Authoritarians cannot rise to power "unaided". Should our outrage at increasing repression be directed elsewhere therefore?
Are our societal gatekeepers "fit for purpose"?
Everyone is up in arms today about the behaviour and belligerence of Donald Trump. Forget (for now) the fact that the United States has always engaged in such belligerent imperialistic behaviour, the primary difference today being the brashness and uncouthness of the Trump administration (as elucidated by the recent private message from Emmanuel Macron to Donald Trump). So our anger, anger at the present decadence within our world, should perhaps be directed elsewhere, to those “independent” agencies whose original purpose was to call out (and temper) such international and domestic malfeasance.
Notable recent examples of compromised “independent” gatekeeper agencies are 1. Gallup who after 88 years suddenly announce its intention to stop tracking US presidential approval ratings; 2. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) makes the “sudden” decision to discontinue its “impunity index”, the most plausible reason for such a decision perhaps being that Israel will -- for the foreseeable future -- head that index.
These two “independent” agencies follow the myriad corrupt, cowardly and/or collusive practices of the Western mass media (whose loyalty to the establishment wings of both US political parties presaged the rise of Donald Trump), the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), sad to say the United Nations, the European Union (through their complicity in the Gaza genocide) and many other so-called influential global gatekeeper institutions.
History has proven that authoritarian leaders will (eventually) rise. The rise of authoritarianism within the European Union continues unabated (with for example, the sanctioning of Jacques Baud and the proposed removal of unanimity within the “Union”). Such authoritarians cannot rise to power “unaided” however. Perhaps the primary danger within our Western society is not so much the authoritarians, rather the decline in the integrity and courage of our “so-called” gatekeepers, those whose raison d’être is to reign in those who engage in repression. As the old saying goes, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing (Edmund Burke)”.
As we look back to the genesis of Adolph Hitler’s reign of terror in the 1930s (as most current international politicians are want to do -- so as to warn us of the impending dangers of authoritarianism! -- we should recall that save for the last gatekeeper of the German state (President Hindenburg), Hitler would not have commandeered absolute power within that state. Hindenburg failed in his duty to protect his nation. Are today’s societal gatekeepers failing in their primary duties? Should we perhaps be directing the majority of our outrage toward these organisations?
Finally, we might also add cultural figures to the list of those lacking the courage and the integrity to call out (protest) the worst excesses of our times, one of the most egregious of these “cultural icons” being the Irish rockstar, Bono. His egregious self-aggrandisement reached new heights in accepting the presidential medal of honour from Joe Biden in January 2025, the same Joe Biden -- who at the time of this medal presentation -- is colluding in the genocide in Gaza.
Today Bono bookends his cowardly behaviour as he releases a song of protest, a song of protest concerning the “safe subject” of ICE violence. [1] Where (one might ask) is his song of protest against the Gaza genocide? Where is his song of support for the decades-long suffering of the Palestine people as they endure a third year of genocide?
At the outset of his career Bono seemed genuine, many admiring his protest songs against apartheid and foreign military interventions, for example. Gradually however, he seemed to become “dazzled” by this fame -- progressively socialising with the rich, the powerful and the famous -- resulting (eventually) in his indoctrination into the ranks of the wilfully blind.
Contrast this behaviour with one of his peers in the world of culture and art, that of Vanessa Redgrave, in 1977 at the Oscars [2] and in 2025 when protesting (at age 88) with the “common people” against the genocide in Gaza.
The contrast between these two cultural icons -- who in their own way participate in shaping our views of the world -- could not be more evident, possessing viscerally different attitudes to culture’s role in shaping the morality of global societies.
What is the purpose of shininglight news digest?