Latest news with #MAGA-style
Asia Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Asia Times
When police states collide, the people's truth will not be erased
'Make America Great Again' and 'Never let the Century of Humiliation return' are the slogans of two opposed superpower governments – producing one unsettling convergence. These are the ideological battle cries of the United States and the People's Republic of China – each invoking a grand civilizational mission to justify extraordinary state power. Beneath this geopolitical theater lies a shared strategy: Both MAGA-style authoritarianism and China's nationalist revivalism have co-opted the rhetoric of public interest to justify surveillance, censorship and the suppression of dissent, while suppressing the public's right to speak for itself. On June 14, demonstrators across the US rallied under the banner 'No Kings,' rejecting what they saw as authoritarian overreach under the Trump 2.0 administration. Protesters challenged the surveillance state, creeping censorship and politicized law enforcement. Civil liberties groups decried creeping executive power, while digital activists broadcast their dissent through livestreams and encrypted chats. 'No Kings' protesters in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, on June 14, 2025. Photo: Susan R. Martin The response was swift: unmarked federal agents, digital surveillance and coordinated efforts to discredit and delegitimize the movement. A familiar pattern has emerged where dissent is framed as extremism, and protest as threat. Thousands of miles away, another protest has unfolded – not in the streets, but across a vast digital terrain. Chinese netizens have erupted in outrage over the death of Dr. Luo Shuaiyu, a young intern surgeon at Xiangya Second Hospital who allegedly exposed illicit organ harvesting practices implicating senior hospital officials before dying under suspicious circumstances. After his May 8, 2024, death was labeled a suicide by the sanitized official provincial official narrative, despite troubling evidence to the contrary, citizens turned to digital forums to demand truth and justice. Luo's story, like the earlier case of missing teen Hu Xinyu, became a lightning rod for public grief, anger, and forensic online investigation. Hashtags, screenshots, voice notes and digital sleuthing kept his memory alive even as censors tried to erase it. On Chinese platforms including WeChat and Weibo, netizens mobilized to generate their own narratives in response to the lack of credibility they perceived in the official account of the doctor's sudden death. His story, like so many others – from Hu Xinyu's disappearance to past vaccine scandals – became a catalyst for a digitally-driven reckoning with the state's moral authority. In China, this takes the form of rights-based advocacy for 'Dao' (Changdao, 倡道). While the interest-based advocacy under Party's control (Changdao,倡导) – state-led ideological guidance – remains dominant, digital spaces have opened new channels for citizens to assert moral claims, circulate forensic counter-narratives, and amplify injustice. In Luo's case, fragments of voice recordings, hospital screenshots and encrypted group chats were enough to bypass censorship and spark mass questioning. Online outrage became a kind of public referendum – one that the government could not ignore, even as it moved to erase, suppress or redirect the conversation. In the United States, the MAGA narrative has done more than reshape electoral politics. It has become a blueprint for state overreach under the guise of immigration enforcement. Agencies such as ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) have increasingly acted as autonomous arms of ideological policy, empowered not just to detain and deport but to surveil, intimidate, and over-police immigrant communities. Under Trump's 2.0 administration, ICE has not only expanded its detention infrastructure but blurred the line between civil immigration proceedings and criminal enforcement. The agency now mirrors the very logic of authoritarian policing: using opaque watchlists, secret evidence and vague national security claims to justify raids, detentions, and prolonged surveillance. While presented as a 'public interest' defense of national sovereignty, this campaign routinely ignores rights-based advocacy, silencing immigrant voices and bypassing due process. Just as China's public interest rhetoric masks political control, MAGA's immigration agenda uses patriotism to conceal systemic injustice. Across the Pacific from each other, two governments – one claiming democratic legitimacy, the other insisting on single-party stability – are confronting a shared challenge: the rise of digitally empowered, rights-based public advocacy. From the United States' 'No Kings' protests to viral outrage over the suspicious death of Dr. Luo Shuaiyu in China, citizens are resisting state narratives using the very tools once designed to control them. These protests—one physical, one digital—are not isolated. These two seemingly disconnected events – one anchored in American civil liberties, the other in Chinese public health scandal – share a deeper infrastructure. They both illuminate the power and signal the emergence of what I call an inter-network society: a transnational digital public sphere where global digital platforms enable ordinary citizens, armed with smart phones and moral outrage, engaged in distributed forms of civic engagement that challenge state-imposed narratives. But this emerging civic infrastructure faces a dual pressure: one from traditional authoritarian censorship, and another from ideological capture – in which 'public interest' becomes whatever serves state goals. In both countries, governments present themselves as defenders of a public good. In China, it is 'national rejuvenation' – a tightly managed story of unity, sacrifice, and historical destiny. In the US, it is MAGA's restoration fantasy – evoking a purified past to rationalize hardline policies in the present. Both narratives appropriate the function of public advocacy, framing dissenters as traitors, radicals or foreign agents. What gets erased in this process is rights-based advocacy. This form of public engagement draws from moral, legal, and civic principles to hold power accountable. While the interest-based advocacy under the Communists Party's control – state-led ideological guidance – remains dominant, digital spaces have opened new channels for citizens to assert moral claims, circulate forensic counter-narratives, and amplify injustice. In Luo's case, fragments of voice recordings, hospital screenshots, and encrypted group chats were enough to bypass censorship and spark mass questioning. Online outrage became a kind of public referendum – one that the government could not ignore, even as it moved to erase, suppress or redirect the conversation. It is messy, often uncomfortable and politically inconvenient. And that is exactly why it matters. This is more than spontaneous protest. Rights-based digital activism has taken the form of forensic public engagement: citizens compiling timelines, documenting abuses, and demanding accountability for the truth underneath the death of figures like Dr. Luo. Though heavily censored, this grassroots movement constitutes an incipient counter-power. Although the state retains control over laws, infrastructure, and coercive force, these digital publics insert new variables into governance: a demand for legitimacy, a challenge to propaganda, and a capacity for decentralized accountability. For now, it does not seek to overthrow the system, but to negotiate with it, expanding the space for justice within an otherwise tightly controlled ecosystem. In the new era of ideological policing, between the emerging digital resistance and the fragility of rights-based advocacy lies the paradox: Both regimes treat public interest as something to be defined from the top down, not claimed from the bottom up. Under whatever banner – national security, civilizational revival or cultural greatness – both of the states now position themselves as the exclusive interpreter of 'the people's will'—while undermining the people's voice. In the US, the rise of surveillance, 'lawfare' and state-led counter-disinformation campaigns reveals how dissent is increasingly framed as destabilization. There's a tendency to believe that constitutional protections shield people from the worst abuses of power. But the 'No Kings' protests reveal a troubling convergence: militarized policing, retaliatory surveillance and the erosion of civil discourse. Even in such a formal democracy, dissenters face digital tracking, criminalization and marginalization – not dissimilar in structure to their counterparts, the authoritarian regimes they claim to oppose. Whether in Beijing or in Washington, the state is learning to police not just individuals but information ecosystems. And yet, the people persist. And the public is learning, too. Thus, this is a nuanced and urgent call to defend public truth from the ground up. It is assembling evidence, forming alliances and refusing to be gaslit into submission. What unites the stories of Luo Shuaiyu, Hu Xinyu, and the 'No Kings' protestors is not ideology but method. Digital advocacy – especially in its rights-based form – has become a crucial lever of engagement. It may not yet dismantle structural power, but it undeniably reshapes its contours. What's new are the transnational logic of repression and the global, networked resistance it has provoked. If there is hope, it lies in the connective tissue of our time: the inter-networked public sphere. It is imperfect, fragmented, and surveilled – but it remains a space where people, across borders and regimes, still ask the hardest questions: Who decides what truth is? Who benefits from silence? Who speaks for justice? And most importantly: Who dares to dissent? It's a digitally connected society that resists monologue with dialogue, propaganda with documentation, erasure with remembrance, The challenge ahead is not simply one of state versus society. It is about who gets to define truth, and how. In both China and the US, people are witnessing an epistemological battle – between authoritarian certainty and democratic doubt, between managed silence and messy transparency. The advocates persist by reclaiming the power through physical demonstration also the digital lifelines, the encrypted circles and the fragmented solidarity of the global internet. A digitally connected society now resists monologue with dialogue, propaganda with documentation and erasure with remembrance. This is the frontier of public life in the 21st century: where networked publics must confront not only authoritarian power but the seductive narratives that claim to speak in their name. To Dr. Luo – and to the countless unnamed advocates across borders who dare to ask inconvenient questions and keep disguised truths alive – we salute you. The people's truth cannot be twisted. It echoes through silence, reassembles through fragments, and survives every attempt to erase it. Yujing Shentu, PhD, is an independent scholar and writer on digital politics, international political economy and US-China strategic competition.
National Observer
11-06-2025
- Politics
- National Observer
If Carney wants to build, he should go big on a Youth Climate Corps
When our delegation of Youth Climate Corps (YCC) organizers met Mark Carney outside the Liberal caucus retreat in Nanaimo in 2024, Canada was a different place. To remind the Liberal Party of their promise made in the 2024 federal budget to hold consultations on a YCC, we staged a lemonade stand to 'raise' the $1 billion needed for a Canada-wide program to put thousands of young people to work confronting the climate emergency — the defining crisis of our lives. This fun stunt gained the attention of Carney — then just an economic advisor to the Liberals — and Members of Parliament, who reassured us a YCC would be established. We couldn't have predicted the political whirlwind that would follow just months later, resulting in former prime minister Justin Trudeau's resignation and Mark Carney's election to the position. Though the Liberals won, the results of the federal election show a persistent disconnect between the governing party and young Canadians. In a rightward shift among youth, the Conservatives won the student vote. If the Liberals want to earn back the trust of young people, they must make a compelling and inspiring offer, and the Youth Climate Corps represents just that, but only if it is a genuinely bold invitation. The crises we face call for more than a precarious pilot program After years of youth advocacy, the YCC was finally featured on most major party platforms: the New Democrats, Greens, and re-elected Liberals. This win is a testament to the dedicated and inspiring advocacy of Canadian youth across the country. But the 'pilot' program proposed by the Liberals is far too modest, and sends mixed signals about whether they truly understand the severity of the crises we face. As the Liberal platform states, 'Building Canada strong starts with our workers.' We agree. That's why they must scale up their inadequate promise and create the ambitious and visionary climate corps that Canada desperately needs. The YCC pilot envisioned in the Liberal platform is too small and susceptible to dismantling by future governments. Some conservative pundits have been calling for the 'Muskification' of Canada, advocating for our very own Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). To combat MAGA-style politics from entering Canada, an innovative and courageous program, like the YCC, must be protected and built right from the beginning, with human rights and Indigenous leadership at its core. If the Liberals want to earn back the trust of young people, they must make a compelling and inspiring offer, and the Youth Climate Corps represents just that, write Bushra Asghar, Erin Blondeau, Lea Mary Movelle and Juan Vargas Alba Late in his term, President Joe Biden launched an American Climate Corps, only to have President Trump terminate it as soon as he took office. We can't repeat the same mistakes as the United States. How a Youth Climate Corps would work The YCC should offer well-paid jobs and training for people 35 and under, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, building renewable energy, restoring ecosystems, and responding to climate disasters. The program would offer positions which include but are not limited to work, such as building retrofits, green construction, conservation, strengthening local food systems and supporting municipalities in developing and implementing their climate action plans. It would create accessible, barrier-free opportunities for young people, prioritizing underserved, undervalued and under-resourced communities. Young people would be empowered to enter the workforce with living wages and union representation, combatting the distressing rise in the youth unemployment rate. Indigenous sovereignty, rights and leadership would guide the way. But for a program like this to work, it needs to be big. If built right and in adherence to our campaign principles, the YCC would create at least 20,000 jobs across Canada in the first year, and grow with demand each year thereafter. If Carney wants to 'build, baby build,' then we need a well-trained and prepared workforce to get the job done. Polling shows the majority of Canadians across every demographic support the idea of a YCC, and 15 per cent of people under 35 are excited and ready to enlist immediately. The Liberal Party must reckon with the reality that young men are turning to the political right after feeling abandoned by the Liberals, yet a huge majority of young men are excited about the idea of a YCC. To Prime Minister Mark Carney: You have expressed your ambition to 'build things we've never imagined, at a speed we've never seen.' Now is your opportunity to establish a transformative, large-scale Youth Climate Corps, and watch as we strengthen this nation without leaving anyone behind. Erin Blondeau is the communications director at the Climate Emergency Unit, an independent journalist and a human rights and climate justice organizer. Bushra Asghar is the co-director of the national Youth Climate Corps campaign and a human rights and climate justice organizer.
France 24
02-06-2025
- Politics
- France 24
Nationalist victory spells trouble for Poland's Tusk
Nawrocki, who is supported by the former governing Law and Justice (PiS) party, is a fierce opponent of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who is a former European Council chief. His aim to strengthen ties with US President Donald Trump could also limit the Tusk government's room for action on foreign policy, experts said. "Nawrocki's main task will be to bring down the government of Donald Tusk, regardless of the cost," Wojciech Przybylski, head of the Res Publica foundation, told AFP. He said Nawrocki's aim would be to bring about "early elections, or at least a serious crisis" to usher in a government led by the populist PiS, Poland's main opposition force. The expert predicted that existing divisions within the ruling coalition, particularly between Tusk's Civic Coalition (KO) and the conservative PSL farmers party, would increase. Piotr Buras, head of the Warsaw office of the European Council on Foreign Relations, a think tank, agreed that Nawrocki's presidency would be a "rough ride" for Tusk. He called the result of the vote -- 51 percent for Nawrocki and 49 percent for liberal rival Rafal Trzaskowski -- a "yellow card" from Poles for Tusk's government. "Dissatisfaction with Tusk's government was the main reason for Trzaskowski's defeat," he said, pointing to the large number of young voters who cast their ballots for Nawrocki. 'Serious escalation' Polish presidents have a five-year mandate and influence over foreign and defence policies but their key power is to be able to veto legislation from the government. Several reforms proposed by Tusk have been blocked by an impasse with the outgoing president, Andrzej Duda, who is a Nawrocki ally. Buras said he believes that Nawrocki's views are "far more radical and right-wing" than those of Duda and that once he takes over in the coming weeks "no major reform project... will be possible". He mentioned specifically government proposals on introducing legislation allowing same-sex unions and easing Poland's near-total ban on abortion. Nawrocki's aim will be to undermine the government "and prepare the ground for the return to power of PiS". He predicted "a very serious escalation of the political conflict in Poland". "It has always been polarised for many years but this will intensify," he said. In terms of foreign policy, Nawrocki's alignment with Trump and his MAGA-style stance could spell changes, he said. Tusk's promotion for "a stronger European defence policy" and Poland's support for EU and NATO accession for neighbouring Ukraine "could be seriously hampered", Buras said. Nawrocki has been critical of Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, and wants to reduce benefits for the estimated one million Ukrainian refugees in Poland. But Przybylski said Poland's increasingly powerful role within the European Union was unlikely to change with the new president.
Straits Times
01-06-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
Poland votes in tight presidential race between pro-EU and nationalist visions
Polish presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki, backed by the main opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party, and his wife Marta Nawrocka look on on the day of his final rally, ahead of the second round of presidential election, in Biala Podlaska, Poland, May 30, 2025. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel Polish presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki, backed by the main opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party, speaks during his final rally, ahead of the second round of presidential election, in Biala Podlaska, Poland, May 30, 2025. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel A supporter of Polish presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki, backed by the main opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party, wears boxing gloves during Nawrocki's final rally, ahead of the second round of presidential election, in Biala Podlaska, Poland, May 30, 2025. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel A combination picture shows two leading candidates in the Polish presidential election, Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, Civic Coalition presidential candidate, smiling during a visit to the Weglewski farm, ahead of the second round of Polish presidential election, in Buczek, May 29, 2025, and Polish presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki, backed by the main opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party, reacting during his final rally, ahead of the second round of presidential election, in Biala Podlaska, Poland, May 30, 2025. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel Supporters of Polish presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki, backed by the main opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party, attend his final rally, ahead of the second round of presidential election, in Biala Podlaska, Poland, May 30, 2025. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel WARSAW - Voting was underway in Poland's knife-edge presidential election on Sunday, which will determine whether the largest country in the European Union's eastern wing cements its place in the bloc's mainstream or turns towards MAGA-style nationalism. Turnout holds the key to the contest between Rafal Trzaskowski of ruling centrists Civic Coalition (KO), who holds a narrow lead in opinion polls, and Karol Nawrocki, backed by nationalists Law and Justice (PiS). Opinion polls show that the difference between the candidates is within the margin of error. Voting began at 7 a.m. (0500 GMT) and is due to end at 9 p.m., with exit polls published soon afterwards. The electoral commission says it hopes final results will be announced on Monday morning or early afternoon. Parliament holds most power in Poland but the president can veto legislation so the vote is being watched closely in neighbouring Ukraine, as well as in Russia, the U.S. and across the EU. Both candidates agree on the need to spend heavily on defence, as U.S. President Donald Trump is demanding from Europe, and to continue supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russia's three-year-old invasion. But while Trzaskowski sees Ukraine's future membership of NATO as essential for Poland's security, Nawrocki has recently said he would not ratify it as president as this could draw the alliance into a war with Russia. Trzaskowski says strong relations with both Brussels and Washington are essential for Poland's security, but Nawrocki, who met Trump in the White House in May, prioritises relations with the United States. "The most important thing is foreign policy," said IT specialist Robert Kepczynski, 53, who was voting in Warsaw. "We can't look both ways, to the U.S. and the EU - and looking only to the U.S. for help is short-sighted." Economist Maria Luczynska, 73, said that going to vote made her emotional. "(The election) is important because this is how we decide our future. What country my daughter, my grandchildren will live in." If Nawrocki wins, he is likely to follow a similar path to President Andrzej Duda, a PiS ally who has used his veto power to block the government's efforts to undo the previous PiS administration's judicial reforms, which the EU says undermined the independence of the courts. Coming around a year and a half since Prime Minister Donald Tusk took office, the vote provides the stiffest test yet of support for his broad coalition government, with Nawrocki presenting the ballot as a referendum on its actions. In 2023, huge queues outside polling stations in large cities forced some to stay open later than planned. Analysts said that high participation by younger, liberal, urban Poles was crucial in securing a majority for Tusk. Trzaskowski is hoping that such scenes will be repeated on Sunday. "Encourage everyone, so that as many Poles as possible vote in the presidential election," he told a rally in Wloclawek, central Poland, on Friday. Nawrocki, who draws inspiration from Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, told supporters in Biala Podlaska in the country's east that "these elections could be decided by single votes". SOCIAL ISSUES The two candidates also differ on social issues, with Trzaskowski favouring the liberalisation of abortion laws and introduction of civil partnerships for LGBT couples, while Nawrocki says predominantly Catholic Poland should reject such moves. The first round of the election on May 18 saw a surge in support for the anti-establishment far-right, suggesting that the KO-PiS duopoly that has dominated Polish politics for a generation may be starting to fracture. Nevertheless, after a tumultuous campaign in which Nawrocki in particular faced a slew of negative media reports about his alleged past conduct, once again candidates representing the two main parties are facing off in the second round. PiS has traditionally enjoyed high support in small towns and rural areas, especially in the south and east. These areas are typically more socially conservative than larger cities and poorer, creating a sense of exclusion that PiS has tapped into. "They want to build a Poland for the elites," Nawrocki told voters in Biala Podlaska, referring to his opponents from KO. KO, meanwhile, campaigns on a pro-European centrist agenda that appeals to more liberal-minded Poles who mainly live in cities or bigger towns. Trzaskowski took heart from the turnout at a rally in Ciechanow, central Poland. "Looking at this mobilisation, I see how much hope you have - hope in a future in which Poland plays a leading role in the European Union," he said. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
TimesLIVE
01-06-2025
- Politics
- TimesLIVE
Pro-EU and MAGA visions clash in Poland's closely fought presidential runoff
Poland holds a knife-edge presidential election on Sunday which will determine whether the largest country in the EU's eastern wing cements its place in the bloc's mainstream or turns towards MAGA-style nationalism. Turnout holds the key to the contest between Rafal Trzaskowski of ruling centrists Civic Coalition (KO), who holds a narrow lead, and Karol Nawrocki, backed by nationalists Law and Justice (PiS). Parliament holds most power in Poland but the president can veto legislation so the vote is being watched closely in neighbouring Ukraine, as well as in Russia, the US and across the EU. Both candidates agree on the need to spend heavily on defence, as US President Donald Trump is demanding from Europe, and to continue supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russia's three-year-old invasion. But while Trzaskowski sees Ukraine's future membership of Nato as essential for Poland's security, Nawrocki has recently said he would not ratify it as president as this could draw the alliance into a war with Russia. Trzaskowski says strong relations with both Brussels and Washington are essential for Poland's security, but Nawrocki, who met Trump in the White House in May, prioritises relations with the US. If Nawrocki wins, he is likely to follow a similar path to President Andrzej Duda, a PiS ally who has used his veto power to block the government's efforts to undo the previous PiS administration's judicial reforms which the EU says undermined the independence of the courts. Coming about a year-and-a half since Prime Minister Donald Tusk took office, the vote provides the stiffest test yet of support for his broad coalition government, with Nawrocki presenting the ballot as a referendum on its actions. Voting begins at 7am and is due to end at 9pm, with exit polls published soon afterwards. The electoral commission says it hopes final results will be announced on Monday morning or early afternoon. Opinion polls show that the difference between the candidates is within the margin of error. In 2023, huge queues outside polling stations in large cities forced some to stay open later than planned. Analysts said that high participation by younger, liberal, urban Poles was crucial in securing a majority for Tusk. Trzaskowski is hoping that such scenes will be repeated on Sunday. 'Encourage everyone, so that as many Poles as possible vote in the presidential election,' he told a rally in Wloclawek, central Poland, on Friday. Nawrocki, who draws inspiration from US President Donald Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, told supporters in Biala Podlaska in the country's east that 'these elections could be decided by single votes'. The two candidates also differ on social issues, with Trzaskowski favouring the liberalisation of abortion laws and introduction of civil partnerships for LGBTQ+ couples, while Nawrocki says predominantly Catholic Poland should reject such moves. The first round of the election on May 18 saw a surge in support for the anti-establishment far-right, suggesting that the KO-PiS duopoly that has dominated Polish politics for a generation may be starting to fracture. Nevertheless, after a tumultuous campaign in which Nawrocki in particular faced a slew of negative media reports about his alleged past conduct, once again candidates representing the two main parties are facing off in the second round. PiS has traditionally enjoyed high support in small towns and rural areas, especially in the south and east. These areas are typically more socially conservative than larger cities and poorer, creating a sense of exclusion that PiS has tapped into. 'They want to build a Poland for the elites,' Nawrocki told voters in Biala Podlaska, referring to his opponents from KO. 'I am simply one of you, I am a citizen of the Polish state who has travelled a long road to be able to today face a person who is the creation of a political laboratory!' KO, meanwhile, campaigns on a pro-European centrist agenda that appeals to more liberal-minded Poles who mainly live in cities or bigger towns. Trzaskowski took heart from the turnout at a rally in Ciechanow, central Poland. 'Looking at this mobilisation, I see how much hope you have — hope in a future in which Poland plays a leading role in the EU,' he said.
