Anne Applebaum in the book entitled The twilight of democracy. The deceptive impulse of authoritarianism identified any of the causes of the democratic strategy crisis in developed capitalist countries. She devoted most attention to subjective causes, i.e. secondary to ongoing socio-economic and political processes in the modern world.
She besides selected any very eloquent examples from the lives and activities of internationally known politicians. She did not deal in her book, as she wrote herself, with mediocre people surviving in the countryside who were not successful, or with those affected by the 2008-2009 economical crisis and the 2015-2016 exile crisis.
Defending Your Class
Her heroes “On the contrary, they have received education at the best universities, they frequently talk abroad languages, they live in large cities – London, Washington, Warsaw, Madrid – they frequently travel around the world”[1]. It follows from this declaration that the crisis of democracy, understood as the power of the people, is so considered by it as power without the people, the crisis of the elite and their pursuit of authoritarianism and dictatorship. The interests of the folk masses are only populism with various adjectives. Thesis closes with a buckle from 1999 to 2019.
Therefore, we will not find in Applebaum's book an analysis of the global protest movement against savings, which was developing at the beginning of the recession in 2008-2009 (in Greece, Spain, Ireland, Portugal). It does not mention the arabian spring started in 2010 and its organizers. There are no protests of the movement Occupy, which peaked in 2011-2012 and passed through over 80 countries, but most powerfully reported in the US. decision Occupy it opposed social and economical inequality and the deficiency of a perceived "real democracy" around the planet – it is no wonder Applebaum was not interested. How, then, can 1 compose meaningfully about democracy, about the sovereignty of the people, without considering the problems of the people and focusing on the representatives of the elite? So if Applebaum focuses his attention on the crisis of democracy among political elites, that is most likely why the state of consciousness of protesters of millions of masses, it considers it scary adequate that for the sake of the elite itself and whose interests it defends, it prefers not to compose about them.
Criticism of PiS policy
Applebaum belongs, like her husband Radek Sikorski, to declared opponents of the current law and justice policy. She wrote that erstwhile the Law and Justice came back to power in 2015, the crisis of the democratic strategy made itself known. She felt that the Law and Justice had made political changes at the time of the low parliamentary majority, to which he did not have adequate legal legitimacy, due to the fact that although he could exercise power on his own, the advantage he had achieved did not let him to make formal changes to the Constitution. She felt that the government appointed under the Law and Justices had broken the constitution: wrongly appointing fresh judges of the Constitutional Court; expanding the number of judges of the ultimate Court; trying to punish judges issuing sentences contrary to the current government's policy; sacking unfavorable journalists in the public media; dismissing thousands of public officials and appointing his supporters to their place; dismissing from the service of many educated elder officers and diplomats; subjecting government policies to public-funded cultural institutions. In addition, Applebaum alleged that PiS meant to make a ‘party’ and ‘more subordinate parties of courts’. We can see that Applebaum allegations do not have much to do with the interests of the folk masses, but alternatively concern disputes at the tops of power over positions and competences.
The allegation of partying or politicalism of the state and its institutions is now the constant argument of all supporters of neoliberalism who do not want to openly and critically analyse socio-economic processes from the interests of individual socio-political forces.
politicizing politics?
For them, any deviation from organization power with a neoliberal agenda and the conduct by a fresh organization of its own personnel policy is simply a "politicisation" of a given office and a misunderstood party. For neoliberals, while they were conducting staff policies and carrying out staff cleaning, this meant that people were being ‘committed to cooperate with the commune’, ‘scrupulous’ and ‘incompetent’. So no 1 is amazed by the manipulation of election ordination before all election, just to stay in power or reduce their own defeat.
The PiS has been basing its tactics on uncovering enemies for years. He directed the attention of his state organs against Muslims, opposition parties, people condemning nationalism, agreements, communists, Germans, Russia, Belarus, and LGBT supporters. In her opinion, the right-wing-chadek party, the Law and Justice, the lie about the assassination of the Smolensk presidential plane, which was to be the origin of a tragic air accident, utilized to spread another lies. "Smolensk conspiracy explanation besides served another purpose: for a young generation that did not remember communism, and for a society in which the erstwhile communists mostly disappeared from politics, this was to be a fresh reason not to trust politicians, entrepreneurs and intellectuals who had been at the head of the country since the 1990s. Moreover, it was a way to form new, better elites. [...] Poland is, of course, not the only country where this simple mechanics works”[2]. And not a word about the fact that the Law and Justice Department had to mitigate the socio-economic contradictions of income accumulated during the period of the post-solidarity regulation of neoliberals, so that there would be no social disturbance and capitalism could continue... Contrary to appearances, the Law and Justice has indeed proved to be a faithful follower of neoliberal politics.
Restrictions on Applebaum's experience in determining the democratic crisis
Applebaum received a careful education, graduated from advanced school and college, where future presidents (not only the US) and their children, where many Nobel Prize winners worked. She has large journalism experience and many individual contacts with many well-known politicians. However, it is hard to defy the impression that she saw the crisis of democracy in another countries, but she did not see it in the US, where she was surely an elite. If Applebaum wrote critically about democracy in Europe, there is simply a problem, due to the fact that specified a democratic strategy as in Europe is not in the US. First of all, there are no specified things as European political parties. There is simply a alleged organization strategy in the U.S., which means that there is no formal organization membership there, that organization executives don't organize organization work, they do fund raising for election campaigns. All election results shall not be calculated in relation to the full eligible voters, but to those who registered for the election. Registration does not encourage participation in elections, but it serves to reduce the number of unfavorable voters and improves the statistic of support for politicians. frequently the triumph in the presidential election is determined by which candidate gets more money for the election campaign. And the right to contribute to electoral funds in the United States is not only for individual citizens, which seems to be understandable from the point of view of democracy, but besides for the management of large corporations, which thus prejudge the results of the elections and guarantee that politicians work in a affirmative way. The President's election is indirect, and that always calls into question the democracy of specified elections, which is confirmed by the fact that presidential elections are not always won by those candidates who win the majority of the votes. 1 of the biggest scandals occurred during the 2000 presidential campaign. The popular vote won Al Gore And his candidate for vice president Joseph Libermanwho was the first candidate hebrew appointed before the election by 1 of the 2 large parties. They won 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush. The election results remained unknown for a long time, as calculation was overextended and not counted all the votes in Florida, where Bush's brother was the politician of the state Jeb Bush. Following a controversial election dispute over the recalculation of votes in Florida (decided by the ultimate Court by 5 to 4 votes in favour of Bush), Gore lost his election to a Republican opponent at the Elector College. In addition, about 50,000 people, mostly black and registered Democrats (potential Gore supporters) were removed from the registry in Florida shortly before the elections. Florida's government explained method errors and added that "the law does not work backwards", which sounded like any mocking euphemism...
President of the World’s Fate
In addition, the "democratic" strategy in the US has 1 more deficiency. While the president in interior politics is restricted by state authorities, legislature and the ultimate Court, he has full freedom in abroad policy. And no uncertainty the policy of the president of the United States is affecting the full world. As he wrote George Friedman, erstwhile advisor to many high-ranking American commanders and leaders and founder of a private intelligence agency, citing a given advice from the sovereign ‘the president may order an invasion, embargo or sanctions. And he frequently resorts to these measures. His economical policies affect the lives of billions of people, possibly for many generations. In the next decade, what the president will be and what he or she will decide will have a greater impact on the lives of people in countries another than the actions of their governments."[3].
Friedman mythologied the function of president, which, in his mind, seems full understandable. "Knowledge and the President's instinct are so directed at power that he understands it in a way that a man without these ambitions simply does not understand"[4]. The conclusion is that due to the fact that a man who is not president, or current sovereign, does not “just understand”, there is no point in wasting time explaining to him the complexity of abroad policy. In the conduct of global politics, presidents have their hands untied. ‘In practice, this means that they can destruct an incorruptible state or reward others at their discretion’[5].
It should be admitted that this statement, from a general humanist point of view, is simply a freezing blood in the veins, especially for a non-American man. What cannot be understood in this “destruction of unruly states”? I guess it's just why Americans bring order to another countries with their own democracy. In specified situations, it is always helpful to ask in whose interest demolition is being done, due to the fact that the message that "in the interests of the USA" is besides general and insufficient. However, Applebaum does not see these problems and does not ask akin questions.
In the country of “human rights”
The United States gained independency in 1776, but slavery was not abolished until 1865, with a number of racial segregation rules inactive in operation in the 20th century. Murder, beating, whipping, torture, burning houses, blowing up churches were the usual thing in the South. Between 1882 and 1935, over 3,000 African Americans were lynched. In August 1940, the U.S. Army had about 500,000 soldiers, of which African Americans accounted for little than 1%, stationed in units separated from white soldiers. There were only 5 black officers in the army, 3 of whom were chaplains. In Europe, African Americans were mostly soldiers in transport and auxiliary units. Most of them never had a weapon in their hands.
Combating racial segregation in the states of the United States of the South and its legalising alleged rights Jim Crow[6], has been the mark of the Negro movement in the United States since the early 20th century. The fight against racial segregation stopped during the period of planet War II, but intensified between 1950 and 1960 and had support in the then-launched conflict of 3rd planet countries against imperialism. In 1954, the ultimate Court declared segregation in public education unconstitutional. Nevertheless, mass anti-Segregation protests under the wire continued to make Martin Luther King, with the support and participation of many white Americans. There was a “raid of freedom” (1961), a large march on Washington (1963), demonstrations called sit-ins (taking places only for white people). The administration had to be straight active in the fight for African American rights John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Kennedy was murdered on November 22, 1963, and the leader of the movements against segregation Martin Luther King fell victim to the assassination on April 4, 1968. The main demands of the movement were recorded in the civilian Rights Act: Civil Rights Act (1964 and 1968) abolished racial segregation in public places and ensured equality in the acquisition of housing and real estate, Voting Rights Act (1965) prohibited discrimination in electoral law.
American People's History
In the United States, most Indians were murdered, property taken from them (allegedly holy). Penalties for “white collars” due to large taxation fraud are much lower than due to petty thefts or burglaries, typical of poor[7]. Of all countries, the United States has the largest number of prisoners per 10,000 population. Police brutality leads to social disturbances, and due to the force of guards and the non-compliance with their prisoners' rights, their revolts are gradually erupting. In prisons, there are proportionally more colored people than white people, which shows racial socio-economic differences. In 1994, nearly 1/3 of the black men between the ages of 20 and 29 were in prison, on parole, or released on bail, and awaiting trial. The seat of democracy in the US is to be the ultimate Court, while its judges are appointed by the president according to the organization key and approved by the legislature for life. As a result, the ultimate Court stands above legislature and all political authorities.
Howard Zinn in his book United States People's past wrote: "In a society bound by a network of control, both brutal and sophisticated, secret thoughts frequently find expression in art. This was the case with the black community. The blues, although full of pain, hid anger, while jazz, though joyful, foretold a maturing rebellion. They were followed by poesy in which the same thoughts were expressed more openly"[8]. From the beginning of his career Elvis Presley He had respect for African-American performers and their music, which challenged the value of his works. It was widely believed that many white adults did not tolerate Presley for disseminating ‘rock’n’roll’ in which roots were seen in the black community.
Global intervention
One feature of modern democracy is the existence of a "legal state". But Applebaum does not want to see that it is hard to talk of the existence of a "legal state" in relation to the US, since the constitution abolished slavery and for centuries segregated government persisted; since more than 4 100 treaties were signed with the Indians and all of them broke the United States government; and a president without abroad policy control could impose sanctions and destruct full states. US troops are stationed in more than 750 bases and 80 countries, controlling all crucial communication routes. Exchanges and US banks affect planet prices of natural materials and goods. The question is, therefore, whether the United States was a democratic state in general and whether what happens to elections, to the legislative authority, to the will of executive power, wars do not begin in the absence of democracy in the US. These problems in Twilight of Democracy Applebaum can't see.
William Blum He wrote that American politicians usage a narrow definition of democracy, bringing it to free elections all 4 or 5 years and civilian liberties. With minimum freedom, dependent on economical status, everyone is guaranteed the freedom to criticize power and the way society operates "without excessive fear of punishment, but without warrant that this criticism will affect the actual course of events"[9]. Apart from the interest of most of them, there is simply a place and working conditions, standard of living, medical care and insurance, the chance to gain education, food or shelter. They did not care about systematic and regular torture, kidnapping and missing people, the activities of death squads, massacres of peasants, killing political opponents. "However, Washington politicians have long maintained the tradition that they have the unlimited right to spend money on electoral campaigns in another countries (including those that prohibit abroad subsidies) to influence the results of elections"[10]. Blum illustrates his thesis with examples between the end of planet War II and 1998. The list of these countries, as Blum found confirmation in American archives, includes: Philippines (year 1950.), Italy (1948 – years 1970.), Lebanon (year 1950.), Indonesia (1955.), Vietnam (1955), British Guiana / Guyana (1953 – 1964), Japan (1958 – years 1970.), Nepal (1959), Laos (1960), Brazil (1962), Dominican Republic (1962), Guatemala (1963), Bolivia (1966), Chile (1964 – years 1970.), Portugal (74 – 1975), Australia (1974 – 1974), Jamaica (1976), Panama (1984 and 1990), Nicaragua (84 and 1990), Haiti (1987 – 1988), Bulgaria (1990 – 1991), Albania (1991 – 1992), Mongolia (1996), Bosnia (1998). Interventions afraid not only tiny states, but besides the largest state – Russia. In 1996, a group of experienced American consultants stayed in Moscow and secretly supported the run Boris Jelcinto prevent choice Ziuganova Gennadija, Communist organization candidate[11]. Blum's book was published in 2000, but the list of countries in which the United States interfered in the elections could surely be extended to Poland and Ukraine. A number of countries could be added to the list of U.S. interventions where the United States was active in the overthrow of democratically elected governments and where various CIA-supported foundations operate.
Reasons for the increasing Popularity of Authoritarianism
Applebaum most likely agrees with the views cited by himself Karen Stenner (Behavioral economist) who believes that in each country about 1 3rd of citizens have an "authoritarian pedipposition" that favours homogenity and order. Its other is the "Libertarian Predisposition", favouring diversity and diversity. Applebaum forgot to add that even dogs do not have an enmity with cats, everything depends on the views of the owner and how he is raising his dog. But in order to justify the request to be a “sage with a glass” he assumes that both predispositions can be “secret”. It's a small like the search for Satan in a witch's head with Witch Hammer.
Applebaum, possibly referring to the Law and Justice and its supporters, wrote: "Authoritarianism appeals to people who cannot cope with the complexity of the world, and in this instinct there is nothing inherently “left” or “right”. It's antipluralistic. Suspected of another Views - E.K. Allergyly reacts to intense discussion [between who and who? — E.K.]. It does not substance whether his political views arise from Marxism or nationalism. This is simply a thoughtful design, not a set of views”[12]. It does not ask itself: why do people “not cope with the complexity of the world”? possibly individual wants them to “do not cope”? However, it seems that this diagnosis of Applebaum about the ideality of authoritarianism has been unnecessarily narrowed down only to authoritarianism, as it is alternatively typical of its private interests of all careers, which must not be lacking in democratic liberal or neoliberal systems either.
Two sides of the same medal
The feature of the end of democracy and the growth of authoritarianism, according to Applebaum, is what is hard to prove on the 1 hand and why it is even harder to deny that “people admire demagogues” and feel “freer under dictatorial authority”. Moreover, according to her, any adherent to authoritarianism “He wants to weaken the courts to take more power”. According to Applebaum “Authorities request people who will encourage riots or carry out a coup. But they besides request people who usage complicated legal language, who can explain that breaking a constitution or bending a law is simply a appropriate move. They request people to voice regret, manipulate discontent, channel anger and fear, dream visions of another future. They request members of an educated intellectual elite, in another words, those who aid declare war on the remainder of the educated intellectual elite, including their own friends from college, colleagues, friends”[13].
Applebaum deals, as we can see, with his erstwhile colleagues, who of the supporters of neoliberal democracy have turned into supporters of nationalism and authoritarianism. Just as any pretend not to see what is uncomfortable for them, so Applebaum besides does not see that her erstwhile friends from the Law and Justice are the same as her supporters of capitalism and friends of the largest neoliberal state – the United States. He does not want to see that manipulators request not only "authoritarians", but besides bourgeois liberals. Just look at George Friedman’s book Next decade. Where we were and where we were going. It confirms the thesis that both authoritarianism and liberal democracy are just a way of pursuing the interests of private capital and its customers, a strong number of society. Liberal democracy and authoritarianism can so be similar, although they disagree in the scope of democratic freedoms, carried out group interests, a tendency to compromises and ways of combating radical-revolutionary movements, methods of combating parliamentary opposition and protests of dissatisfied folk masses. Liberal democracy and authoritarianism are 2 sides of 1 process – maintaining the regulation of capital and exploiting the majority by a vast minority.
Towards dictatorship
It is very crucial for Applebaum to argue democracy to just authoritarianism. This is not the only other of democracy. past shows that dictatorship was the other of liberal democracy. possibly writing about the other of democracy – authoritarianism, Applebaum did not want to bring associations to the reader with the dictatorship of the proletariat, which declared itself a dictatorship in the interests of the working class, a majority of the society. possibly she wanted to avoid association with a dictator appointed in the ancient Roman republic during a time of danger. And possibly she wanted to avoid showing the evolution of democracy towards dictatorship. Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Francisco Franco is Augusto PinochetaWhich are besides the other of her.
Applebaum wrote as if the destiny of democracy had already been determined. She felt that the propaganda of the current post-democratic order had no thought of the past political leaders and they originated "and from the right and the left" (whatever that means). However, this can only be seen as evidence of the ideological crisis experienced by capital spokesmen and moral deprivation, erstwhile no "values" matter, but only private interests and benefits. Applebaum so wrote that "the vulnerability to authoritarianism is undoubtedly seen by campus agitators of the far left who would like to dictate to professors what they can teach and what students can say"[14], as if she wanted to convince the reader that the unusual is simply a “levice” and a very mediocre program – “dicting professors”. The left, according to her, grows stronger and is loud, but the right sits in ruling coalitions, shows the way to political parties. Today's left and right do not match the 1 from the interwar period or the 1 after planet War II. In her opinion, post-war British Tories, American Republicans, German Christian Democrats and French Gaullists, although they come from different traditions, they are "Dedicated not only to typical democracy, but besides to spiritual tolerance, independent justice, freedom of speech and the press, economical integration, global institutions, the transatlantic alliance and the political thought of the West"[15]. We see that this old right ignores the problem of various forms of private ownership of capital, only so that the public debate does not have any discussion. The interests of private capital so stay inviolable in this "post-democratic" order, only the way they are implemented is debated. Applebaum has been a strong supporter of globalisation and a consistent anti-communist in fresh decades. That is why she fell into contradiction, due to the fact that on the 1 hand she accused the modern fresh right of nationalist deficiency of idealism (which is in itself a contradiction), and on the another hand she accused her of her relation with communism. “Although the fresh right hates this term, closer to the Bolsheviks than Burke: he wants to overthrow, bypass, undermine the current institutions to destruct what exists today”[16]. Searching for Bolsheviks where they are not, it is most likely a fresh “play” of the far right in “catching a bunny” or searching for “hidden predispositions”...
Mythical ‘bolsheviks’
However, the question arises: for what intent and for whose interests the nationalist right wishes "object, bypass, undermine existing institutions"? Is it pursuing the same or akin goals as “bolsheviks? In order to be strict, however, the Bolsheviks did not break down for the storm itself, but were forced to go against the political order of the emerging liberal democracy in order to deal with the basic socio-economic and political problems encountered, the problem of transformation of production relations and the change in social structure. It should be stressed that in this limitation Applebaum rightly points to deep ideological divisions in the bosom of the present right, which paralyzes its ability to address socio-economic problems and to destruct the crisis of democratic institutions. “Some are cynics who manipulate, adopt extremist and authoritarian language due to the fact that it carries power or fame to them. Others strike apocalyptic speech due to the fact that they are convinced that society has failed and that they request to be transformed, despite the possible consequences. any are profoundly religious. Others enjoy chaos, want to spread it, due to the fact that it is to be an introduction to any fresh order. Everyone wants to redefine the identity of their peoples, rewrite the social agreement, and sometimes change the principles of democracy, so that they never lose power.”[17]. This chaos truly serves something, but Applebaum rejects the Bolshevik criticism of liberal and bourgeois democracy. Applebaum fails to see that what it calls a crisis of democracy is the creation of a political strategy akin to that in its home country, where power can be gained by a organization that does not win a majority in elections, where it is possible to ignore electoral protests, where people who question the legitimacy of elections can be disconnected from the Internet. Elections are in specified a reality a form of prolonged endurance in power and pacification of possible social protests. akin processes take place in Poland – the PiS party, which did not win the majority of qualified voters in 2015, could gain parliamentary power and regulation without paying attention to the opinion of the majority of the population.
Applebaum indicates that the modern non-liberal monopartisan state can function “In conjunction with various ideologies”. This may mean that, in her view, in the strategy of the hegemonic party, as part of pluralism, the state can represent the interests of antagonistic social classes. This view may seem only right, that the interests of 1 class or the individual interests of the state apparatus itself may be the basis of authoritarianism. all authoritative can then for his individual career preach officially only accepted views and privately at home others. Only that is the correct view of Applebaum that "in Greece, past is rolling. There's liberal democracy now. It could be followed by oligarchy, then liberal democracy again. Then there may be any abroad intervention, an effort to overthrow, a civilian war, a dictatorship, an oligarchy again. That is due to the fact that it has always been, since the Republic of Athens.”[18]. On the next page, developing this thought, he writes: "since people have rejected aristocracy, no longer believing in leadership due by birth and in divine support for the ruling class, there never ends a dispute over who has the right to rule—who is the elite"[19].
But there is any uncertainty – and for whom in democracy are these discussions about the elite needed? After all, after changing the essence of production relations, specified ideological changes will no longer be possible. The state cannot follow different ideologies at the same time, due to the fact that it would not be able to guarantee its continuity and consistency between the different directions of its interior and abroad policies. erstwhile a fundamental ideological direction is being pursued, or as it is now said, a single strategy of values is being maintained, state forms can change without threatening the main socio-economic and political objectives. Applebaum forgets that the change in the form of democracy, or even the overthrow of democracy in ancient Athens, did not origin the abolition of slavery and discrimination against women in public life.
The marketplace of Democracy
Applebaum rightly presented the ongoing process of marketing democracy. It is not only the request to get immense funds for election campaigns, which is mainly addressed by organization leaders in the US. The point is that ways of examining consumer needs, analysing the dependency of request and supply, the functioning of goods advertising have been transferred to a survey of socio-political, economical and ideological views that function in peculiar social groups and in circumstantial territories. The political agenda is based on the results of a survey of what people want to hear. It showed this process on the example of the Spanish national-conservative Vox organization formed in 2013. This organization opposed the separatist tendencies in Spain. She advocated the preservation of the integrated state structure, opposes feminism and LGBT movement, supports the conflict to strengthen the authority of the monarchy, is in favour of maintaining Catholic symbolism in public places. This organization has achieved electoral successes in the short word and its representatives are in the national and European Parliament. Applebaum came to the conclusion that the program of this organization was created as a model of the activities of modern evidence companies, which before the formation of music pop bands, "they conduct marketplace research, choice faces matching their results, and then direct advertising to the most favoured demographic group. The fresh political parties are doing the same today: you combine different cases, repack them and put them on the marketplace utilizing precisely the same target(based on the same marketplace research) as elsewhere. Vox's program consisted of remnants, cases that another parties ignored or ignored, specified as opposition to Catalan or Basque separatistism, opposition to single-sex marriages, opposition to feminism, opposition to immigration (especially Muslims), anger over corruption, boredom with mainstream politics”[20]. In its assessment of this procedure "The offer was not ideology, but an identity carefully prepared, comfortably packaged for easier consumption, so prepared that it could easy be unleashed by an online campaign"[21]. So the client bought not what he actually needed, but what he was offered. However, 1 can uncertainty whether the "identity" is detached from the "ideology" – ideology is more or little clearly contained in the identity, in the last instance it is hard to imagine ideology without identity, after all, ideology acts as an integrated community of interests.
The fresh European right refers to its traditions. The French right reaches with its roots to the Vichy era, Italian to the ideology of Benit Mussolini, and Polish organization Law and Justice to fight anti-communist “soldiers cursed” and Smolensk catastrophe, and Ukraine to cooperate with Nazis Stepana Bandery. This does not hinder right-wings from different countries from working together internationally. According to Applebaum, ideologists of these movements found ideas around which they can unite their activities: opposition to immigration, especially Muslim; promotion of the spiritual imagination of the world; opposition to the European Union and global institutions; opposition to single-sex marriages. She just forgot to add that they are most closely linked by capital interests and coordination from 1 centre. Applebaum fails to see that modern right-wing parties besides combine ideas that they do not want to talk openly about in their programs. It is supported by privatised media, which is dependent on capital and paid advertising.
Pro-American Brexit
Applebaum believed in the spread of democracy and the free marketplace in Europe, and the European Union regarded as a large part the creation of British diplomacy and the world's most accurate free trade agreement. Britain has gained a large deal from membership in the European Union. That is most likely why she has made many critical opinions about leaving the UK Union. In fresh months, however, it has turned out that Britain will feel the crisis in 2022 much more than another countries, which was 1 of the main reasons for the resignation of her husband's colleague's government – Prime Minister Boris Johnson.. UK agriculture employed only 0.6% of the population, over 50% of agricultural land was pastures and meadows, individual farms have the largest area and received EUR 4 billion of subsidies from the European Union.
Before brexit in the UK, Applebaum said that there was a ‘restoratory nostalgia’, along with conspiracy theories: “Our nation is no longer great, due to the fact that individual has attacked us, due to the fact that individual harms us, due to the fact that individual has depleted our forces. individual – immigrants, foreigners, elites, the European Union – perverted the course of past and reduced our nation to the shadow of erstwhile glory. We have been taken from the core of our existence and replaced with something inexpensive and artificial.”[22]. The top contribution to the probrexit campaign, according to the author Twilight of DemocracyThe British Conservatives brought in. However, this did not have much to do with conventional distance and writing of pamphlets. Characterizing this run and setting another example for the creation of democracy, Applebaum writes: “Probexit run meant the end of this concept and the coming of something new. Vote Leave run creators [UK membership run — E.K.] They cheated, violated electoral laws to spend more money on online ads aimed at circumstantial groups of voters. Animal lovers received photos of Spanish corrida, tea gourmets pictures on which the EU flag-marked hand reaches for a British cup, signed: “The European Union wants to destruct the afternoon tea”. The exit run utilized data stolen by Cambridge Analitica to mark advertising. [...] The atmosphere of this run was worse than any erstwhile one. At its very summit, a associate Joe Cox She was murdered by a man convinced that brexit would become liberation and stay in the Union will mean that England will destruct hordes of dark-skinned foreigners”[23]. Applebaum considers that the brexit supporters were financially supported by Russia to weaken the European Union, but did not see erstwhile efforts to do the same on the part of the US, which surely proved much more aid and acted with more freedom. The Brexits announced that only in this way could democracy and the erstwhile size of Britain be rebuilt, but they fell, as if by chance, into an even greater dependence on the US.
The Twilight of Democracy?
When British judges ruled in 2016 that Parliament had to give its consent to leave the European Union, the tabloid press, which never liked democratic institutions, began a run to slander individual judges. Applebaum released how “Daily Mail”, led by brexit supporters, posted photos of 3 judges with a signature on the cover “enemies of the people”. "This message had nothing to do with brexit. On the contrary, it was a confirmation of Parliament's sovereignty. [...] There were attacks not only on the judiciary, but besides on another respectable British institutions. The intent of this attack was later the home of Lords – the header “destroy saboteurs” was on the front page of the regular Mail.”[24].
Example of France on the case Alfred Dreyfus, large Britain, Poland, Russia, Hungary and another countries, has led Applebaum to the sad conclusion that possibly the dusk of democracy is taking place. The present right hand consciously causes chaos, but contrary to appearances it retains full control of the crisis situation. It may be assumed that those who control the capital and ideological apparatus of a state whose erstwhile taxation restrictions on wealth have begun to interfere with it. due to their vast resources, they are able to control developments in the desired direction. The propaganda run on brexit began with the question of paying abroad immigrants allowances for their children outside the country, as was the case for British workers. In this way, the atmosphere of nationalism and intolerance and rational arguments of supporters remaining in the Union were not able to reverse events.
Cause for globalisation
Anne Applebaum is amazed by the improvement of the situation, the decay of old social circles that believed in the bright future of liberal democracy and globalisation. She is terrified of the improvement of right-wing nationalist movements that appear to be increasing – contrary to the apparent and supported trend – against globalisation. It sees the affirmative globalisation itself and advocates it wholeheartedly. However, it does not analyse the socio-economic and political contradictions of globalisation.
Its methodological assumptions make it impossible to see that what it criticises is the consequence of phenomena and processes inherently accompanying globalisation. In fact nationalism and authoritarianism is the second organization to globalisation and the consequence to increasing social inequalities and contradictions. The omission by Applebaum of the problems of mediocre people, or those affected by the 2008-2009 economical crisis and the 2015-2016 exile crisis, is so not accidental. It remains a literary typical of those socio-economic and political forces who are curious in the advancement of globalisation, as it brings the top benefits.
The consequence of any societies to changes related to globalisation – to unification of production, consumption and culture, and tv and movie transmission, to occidentalisation, to imposing languages on local peoples and nationalities, to changes in the social structure, to fast degradation or unexplained advancement of many social groups, to fast ownership transformations, to throw out beyond social brackets many not integrated into the global system, to the improvement of transnational and supra-local bureaucracy, to the failure of landmarks in the value system, to widen the distance between the centre and the periphery, to bankruptcy of decolonization, to changes in prices and interest rates caused by distant economical facts, to break down the force of global customs, to among another things the improvement of the feeling of individual states and nations being political, while being neither left nor left-wing, nor right-wing in their prosperity, to revive conventional territorial conflicts, to stimulate the pursuit of separatistism and regionalism, and rebellion, to make the improvement of environmental movements which they want to be political, while not being left-right, nor right-right, to the revolution, to the revolution of the political generation of the long-terming revolution of political revolution, replaces, and revolution of Developing centrifugal movements are a consequence to organization centralization and globalisation, to threats from the outside planet that hang over individual countries and local communities. Right-wing populism fears disgruntled working masses, so it tries to bribe them with insignificant financial additives and to indicate to them objectives that will not have much effect on their actual position.
Risk capital
Modern nationalism without globalisation and free trade does not exist, and this Applebaum does not understand. Nor does he realize that large-scale racial prejudices in the United States stem from the interests of capital, which aims to reduce the value of a large part of the workforce and to put force on those working for wage cuts. Therefore, Applebaum deceives the reader by seeking comfort from ancient philosophers that they besides pointed to threats brought by democracy in the form of anarchy and tyranny. But 1 has nothing to do with the other. Democracy itself is not a threat, but private ownership of capital and competition between its groups. Applebaum ignores the key function in the globalization of the United States, whose non-democratic government is straight liable for the collapse of liberal democracy in many countries of the world, for the spread of dangerous nationalism, spiritual fundamentalism and authoritarianism.
Dr Edward Karolczuk
[1] Anne Applebaum, The twilight of democracy. The deceptive impulse of authoritarianism, Agora Publishing House, Warsaw 2020, pp. 23-24.
[2] Ibid. pp. 58-59.
[3] The president Next decade. Where were we going?, Literary Publishing House, Kraków 2012, p. 24.
[4] Ibid. p. 47.
[5] Ibid. p. 49.
[6] The legal basis for Jim Crow's law was the ruling of the ultimate Court (1896), which — recognizing that the XIII and XIV amendments to the Constitution, abolishing slavery and strengthening equality between races, did not prohibit their segregation — introduced the rule of "equal but separate". The name of the law comes from the contemptible nickname of a Negro – Jim Crow.
[7] Howard Zinn, People's past of the United States. From 1492 to today, Wydawnictwo Krytyki Politycznyj, Warszawa 2016, pp. 665-666.
[8] Ibid., Warsaw 2016, pp. 574-575.
[9] William Blum, A country of evil, a guide to a dark empire, Wydawnictwo „Reflexje”, Warszawa 2003, p. 219.
[10] Ibid. p. 217.
[11] Wider: Ibid. pp. 220-230.
[12] Anne Applebaum, The twilight of democracy... jw. p. 27.
[13] Ibid., pp. 27-28.
[14] Ibid. p. 29.
[15] Ibid. p. 30.
[16] Ibid. p. 31.
[17] Ibid., pp. 31-32.
[18] Ibid. p. 74.
[19] Ibid. p. 75.
[20] Targeting – a process involving the selection of consumers by advertisers to identify the mark group that is most curious in the product being advertised.
[21] Anne Applebaum, The twilight of democracy..., p. 150.
[22] Ibid. p. 93.
[23] Ibid. pp. 109-110.
[24] Ibid. p. 112.
