SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The U.S.'s first experience with a modern autocrat looks likely to end in a chaotic implosion," Winters writes. (Photo: Ted Eytan/Flickr/cc)
Those of us constantly assessing the national political scene could be forgiven for looking at the coming year with more than a bit of trepidation. True, new Democratic control of the House of Representatives means we might get the investigations of President Trump that Republicans have refused to do.
And as a fairly bleak 2018 comes to a close, we're getting a taste of what might be more to come: a continuing shutdown of the federal government over funding for a border wall, simmering international crises that threaten to drag in the U.S. and an administration untested by a major crisis, and partisan monkey business in states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina, where Republicans are moving to strip power from offices won by incoming Democrats.
The big unknown is special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of the Trump campaign, administration, and businesses and their connections to Russia--and how the president might react to each new drip of information to trickle out of the locked grand jury courtrooms.
So yes, it could be a very bad year.
But wait.
We could choose to look at the coming year not as a pot of misery getting ready to boil over. With the right attitude, you might see--if you squint--that the proverbial glass is half-full of hope. Some things are going in the right direction.
These past two years have energized a wide swath of sensible people who have come to realize that apathy is unacceptable in the face of an administration determined to corrupt the rule of law and strip vulnerable populations of their rights. That energy has borne fruit: a historic midterm transfer of power in the House of Representatives, with 40 seats changing from Republican to Democrat. A similar upheaval is taking place at the state level, with seven governorships and five legislative chambers also going blue.
That awakened activism isn't going away, especially since the 2020 presidential election is going to get started next summer.
While it is true that Trump's core supporters haven't wavered in their adulation, much of that support is reinforced by a steady media diet that starts at Fox News and goes further right. But reality has a way of penetrating even the most hermetically sealed of information bubbles. Even Trump's cheerleaders on the morning Fox and Friends show called him out loudly in a few cases, most recently for his announcement that we were pulling troops from Syria without making contingency plans for an orderly withdrawal--or even notifying our allies who will be left without support.
There were quieter successes, too, that bode well for the year in front of us. Many of those were driven in large part by a court system that has resisted many attempts to corrupt justice. A federal judge in December upheld Maine's ranked-choice elections. That points the way to fairer elections, ensuring that third-party votes don't become spoilers. The judge ruled that states have wide leeway to interpret the Constitution, and ranked-choice voting falls squarely within that purview. Some states already are following Maine's example: Utah plans to use ranked-choice voting in local elections in 2019.
The same goes for redistricting, as more states look at the dysfunction created by blatant partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina and elsewhere and decide to give the task to some sort of independent body. Also in the Tarheel State, a federal judge blocked the state's attempt to purge voters from the rolls en masse through a loophole in the law.
And speaking of voting rights: Though the administration uses the unsubstantiated shibboleth of voter fraud to justify preemptively stripping poor people and people of color of the vote, and states impose onerous ID requirements that make it hard for them to register, those have had the opposite effect, spurring people to get even more involved in voter registration.
One of the most blatant attempts at vote suppression was a North Dakota law passed late in the midterm election cycle that required people registering to vote to have a street address, seemingly tailor-made to disenfranchise the state's sizable Native American communities. It backfired. Tribes worked to ensure that those living even on the remotest parts of reservations would be able to register to vote. They succeeded in force, by some estimates setting voter participation records in the state.
And so we begin the new year with greater resolve and tools to safeguard our democracy.
Our ongoing humanitarian crisis on the Mexico border continues. Two children died in U.S. custody. The courts have stepped in, however, and are starting to reject some of the administration's attempts to keep refugees out. In November, a federal judge rejected a plan that would have prevented people who entered the country illegally from seeking asylum. In December, yet another judge blocked the administration from denying asylum to people in the migrant caravan fleeing domestic abuse or gang violence in their home countries.
These judges are not just holding back the tide of autocracy, but they're advancing the cause of justice one small court ruling at a time.
For so many reasons--which I won't list here because this is a glass-half-full uplifting look at the year ahead, after all--the U.S.'s first experience with a modern autocrat looks likely to end in a chaotic implosion. But the Trump years have demonstrated that, while our democracy is a fragile thing that needs the force of law and the will of the people to protect it, Americans have been rising to and meeting that challenge.
Some of our leaders in Washington, D.C., are starting to recognize that.
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Those of us constantly assessing the national political scene could be forgiven for looking at the coming year with more than a bit of trepidation. True, new Democratic control of the House of Representatives means we might get the investigations of President Trump that Republicans have refused to do.
And as a fairly bleak 2018 comes to a close, we're getting a taste of what might be more to come: a continuing shutdown of the federal government over funding for a border wall, simmering international crises that threaten to drag in the U.S. and an administration untested by a major crisis, and partisan monkey business in states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina, where Republicans are moving to strip power from offices won by incoming Democrats.
The big unknown is special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of the Trump campaign, administration, and businesses and their connections to Russia--and how the president might react to each new drip of information to trickle out of the locked grand jury courtrooms.
So yes, it could be a very bad year.
But wait.
We could choose to look at the coming year not as a pot of misery getting ready to boil over. With the right attitude, you might see--if you squint--that the proverbial glass is half-full of hope. Some things are going in the right direction.
These past two years have energized a wide swath of sensible people who have come to realize that apathy is unacceptable in the face of an administration determined to corrupt the rule of law and strip vulnerable populations of their rights. That energy has borne fruit: a historic midterm transfer of power in the House of Representatives, with 40 seats changing from Republican to Democrat. A similar upheaval is taking place at the state level, with seven governorships and five legislative chambers also going blue.
That awakened activism isn't going away, especially since the 2020 presidential election is going to get started next summer.
While it is true that Trump's core supporters haven't wavered in their adulation, much of that support is reinforced by a steady media diet that starts at Fox News and goes further right. But reality has a way of penetrating even the most hermetically sealed of information bubbles. Even Trump's cheerleaders on the morning Fox and Friends show called him out loudly in a few cases, most recently for his announcement that we were pulling troops from Syria without making contingency plans for an orderly withdrawal--or even notifying our allies who will be left without support.
There were quieter successes, too, that bode well for the year in front of us. Many of those were driven in large part by a court system that has resisted many attempts to corrupt justice. A federal judge in December upheld Maine's ranked-choice elections. That points the way to fairer elections, ensuring that third-party votes don't become spoilers. The judge ruled that states have wide leeway to interpret the Constitution, and ranked-choice voting falls squarely within that purview. Some states already are following Maine's example: Utah plans to use ranked-choice voting in local elections in 2019.
The same goes for redistricting, as more states look at the dysfunction created by blatant partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina and elsewhere and decide to give the task to some sort of independent body. Also in the Tarheel State, a federal judge blocked the state's attempt to purge voters from the rolls en masse through a loophole in the law.
And speaking of voting rights: Though the administration uses the unsubstantiated shibboleth of voter fraud to justify preemptively stripping poor people and people of color of the vote, and states impose onerous ID requirements that make it hard for them to register, those have had the opposite effect, spurring people to get even more involved in voter registration.
One of the most blatant attempts at vote suppression was a North Dakota law passed late in the midterm election cycle that required people registering to vote to have a street address, seemingly tailor-made to disenfranchise the state's sizable Native American communities. It backfired. Tribes worked to ensure that those living even on the remotest parts of reservations would be able to register to vote. They succeeded in force, by some estimates setting voter participation records in the state.
And so we begin the new year with greater resolve and tools to safeguard our democracy.
Our ongoing humanitarian crisis on the Mexico border continues. Two children died in U.S. custody. The courts have stepped in, however, and are starting to reject some of the administration's attempts to keep refugees out. In November, a federal judge rejected a plan that would have prevented people who entered the country illegally from seeking asylum. In December, yet another judge blocked the administration from denying asylum to people in the migrant caravan fleeing domestic abuse or gang violence in their home countries.
These judges are not just holding back the tide of autocracy, but they're advancing the cause of justice one small court ruling at a time.
For so many reasons--which I won't list here because this is a glass-half-full uplifting look at the year ahead, after all--the U.S.'s first experience with a modern autocrat looks likely to end in a chaotic implosion. But the Trump years have demonstrated that, while our democracy is a fragile thing that needs the force of law and the will of the people to protect it, Americans have been rising to and meeting that challenge.
Some of our leaders in Washington, D.C., are starting to recognize that.
Those of us constantly assessing the national political scene could be forgiven for looking at the coming year with more than a bit of trepidation. True, new Democratic control of the House of Representatives means we might get the investigations of President Trump that Republicans have refused to do.
And as a fairly bleak 2018 comes to a close, we're getting a taste of what might be more to come: a continuing shutdown of the federal government over funding for a border wall, simmering international crises that threaten to drag in the U.S. and an administration untested by a major crisis, and partisan monkey business in states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina, where Republicans are moving to strip power from offices won by incoming Democrats.
The big unknown is special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of the Trump campaign, administration, and businesses and their connections to Russia--and how the president might react to each new drip of information to trickle out of the locked grand jury courtrooms.
So yes, it could be a very bad year.
But wait.
We could choose to look at the coming year not as a pot of misery getting ready to boil over. With the right attitude, you might see--if you squint--that the proverbial glass is half-full of hope. Some things are going in the right direction.
These past two years have energized a wide swath of sensible people who have come to realize that apathy is unacceptable in the face of an administration determined to corrupt the rule of law and strip vulnerable populations of their rights. That energy has borne fruit: a historic midterm transfer of power in the House of Representatives, with 40 seats changing from Republican to Democrat. A similar upheaval is taking place at the state level, with seven governorships and five legislative chambers also going blue.
That awakened activism isn't going away, especially since the 2020 presidential election is going to get started next summer.
While it is true that Trump's core supporters haven't wavered in their adulation, much of that support is reinforced by a steady media diet that starts at Fox News and goes further right. But reality has a way of penetrating even the most hermetically sealed of information bubbles. Even Trump's cheerleaders on the morning Fox and Friends show called him out loudly in a few cases, most recently for his announcement that we were pulling troops from Syria without making contingency plans for an orderly withdrawal--or even notifying our allies who will be left without support.
There were quieter successes, too, that bode well for the year in front of us. Many of those were driven in large part by a court system that has resisted many attempts to corrupt justice. A federal judge in December upheld Maine's ranked-choice elections. That points the way to fairer elections, ensuring that third-party votes don't become spoilers. The judge ruled that states have wide leeway to interpret the Constitution, and ranked-choice voting falls squarely within that purview. Some states already are following Maine's example: Utah plans to use ranked-choice voting in local elections in 2019.
The same goes for redistricting, as more states look at the dysfunction created by blatant partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina and elsewhere and decide to give the task to some sort of independent body. Also in the Tarheel State, a federal judge blocked the state's attempt to purge voters from the rolls en masse through a loophole in the law.
And speaking of voting rights: Though the administration uses the unsubstantiated shibboleth of voter fraud to justify preemptively stripping poor people and people of color of the vote, and states impose onerous ID requirements that make it hard for them to register, those have had the opposite effect, spurring people to get even more involved in voter registration.
One of the most blatant attempts at vote suppression was a North Dakota law passed late in the midterm election cycle that required people registering to vote to have a street address, seemingly tailor-made to disenfranchise the state's sizable Native American communities. It backfired. Tribes worked to ensure that those living even on the remotest parts of reservations would be able to register to vote. They succeeded in force, by some estimates setting voter participation records in the state.
And so we begin the new year with greater resolve and tools to safeguard our democracy.
Our ongoing humanitarian crisis on the Mexico border continues. Two children died in U.S. custody. The courts have stepped in, however, and are starting to reject some of the administration's attempts to keep refugees out. In November, a federal judge rejected a plan that would have prevented people who entered the country illegally from seeking asylum. In December, yet another judge blocked the administration from denying asylum to people in the migrant caravan fleeing domestic abuse or gang violence in their home countries.
These judges are not just holding back the tide of autocracy, but they're advancing the cause of justice one small court ruling at a time.
For so many reasons--which I won't list here because this is a glass-half-full uplifting look at the year ahead, after all--the U.S.'s first experience with a modern autocrat looks likely to end in a chaotic implosion. But the Trump years have demonstrated that, while our democracy is a fragile thing that needs the force of law and the will of the people to protect it, Americans have been rising to and meeting that challenge.
Some of our leaders in Washington, D.C., are starting to recognize that.
"This massacre and Israel's media blackout strategy, designed to conceal the crimes committed by its army for more than 21 months in the besieged and starving Palestinian enclave, must be stopped immediately."
The international advocacy group Reporters Without Borders on Monday called on the United Nations Security Council to convene an emergency meeting following the massacre of six Palestinian media professionals in an Israeli strike on the Gaza Strip.
Al Jazeera reporters Anas al-Sharif and Mohammed Qreiqeh, camera operators Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal, and Moamen Aliwa, and independent journalist Mohammed al-Khaldi were killed Sunday in a targeted Israel Defense Forces (IDF) strike on their tent outside al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.
The IDF claimed that al-Sharif—one of the most prominent Palestinian journalists—"was the head of a Hamas terrorist cell," repeating an allegation first made last year. However, independent assessments by United Nations experts, the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) concluded that Israel's allegations were unsubstantiated.
Investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill warned last year that the IDF's portrayal of al-Sharif and other Palestinian journalists as Hamas members was "an assassination threat and an attempt to preemptively justify their murder" for showing the world the genocidal realities of Israel's U.S.-backed war.
"Tonight Israel murdered the bravest journalistic hero in Gaza, Anas al-Sharif," Scahill said Sunday on social media. "For nearly two straight years, he documented the genocide of his people with courage and principle. Israel put him on a hit list because of his voice. Shame on this world and all who were silent."
Al Jazeera condemned Sunday's massacre as "a desperate attempt to silence the voices exposing the impending seizure and occupation of Gaza."
RSF issued a statement accusing the IDF of killing the six men "without providing solid evidence" of Hamas affiliation, a "disgraceful tactic" that is "repeatedly used against journalists to cover up war crimes."
The Paris-based nonprofit noted that Israeli forces have "already killed more than 200 media professionals"—including at least 19 Al Jazeera workers and freelancers—since the IDF began its annihilation and siege of Gaza in retaliation for the October 7, 2023 attack led by Hamas.
These include Al Jazeera reporter Ismail al-Ghoul and photographer Rami al-Rifi, who were killed in a targeted strike on the al-Shati refugee camp in July 2024 following an IDF smear campaign alleging without proof that al-Ghoul took part in the October 7 attack. The IDF claimed that al-Ghoul received Hamas military training at a time when he would have been just 10 years old.
"RSF strongly condemns the killing of six media professionals by the Israeli army, once again carried out under the guise of terrorism charges against a journalist," RSF director general Thibaut Bruttin said in a statement. "One of the most famous journalists in the Gaza Strip, Anas al-Sharif, was among those killed."
"This massacre and Israel's media blackout strategy, designed to conceal the crimes committed by its army for more than 21 months in the besieged and starving Palestinian enclave, must be stopped immediately," Bruttin continued. "The international community can no longer turn a blind eye and must react and put an end to this impunity."
"RSF calls on the U.N. Security Council to meet urgently on the basis of Resolution 2222 of 2015 on the protection of journalists in times of armed conflict in order to stop this carnage," he added.
Israel's latest killing of media professionals sparked international condemnation. On Monday, Stéphane Dujarric, a spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, called for an investigation into the massacre, saying that "journalists and media workers must be respected, they must be protected and they must be allowed to carry out their work freely, free from fear and free from harassment."
Recognizing the possibility that he would become one of the more than 61,500 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in Gaza since October 2023, al-Sharif, like many Palestinian journalists, prepared a statement to be published in the event of his death.
"This is my will and my final message. If these words reach you, know that Israel has succeeded in killing me and silencing my voice," he wrote. "I urge you not to let chains silence you, nor borders restrain you. Be bridges toward the liberation of the land and its people, until the sun of dignity and freedom rises over our stolen homeland."
"Make my blood a light that illuminates the path of freedom for my people and my family," al-Sharif added.
Since October 2023, RSF has filed four complaints with the International Criminal Court—which last year issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes—requesting investigations into IDF killings of journalists in Gaza and accusing Israel of a deliberate "eradication of the Palestinian media."
The six journalists' killings came as Israeli forces prepared to ramp up the Gaza invasion with the stated goal of occupying the entire coastal enclave and ethnically cleansing much of its Palestinian population.
The Gaza Health Ministry said Monday afternoon that at least 69 Palestinians, including at least 10 children and 29 aid-seekers, were killed in the past 24 hours. An IDF strike on Gaza City reportedly killed nine people, including six children. Five more Palestinians also reportedly died of starvation in a burgeoning famine that officials say has claimed at least 222 lives, including 101 children.
"The Trump-Vance administration is refusing to hand over documents that could show their culpability in hiding international human civil rights abuses," says the president of Democracy Forward.
A coalition of LGBTQ+ and human rights organizations filed a lawsuit Monday against the U.S. Department of State over its refusal to release congressionally mandated reports on international human rights abuses.
The Council for Global Equality (CGE) has accused the administration of a "cover-up of a cover-up" to keep the reports buried.
Each year, the department is required to report on the practices of other countries concerning individual, civil, political, and worker rights protected under international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Governments and international groups have long cited these surveys as one of the most comprehensive and authoritative sources on the state of human rights, informing policy surrounding foreign aid and asylum.
The Foreign Assistance Act requires that these reports be sent to Congress by February 25 each year, and they are typically released in March or April. But nearly six months later, the Trump administration has sent nothing for the calendar year 2024.
Meanwhile, NPR reported in April on a State Department memo requiring employees to "streamline" the reports by omitting many of the most common human rights violations:
The reports... will no longer call governments out for such things as denying freedom of movement and peaceful assembly. They won't condemn retaining political prisoners without due process or restrictions on "free and fair elections."
Forcibly returning a refugee or asylum-seeker to a home country where they may face torture or persecution will no longer be highlighted, nor will serious harassment of human rights organizations...
...reports of violence and discrimination against LGBTQ+ people will be removed, along with all references to [diversity, equity, and inclusion] (DEI).
Among other topics ordered to be struck from the reports: involuntary or coercive medical or psychological practices, arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, serious restrictions to internet freedom, extensive gender-based violence, and violence or threats of violence targeting people with disabilities.
Last week, The Washington Post obtained leaked copies of the department's reports on nations favored by the Trump administration—El Salvador, Russia, and Israel. It found that they were "significantly shorter" than the reports released by the Biden administration and that they struck references to widely documented human rights abuses in these countries.
In the case of El Salvador, where the administration earlier this year began shipping immigrants deported from the United States, the department's report stated that were "no credible reports of significant human rights abuses" there, even though such abuses—including torture, physical violence, and deprivation have been widely reported, including by Trump's own deportees.
Human rights violations against LGBTQ+ people were deleted from the State Department's report on Russia, while the report on Israel deleted references to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's corruption trial and to his government's threats to the country's independent judiciary.
"Secretary Rubio's overtly political rewriting of the human rights reports is a dramatic departure from even his own past commitment to protecting the fundamental human rights of LGBTQI+ people," said Keifer Buckingham, the Council for Global Equality's managing director. "Strategic omission of these abuses is also directly in contravention to Congress's requirement of a 'full and complete report' regarding the status of internationally recognized human rights."
In June, the CGE sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the State Department calling for all communications related to these decisions to be made public. The department acknowledged the request but refused to turn over any documents.
Now CGE has turned to the courts. On Monday, the legal nonprofit Democracy Forward filed a complaint on CGE's behalf in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that the department had violated its duties under FOIA to turn over relevant documents in a timely manner.
"The Trump-Vance administration is refusing to hand over documents that could show their culpability in hiding international human civil rights abuses," said Skye Perryman, Democracy Forward's president and CEO.
"The world is watching the United States. We cannot risk a cover-up on top of a cover-up," Perryman continued. "If this administration is omitting or delaying the release of information about human rights abuses to gain favor with other countries, it is a shameful statement of the gross immorality of this administration."
"Our elections should belong to us, not to corporations owned or influenced by foreign governments whose interests may not align with our own," said the head of the committee behind the measure.
The Associated Press reported Monday that a federal appeals court recently blocked Maine from enforcing a ban on foreign interference in elections that the state's voters passed in 2023.
After Hydro-Quebec spent millions of dollars on a referendum, 86% of Mainers voted for Question 2, which would block foreign governments and companies with 5% or more foreign government ownership from donating to state referendums.
Then, the Maine Association of Broadcasters, Maine Press Association, Central Maine Power, and Versant Power sued to block the ballot initiative. According to the AP, last month, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston affirmed a lower-court ruling that the measure likely violates the First Amendment to the federal Constitution.
Judge Lara Montecalvo wrote that "the prohibition is overly broad, silencing U.S. corporations based on the mere possibility that foreign shareholders might try to influence its decisions on political speech, even where those foreign shareholders may be passive owners that exercise no influence or control over the corporation's political spending."
As the AP detailed:
The matter was sent back to the lower court, where it will proceed, and there has been no substantive movement on it in recent weeks, said Danna Hayes, a spokesperson for the Maine attorney general's office, on Monday. The law is on the state's books, but the state cannot enforce it while legal challenges are still pending, Hayes said.
Just months before voters approved Question 2, Democratic Gov. Janet Mills vetoed the ban, citing fears that it could silence "legitimate voices, including Maine-based businesses." She previously vetoed a similar measure in 2021.
Still, supporters of the ballot initiative continue to fight for it. Rick Bennett, chair of Protect Maine Elections, the committee formed to support Question 2, said in a statement that "Mainers spoke with one voice: Our elections should belong to us, not to corporations owned or influenced by foreign governments whose interests may not align with our own."
A year after Maine voters approved that foreign election interference law, they also overwhelmingly backed a ballot measure to restrict super political action committees (PACs). U.S. Magistrate Judge Karen Frink Wolf blocked that measure, Question 1, last month.
"We think ultimately the court of appeals is going to reverse this decision because it's grounded in a misunderstanding of what the Supreme Court has said," Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard professor and founder of the nonprofit Equal Citizens that helped put Question 1 on the ballot, told News Center Maine in July. "We are exhausted, all of us, especially people in Maine, with the enormous influence money has in our politics, and we want to do something about it."