaces jobs
by making each worker more productive and integrating workers to machines.
Why hire a teller in a bank, when an ATM can do the job? It is depressing in
grocery stores to see the clerks encourage customers to use the
self-checkout option. They are putting themselves out of a job.
Strong Leader
No wonder that from Egypt to India to Turkey arrives a new phenomenon to
take charge of the crisis. Egypt's Abdel-Fateh al-Sisi, India's Narendra
Modi and Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdoğan are powerful examples of free market,
authoritarian populism. These men are said to be able to solve all
problems-to take a stagnant economy and make it purr, to take joblessness by
the throat and make it cough out jobs. In Cairo's Tahrir Square, an old lady
from the countryside sells me a facsimile of Sisi's identity card. Under
profession it says, "Savior of Egypt." These men have no time for arguments.
Democracy is given lip service. It is an impediment to their ambitions. They
value action. They have nations to save.
Older ideas of austerity take root. It is not for economic growth alone.
That would be too narrow, too closely identified with the blue suits of the
bankers. The austerity of the free market, authoritarian populists is for
the Nation. The people must suffer so that their Nation can thrive.
Patriotism is the incentive for economic activity, not merely the animal
spirits of capitalism. But this patriotism is not to be shared. Its benefits
will be channeled to the large business houses, which are linked to the
political parties of the strong leaders. Impediments to progress must be
cast aside at any cost. The long arm of the law, short of outright military
dictatorship, can smash workers' protests, political protests and arrest
critical journalists for sedition. Violence against democracy is justified
as the mechanism to create jobs. Justification for military rule has made a
comeback. The rhetoric of counter-terrorism and of social instability has
allowed the army to leave the barracks from Egypt to Thailand-with liberal
elites taking refuge in the Generals. Critics ruin the country's brand, it
is said, and they deter investment. Dissent is blamed for poverty. It must
wear that cross.
Human Rights Watch has a new report out on this attack on democracy in
India. It is called Stifling Dissent: The Criminalization of Peaceful
Expression in India [4] (May 2016). The report covers the most egregious
examples of undemocratic action by the State. There is the use of
colonial-era sedition laws against student activists and defamation laws
against journalists, hate speech laws against artists and information
technology laws against professors. The range of legal methods used by the
central and state governments to muzzle dissent of any kind of striking. In
1988, the Indian Supreme Court warned that politicians who "scent danger in
every hostile point of view" should not use the architecture of state
violence to protect themselves. That prescient phrase-scenting danger-has
now come to define politics in countries such as Egypt, India and Turkey. No
journalist or student is safe from prosecution. Any gesture against the
political class is met not with argument but with the gallows. What is new
here is not the muzzle but its tightness. The crackdown is deeper, more
threatening. It skirts at the edge of fascism.
Turkey's celebrated author Orhan Pamuk is bewildered by how ordinary
satirists, teenagers and journalists have been hustled before the courts on
charges of sedition. Since Recep Tayyip Erdoğan became president in 2014,
almost two thousand cases have been brought for insulting him. "This has
nothing to do with insulting the president," said Pamuk. "This is only about
silencing political opposition. This is about intimidating people and
scaring the country so nobody would criticize the government." Much the same
explanation stands for the sensitivity of India's Narendra Modi and Egypt's
Abdel-Fateh al-Sisi. These are men who traffic on machismo. Their jails are
filled with people who criticize them. They personally are the answer to the
Nation's problems; they are therefore immune from criticism.
Human Rights Watch's report argues that dissent is being stifled in India
"because of a combination of overbroad laws, an inefficient criminal justice
system and lack of judisprudential consistency." The report says little
about the character of the crackdown: it is against the Left, against the
journalists, against anyone who wants to challenge the consensus that the
strong leader wishes to establish. In Turkey the State has gone after those
who want to raise questions about their government's war on the Kurds or its
involvement in Syria-forbidden topics in a country convulsed by the
president's tantrums. There are politics here, not merely problems in the
judiciary and the police.
Such reports as come from Human Rights Watch are silent on the politics of
the strong leaders (Modi, Erdoğan, Sisi), who have cultivated a political
base for their free market, populist authoritarianism. These leaders have no
answer to the economic trials of their countries, where decent jobs are hard
to find and where poverty rates creep upwards. They will not go after
corruption or sanctify unions-the two mechanisms suggested by the ILO. For
them, the answer to economic troubles is their virility. Imprisonment for
their rivals is not-to their mind-antithetical to democracy or economy.
Their kind of democracy insists upon adulation of the leader, who can do no
wrong. Even if the leader cannot solve the pressing economic and social
problems, it is this leader's very existence that is the answer to them.
Vijay Prashad is professor of international studies at Trinity College in
Hartford, Connecticut. He is the author of 18 books, including Arab Spring,
Libyan Winter (AK Press, 2012), The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of
the Global South (Verso, 2013) and the forthcoming The Death of a Nation and
the Future of the Arab Revolution (University of California Press, 2016).
His columns appear at AlterNet every Wednesday.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [5]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.[6]
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/world/dissent-egypt-india-and-turkey ;
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/vijay-prashad
[2] http://alternet.org
[3]
mailto:http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ
/documents/publication/wcms_481534.pdf
[4] mailto:https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/india0516.pdf
[5] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on 'Free Market'
Authoritarian Leaders Across the Planet Are Stifling Dissent and Enriching
the Elites
[6] http://www.alternet.org/
[7] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
