UPDATED: "Anticipatory Obedience"

Anticipatory obedience is a term I was unfamiliar with until reading an article in The Guardian.

[I]n On Tyranny, Tim Snyder’s bestselling guide to authoritarianism. Snyder defines the term as “giving over your power to the aspiring authoritarian” before the authoritarian is in position to compel that handover.

It appears that is precisely what has happened at The Washington Post. The newspaper's editorial board had drafted its endorsement of Kamala Harris for U.S. president, but then its owner, Jeff Bezos, intervened and forbade it. It appears that Bezos, who also owns Amazon and Blue Origin, wants to make sure that if Don Trump wins the race, his businesseses, which compete for government contracts, will thrive.

Within hours of making that decision, 

high-ranking officials of [Blue Origin] briefly met with Trump after a campaign speech in Austin, Texas, as the Republican nominee seeks a second presidency.

Trump met with Blue Origin chief executive officer David Limp and vice-president of government relations Megan Mitchell, the Associated Press reported.

Meanwhile, CNN reported that the Amazon CEO, Andy Jassy, had also recently reached out to speak with the former president by phone. 

Those reported overtures were eviscerated by Washington Post editor-at-large and longtime columnist Robert Kagan, who resigned on Friday. On Saturday, he argued that the meeting Blue Origin executives had with Trump would not have taken place if the Post had endorsed the Democratic vice-president as it planned.

The was additional fallout.

 In their criticism of the Post’s decision on Friday, former and current employees cite the dangers to democracy posed by Trump, who has openly expressed his admiration for authoritarian rule amid his appeals for voters to return him to office.

The former Washington Post journalists Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, who broke the Watergate story, called the decision “disappointing, especially this late in the electoral process”.

The former Washington Post executive editor Marty Baron said in a post on X, “This is cowardice with democracy as its casualty”.

The cartoon team at the paper published a dark formless image protesting against the non-endorsement decision, playing on the “democracy dies in darkness” slogan that the Post adopted in 2017, five years after its purchase by Bezos. 

The Post was actually the second major paper to veto a presidential endorsement. 

The Post’s non-endorsement came shortly after the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, refused to allow the editorial board publish an endorsement of Harris.

Unfettered and fearless journalism has always been crucial to stable, well-functioning democracies. With the craven, self-serving sycophancy of people like Bezos and Soon-Shiong, it is clear that America's drift toward authoritarianism is no longer limited to the unhinged MAGA  crowd. As a consequence, all are diminished and endangered.

UPDATE: In today's (Oct.29) Star, Andrew Phillips writes:

The point is that by ordering their papers to stop short of endorsing Trump’s opponent the owners are showing weakness in the face of a candidate who has made clear he’s prepared to violate every norm of democracy. Make no mistake: Trump will take advantage. “If Trump sees a sign of weakness,” former Post editor Martin Baron told the New Yorker over the weekend, “he’s going to pounce even harder in the future.” 

The Erosion Of Local Democracy

The dog days of summer often offer opportunities for unscrupulous governments to slip something by the people. With the focus more on partying than politics, unpopular measures can be enacted with minimal consequences, at least that was likely the thought of Doug Ford and his cronies here in Ontario.

After his retreat from the Greenbelt incursions he had promised to his developer friends, the premier has to find ways to atone for his betrayal. One part of his penance is to remove impediments to their schemes.

A provincial law change that curtailed third-party groups’ ability to appeal development decisions has left environmental and ratepayer groups saying they’ve been silenced in a move that puts developer interests ahead of citizen concerns.

Ontario residents can no longer appeal development decisions at the Ontario Land Tribunal — a quasi-judicial body designed to adjudicate planning and other land disputes — after the Doug Ford government introduced legislation that removes the ability of third-parties such as ratepayer groups or environmental groups to do so.

The province says the changes to the third-party appeal rights in the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act (Bill 185), which passed in June, will “help communities get quicker planning approvals for housing projects.”

But this arrack on citizens' rights, contrary to the plan, has not gone unnoticed, as evidenced by these letters from concerned residents of this province. 

With my community, I was part of an Ontario Joint Board hearing (now known as the Ontario Land Tribunal) that successfully protected source water and endangered species from a gravel mining proposal on Mount Nemo in Burlington, Ont. We hired independent experts to make our case, and the evidence we presented was instrumental in the board’s decision to deny the quarry. As citizens, we had real stake in the outcome. Our well water, air quality and surrounding environment were at risk. Removing a community’s right to participate threatens to remove decision maker’s access to the on-the-ground knowledge and concerns of locals. Developers have the right to appeal local government decisions to the OLT. Taking away citizen’s equal rights encourages poorer planning and riskier development. The Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act (Bill 185) bolsters corporate dominance, and renders the democratic voice of the people mute.

Sarah Harmer, Burlington

Reporter Noor Javed’s excellent article about new rules barring OLT third party appeals illustrates how our democratic rights are being trampled. The anger is growing daily in this region about Premier Doug Ford’s hypocritical statements about “governing for the people” as precious farmland and natural spaces are being squandered and lost. Our community of Ball’s Bridge and Little Lakes Road in southwestern Ontario has invested years of time and thousands of dollars to try to protect a natural area well loved by the public. We have been abandoned by our local council and have now been abandoned by the provincial government.

Rebecca Garrett, Goderich, Ont.

Bill 185 denies citizens groups from speaking up to protect our precious places. Is this this fair? Is this democratic? Absolutely not. We must fight for our right to be heard!

Wendy Hoernig, Goderich, Ont.

Since the enactment of Bill 185, the right of citizen groups to influence, challenge or contest planning decisions pushed by developers has been stripped away. This egregious action continues to erode our civil society and our democratic process. This seems to be the unspoken Tory agenda. We are “Open for Business” but only for those who are developers. This is hardly “a government for the people.” The worst kind of hypocrisy is to claim citizens are holding up development through appeals when the data shows that many of the appeals recorded over the past decade are by the developers themselves. Shame on the Ontario Conservatives for the their attack on democracy. Shame on MPP Jill Dunlop for supporting this. Bill 185 must be repealed.

David Jeffery, Tiny, Ont.

A somnolent citizenry is something that governments who are "for the people" in name only count on. One hopes that those who refuse to sleep are able to get some much needed traction here.