I keep running into people who feel overwhelmed by so many seemingly unrelated but terrifying things occurring all at once. “How can all this be happening?” they ask.
These things are connected. They are reinforcing each other. As such, they pose a clear challenge to a decent society.
Russian President Vladimir Putin invades Ukraine. Former US president Donald Trump refuses to concede the 2020 election and promotes his “big lie.” Right-wing politicians in the US and Europe inflame white Christian nationalism. Television pundits spur bigotry toward immigrants. Politicians target LGBTQ+ youth.
Powerful men sexually harass and abuse women. Abortion bans harm women unable to obtain safe abortions. Police kill innocent black people with impunity.
CEOs rake in record profits and compensation, but give workers meager wages and fire them for unionizing. The richest men in the world own the most influential media platforms. Billionaires make large campaign donations (read: legal bribes) so lawmakers will not raise their taxes.
What connects these? All are abuses of power. All are occurring at a time when power and wealth are concentrated in few hands.
It is important to see the overall pattern because each of these sorts of abuses encourages other abuses. Stopping them — standing up against all forms of bullying and brutality — is essential to preserving a civil society.
Throughout history, the central struggle of civilization has been against brutality by the powerful. The state of nature is a continuous war in which only the fittest survive — where lives are “nasty, brutish and short,” in the words of the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes.
Without norms, rules and laws preventing the stronger from attacking or oppressing the weaker, none of us is safe. We all live in fear. Even the most powerful live in fear of being attacked or deposed.
Civilization is the opposite of a state of nature. A civil society does not allow the strong to brutalize the weak. The responsibility of all who seek a decent society is to move as far from a state of nature as possible.
Certain inequalities of power are expected, even in a civil society. Some people are bigger and stronger than others. Some are quicker of mind and body. Some have more forceful personalities. Some have fewer scruples.
Some inequalities of income and wealth might be necessary to encourage hard work and inventiveness, from which everyone benefits.
When inequalities become too wide, they invite abuses. Such abuses invite further abuses until society degenerates into a Hobbesian survival of the most powerful. An entire society — even the world — can descend into chaos.
Every time the stronger bully the weaker, the social fabric is tested. If bullying is not contained, the fabric unwinds.
Some posit a moral equivalence between those who seek social justice and those who want to protect individual liberty, between “left” and “right.”
There is no moral equivalence between bullies and the bullied, between tyranny and democracy, between brutality and decency — no “balance” between social justice and individual liberty.
No individual can be free in a society devoid of justice. There can be no liberty where brutality reigns.
The struggle for social justice is the most basic struggle of all because it defines how far a civilization has come from a Hobbesian survival of the most powerful.
A civil society stops brutality, holds the powerful accountable and protects the vulnerable.
Putin must be stopped. Trump must be held accountable. Right-wing politicians who encourage white Christian nationalism must be condemned and voted out of office. Celebrity pundits who fuel racism and xenophobia must be denounced and defunded.
Powerful men who sexually harass or abuse women must be prosecuted. Women must have safe means of ending pregnancies they do not want. Police who kill innocent black people must be brought to justice.
CEOs who treat their employees badly must be exposed and penalized. Billionaires who bribe lawmakers to cut their taxes or exempt them from regulations must be sanctioned, as should lawmakers who accept such bribes.
This is what civilization demands. This is what the struggle is all about. This is why that struggle is so critical.
Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few, The Common Good and The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Immediately after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “Justice Mission” exercise at the end of last year, a question was posed to Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal regarding recent developments involving the exercises around Taiwan, and how he viewed their impact on regional peace and stability. His answer was somewhat perplexing to me as a curious student of Taiwanese affairs. “India closely follows developments across the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, adding: “We have an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our significant trade, economic, people-to-people, and maritime interests. We urge all concerned
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
RSS