The Netherlands: Larges Dutch criminal investigation' finds corruption among Amsterdam police

The officer appeared on the radar of the investigative services through the analysis of intercepted messages from the Encrochat encryption service, whose computer server was seized in France on June 12, 2020. This happened after the investigation team had been following the communication between the officer and external parties since April 1, 2020.

This led to the largest Dutch criminal investigation ever. Murders

Read more at: https://nltimes.nl/2021/03/06/larges-dutch-criminal-investigation-finds-corruption-among-amsterdam-police

Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems - by George Monbiot

NEOLIBERALISM

Neoliberalism: do you know what it is?

If you do have the capability to distinguish between "Right and Wrong",  and  are not too preoccupied with other "things" to do, it might be worth your while to read this rather lengthy, but most informative article, to help you understand why the world is in the total mess it is.  Have fun, and don't get too depressed. Tomorrow might bring better tidings - R.M - EU-Digest

Its anonymity is both a symptom and cause of its power. It has played a major role in a remarkable variety of crises: the financial meltdown of 2007‑8, the offshoring of wealth and power, of which the Panama Papers offer us merely a glimpse, the slow collapse of public health and education, resurgent child poverty, the epidemic of loneliness, the collapse of ecosystems, the rise of Donald Trump. But we respond to these crises as if they emerge in isolation, apparently unaware that they have all been either catalysed or exacerbated by the same coherent philosophy; a philosophy that has – or had – a name. What greater power can there be than to operate namelessly?

So pervasive has neoliberalism become that we seldom even recognise it as an ideology. We appear to accept the proposition that this utopian, millenarian faith describes a neutral force; a kind of biological law, like Darwin’s theory of evolution. But the philosophy arose as a conscious attempt to reshape human life and shift the locus of power.

Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that “the market” delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning.

Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulation should be minimised, public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous: a reward for utility and a generator of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve.

We internalise and reproduce its creeds. The rich persuade themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit, ignoring the advantages – such as education, inheritance and class – that may have helped to secure it. The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when they can do little to change their circumstances.

Never mind structural unemployment: if you don’t have a job it’s because you are unenterprising. Never mind the impossible costs of housing: if your credit card is maxed out, you’re feckless and improvident. Never mind that your children no longer have a school playing field: if they get fat, it’s your fault. In a world governed by competition, those who fall behind become defined and self-defined as losers.

Among the results, as Paul Verhaeghe documents in his book What About Me?  in which he describes his main concern how social change has led to this psychic crisis and altered the way we think about ourselves.re :epidemics of self-harm, eating disorders, depression, loneliness, performance anxiety and social phobia. Perhaps it’s unsurprising that Britain, in which neoliberal ideology has been most rigorously applied, is the loneliness capital of Europe. Unfortunately we are all neoliberals now.

The term neoliberalism was coined at a meeting in Paris in 1938. Among the delegates were two men who came to define the ideology, Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. Both exiles from Austria, they saw social democracy, exemplified by Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and the gradual development of Britain’s welfare state, as manifestations of a collectivism that occupied the same spectrum as nazism and communism.

In The Road to Serfdom, published in 1944, Hayek argued that government planning, by crushing individualism, would lead inexorably to totalitarian control. Like Mises’s book Bureaucracy, The Road to Serfdom was widely read. It came to the attention of some very wealthy people, who saw in the philosophy an opportunity to free themselves from regulation and tax. When, in 1947, Hayek founded the first organisation that would spread the doctrine of neoliberalism – the Mont Pelerin Society – it was supported financially by millionaires and their foundations.

With their help, he began to create what Daniel Stedman Jones describes in Masters of the Universe as “a kind of neoliberal international”: a transatlantic network of academics, businessmen, journalists and activists. The movement’s rich backers funded a series of thinktanks which would refine and promote the ideology. Among them were the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Institute of Economic Affairs, the Centre for Policy Studies and the Adam Smith Institute. They also financed academic positions and departments, particularly at the universities of Chicago and Virginia.

s it evolved, neoliberalism became more strident. Hayek’s view that governments should regulate competition to prevent monopolies from forming gave way – among American apostles such as Milton Friedman – to the belief that monopoly power could be seen as a reward for efficiency.
Something else happened during this transition: the movement lost its name. In 1951, Friedman was happy to describe himself as a neoliberal. But soon after that, the term began to disappear. Stranger still, even as the ideology became crisper and the movement more coherent, the lost name was not replaced by any common alternative.

At first, despite its lavish funding, neoliberalism remained at the margins. The postwar consensus was almost universal: John Maynard Keynes’s economic prescriptions were widely applied, full employment and the relief of poverty were common goals in the US and much of western Europe, top rates of tax were high and governments sought social outcomes without embarrassment, developing new public services and safety nets.

But in the 1970s, when Keynesian policies began to fall apart and economic crises struck on both sides of the Atlantic, neoliberal ideas began to enter the mainstream. As Friedman remarked, “when the time came that you had to change ... there was an alternative ready there to be picked up”. With the help of sympathetic journalists and political advisers, elements of neoliberalism, especially its prescriptions for monetary policy, were adopted by Jimmy Carter’s administration in the US and Jim Callaghan’s government in Britain.After Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan took power, the rest of the package soon followed: massive tax cuts for the rich, the crushing of trade unions, deregulation, privatisation, outsourcing and competition in public services. Through the IMF, the World Bank, the Maastricht treaty and the World Trade Organisation, neoliberal policies were imposed – often without democratic consent – on much of the world. Most remarkable was its adoption among parties that once belonged to the left: Labour and the Democrats, for example. As Stedman Jones notes, “it is hard to think of another utopia to have been as fully realised.”

It may seem strange that a doctrine promising choice and freedom should have been promoted with the slogan “there is no alternative”. But, as Hayek remarked on a visit to Pinochet’s Chile – one of the first nations in which the programme was comprehensively applied – “my personal preference leans toward a liberal dictatorship rather than toward a democratic government devoid of liberalism”. The freedom that neoliberalism offers, which sounds so beguiling when expressed in general terms, turns out to mean freedom for the pike, not for the minnows.

Freedom from trade unions and collective bargaining means the freedom to suppress wages. Freedom from regulation means the freedom to poison rivers, endanger workers, charge iniquitous rates of interest and design exotic financial instruments. Freedom from tax means freedom from the distribution of wealth that lifts people out of poverty.

As Naomi Klein documents in The Shock Doctrine, neoliberal theorists advocated the use of crises to impose unpopular policies while people were distracted: for example, in the aftermath of Pinochet’s coup, the Iraq war and Hurricane Katrina, which Friedman described as “an opportunity to radically reform the educational system” in New Orleans.

Where neoliberal policies cannot be imposed domestically, they are imposed internationally, through trade treaties incorporating “investor-state dispute settlement”: offshore tribunals in which corporations can press for the removal of social and environmental protections. When parliaments have voted to restrict sales of cigarettes, protect water supplies from mining companies, freeze energy bills or prevent pharmaceutical firms from ripping off the state, corporations have sued, often successfully. Democracy is reduced to theatre.

Another paradox of neoliberalism is that universal competition relies upon universal quantification and comparison. The result is that workers, job-seekers and public services of every kind are subject to a pettifogging, stifling regime of assessment and monitoring, designed to identify the winners and punish the losers. The doctrine that Von Mises proposed would free us from the bureaucratic nightmare of central planning has instead created one.

Neoliberalism was not conceived as a self-serving racket, but it rapidly became one. Economic growth has been markedly slower in the neoliberal era (since 1980 in Britain and the US) than it was in the preceding decades; but not for the very rich. Inequality in the distribution of both income and wealth, after 60 years of decline, rose rapidly in this era, due to the smashing of trade unions, tax reductions, rising rents, privatisation and deregulation.

The privatisation or marketisation of public services such as energy, water, trains, health, education, roads and prisons has enabled corporations to set up tollbooths in front of essential assets and charge rent, either to citizens or to government, for their use. Rent is another term for unearned income. When you pay an inflated price for a train ticket, only part of the fare compensates the operators for the money they spend on fuel, wages, rolling stock and other outlays. The rest reflects the fact that they have you over a barrel.

Those who own and run the UK’s privatised or semi-privatised services make stupendous fortunes by investing little and charging much. In Russia and India, oligarchs acquired state assets through firesales. In Mexico, Carlos Slim was granted control of almost all landline and mobile phone services and soon became the world’s richest man.

Financialisation, as Andrew Sayer notes in Why We Can’t Afford the Rich, has had a similar impact. “Like rent,” he argues, “interest is ... unearned income that accrues without any effort”. As the poor become poorer and the rich become richer, the rich acquire increasing control over another crucial asset: money. Interest payments, overwhelmingly, are a transfer of money from the poor to the rich. As property prices and the withdrawal of state funding load people with debt (think of the switch from student grants to student loans), the banks and their executives clean up.

Sayer argues that the past four decades have been characterised by a transfer of wealth not only from the poor to the rich, but within the ranks of the wealthy: from those who make their money by producing new goods or services to those who make their money by controlling existing assets and harvesting rent, interest or capital gains. Earned income has been supplanted by unearned income.

Neoliberal policies are everywhere beset by market failures. Not only are the banks too big to fail, but so are the corporations now charged with delivering public services. As Tony Judt pointed out in Ill Fares the Land, Hayek forgot that vital national services cannot be allowed to collapse, which means that competition cannot run its course. Business takes the profits, the state keeps the risk.

The greater the failure, the more extreme the ideology becomes. Governments use neoliberal crises as both excuse and opportunity to cut taxes, privatise remaining public services, rip holes in the social safety net, deregulate corporations and re-regulate citizens. The self-hating state now sinks its teeth into every organ of the public sector.

Perhaps the most dangerous impact of neoliberalism is not the economic crises it has caused, but the political crisis. As the domain of the state is reduced, our ability to change the course of our lives through voting also contracts. Instead, neoliberal theory asserts, people can exercise choice through spending. But some have more to spend than others: in the great consumer or shareholder democracy, votes are not equally distributed. The result is a disempowerment of the poor and middle. As parties of the right and former left adopt similar neoliberal policies, disempowerment turns to disenfranchisement. Large numbers of people have been shed from politics.

Chris Hedges remarks that “fascist movements build their base not from the politically active but the politically inactive, the ‘losers’ who feel, often correctly, they have no voice or role to play in the political establishment”. When political debate no longer speaks to us, people become responsive instead to slogans, symbols and sensation. To the admirers of Trump, for example, facts and arguments appear irrelevant.

Judt explained that when the thick mesh of interactions between people and the state has been reduced to nothing but authority and obedience, the only remaining force that binds us is state power. The totalitarianism Hayek feared is more likely to emerge when governments, having lost the moral authority that arises from the delivery of public services, are reduced to “cajoling, threatening and ultimately coercing people to obey them”.

Like communism, neoliberalism is the God that failed. But the zombie doctrine staggers on, and one of the reasons is its anonymity. Or rather, a cluster of anonymities.

The invisible doctrine of the invisible hand is promoted by invisible backers. Slowly, very slowly, we have begun to discover the names of a few of them. We find that the Institute of Economic Affairs, which has argued forcefully in the media against the further regulation of the tobacco industry, has been secretly funded by British American Tobacco since 1963. We discover that Charles and David Koch, two of the richest men in the world, founded the institute that set up the Tea Party movement. We find that Charles Koch, in establishing one of his thinktanks, noted that “in order to avoid undesirable criticism, how the organisation is controlled and directed should not be widely advertised.

The words used by neoliberalism often conceal more than they elucidate. “The market” sounds like a natural system that might bear upon us equally, like gravity or atmospheric pressure. But it is fraught with power relations. What “the market wants” tends to mean what corporations and their bosses want. “Investment”, as Sayer notes, means two quite different things. One is the funding of productive and socially useful activities, the other is the purchase of existing assets to milk them for rent, interest, dividends and capital gains. Using the same word for different activities “camouflages the sources of wealth”, leading us to confuse wealth extraction with wealth creation.

A century ago, the nouveau riche were disparaged by those who had inherited their money. Entrepreneurs sought social acceptance by passing themselves off as rentiers. Today, the relationship has been reversed: the rentiers and inheritors style themselves entre preneurs. They claim to have earned their unearned income.

These anonymities and confusions mesh with the namelessness and placelessness of modern capitalism: the franchise model which ensures that workers do not know for whom they toil; the companies registered through a network of offshore secrecy regimes so complex that even the police cannot discover the beneficial owners; the tax arrangements that bamboozle governments; the financial products no one understands.

The anonymity of neoliberalism is fiercely guarded. Those who are influenced by Hayek, Mises and Friedman tend to reject the term, maintaining – with some justice – that it is used today only pejoratively. But they offer us no substitute. Some describe themselves as classical liberals or libertarians, but these descriptions are both misleading and curiously self-effacing, as they suggest that there is nothing novel about The Road to Serfdom, Bureaucracy or Friedman’s classic work, Capitalism and Freedom.

For all that, there is something admirable about the neoliberal project, at least in its early stages. It was a distinctive, innovative philosophy promoted by a coherent network of thinkers and activists with a clear plan of action. It was patient and persistent. The Road to Serfdom became the path to power.

Neoliberalism’s triumph also reflects the failure of the left. When laissez-faire economics led to catastrophe in 1929, Keynes devised a comprehensive economic theory to replace it. When Keynesian demand management hit the buffers in the 70s, there was an alternative ready. But when neoliberalism fell apart in 2008 there was ... nothing. This is why the zombie walks. The left and centre have produced no new general framework of economic thought for 80 years.

Every invocation of Lord Keynes is an admission of failure. To propose Keynesian solutions to the crises of the 21st century is to ignore three obvious problems. It is hard to mobilise people around old ideas; the flaws exposed in the 70s have not gone away; and, most importantly, they have nothing to say about our gravest predicament: the environmental crisis. Keynesianism works by stimulating consumer demand to promote economic growth. Consumer demand and economic growth are the motors of environmental destruction.

What the history of both Keynesianism and neoliberalism show is that it’s not enough to oppose a broken system. A coherent alternative has to be proposed. For Labour, the Democrats and the wider left, the central task should be to develop an economic Apollo programme, a conscious attempt to design a new system, tailored to the demands of the 21st century.

 EU-Digest - Neoliberalism : "The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of functions performed by its private citizens"

USA - a thoroughly corrupt political process: Billionaires got $565 billion richer during the coronavirus pandemic

American billionaires are now nearly 20% richer — by $565 billion,to be exact — than they were at the start of the coronavirus pandemic,according to a new report by the Institute for Policy Studies

Six billionaires, including Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Tesla's Elon Musk, and Zoom's Eric Yuan, have seen their net worths grow by more than $2billion each since March, according to the think tank's analysis of Forbes' Billionaires List.

The coronavirus crisis has been an economic disaster for the rest of America, as an end unprecedented 42.6 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits in the past 11 weeks.

Note EU-Digest: This is another major problem facing America, and has resulted in the overwhelming influence Corporate America has on the political environment of the US and beyound. What's been happening with White House and Congressional politics could only be described as a thoroughly corrupt process, with the blessings of a Supreme Court dominated by justices hand-picked to protect the same process.

Read more at:
Billionaires got $565 billion richer during the coronavirus pandemic - Business Insider

Capitalism: slowly but surely the Capitalist system is self-destructing

Capitalism: all we have to do is look how some major multinational corporations, including the Chemical and Pharmaceutical Industries, weapons or financial Industry, are exploiting the world community, to realize they are the ones who are destroying the image and reputation  of Capitalism

http://www.asanet.org/news-events/speak-sociology/real-structural-problem-self-destruction-capitalism

Turkey - Presidential elections: Turkey’s opposition with its new shining democratic star Muharrem Ince might actually have a chance – by Zia Weise

Muharrem Ince wants to bring democracy back to Turkey

Politico reports that President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s challengers are gaining momentum ahead of a snap election Sunday — their confidence buoyed by the energetic campaign of Muharrem Ince, a firebrand politician and former physics teacher who has become "dictator" Erdoğan’s foremost rival in the race for Turkey’s presidencyo reports that Turkey’s opposition, long written off as toothless, has rediscovered its bite.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s challengers are gaining momentum ahead of a snap election Sunday — their confidence buoyed by the energetic campaign of Muharrem Ince, a firebrand politician and former physics teacher who has become "dictator" Erdoğan’s foremost rival in the race for Turkey’s presidency

Ince — the nominee of the secularist Republican People’s Party (CHP) — has won popularity with boisterous political rhetoric not unlike Erdoğan’s own.

On Saturday, while campaigning on Istanbul’s Asian side, he took the president to task over issues ranging from economic mismanagement to democratic erosion, taunting Erdoğan for rejecting a televised debate.

“We’ll only talk about the economy,” he shouted as he paced back and forth on top of a campaign bus in Üsküdar, a largely conservative neighborhood where Erdoğan owns a house. “Come on television. Aren’t you a world leader? Why won’t you come?

The crowd packing the shorefront square in the scalding June heat cheered, but Ince was not finished: “Look, the people of Üsküdar want you to, Erdoğan. Don’t be afraid, I won’t eat you. Come!” he roared.

Even though the odds, mainly reported by the Erdogan cam,  still seem firmly in Erdoğan’s favor on June 24, it will be the first time Turkey holds simultaneous parliamentary and presidential elections. 

Given there is no ballot box fraud, like there was in the last Turkish referendum, a new democratic star might be born in Turkey, who can bring the country back on a normal footing, re; human rights, including freedom of the press, and economic health, also with a more than fair chance for Turkey to finally join the European Union.

Opposition candidates hope to force Erdogan into a runoff on July 8 — and most polls show Erdoğan falling narrowly short of 50 percent in the first round, suggesting they might stand a chance.

Sunday will also mark the day that Turkey’s constitutional reforms come into force, endowing the president with vast executive powers as approved in a controversial 2017 referendum. The opposition candidates have vowed to roll back the changes and return to parliamentary rule.

If there is a second round, Ince will likely be the one to face off against Erdoğan — an unexpected turn of events, as the president and his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) had counted on CHP to nominate its mild-mannered leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu.

Kılıçdaroğlu, however, surprised many by choosing Ince, an outspoken MP known for criticizing his own party. It was a shrewd choice for CHP: Unlike most secular politicians, Ince has proven capable of reaching out to voters beyond the party’s base.

Unlike most secular politicians, Ince has proven capable of reaching out to voters beyond the party’s base.

Aslı Aydıntaşbaş, fellow at the European Council for Foreign Relations said of him: “But Ince — he’s not elite, he’s a village kid, he knows how to ride a tractor. His mother wears a headscarf. So, he cannot be labelled as an elite hard-line secularist. That makes it difficult for Erdoğan to attack him,”

Erdoğan is still a force to be reckoned with. But in stark contrast to previous elections, the president has run a lackluster campaign plagued by gaffes — from a malfunctioning teleprompter to gifting the opposition its slogan of tamam (“enough”) when he pledged to step down should voters tell him “enough.”

Ince and his fellow opposition candidate Meral Akşener, the nominee of the center-right Iyi Party, are increasingly setting the tone of the campaign. When both Ince and Akşener decided not to appear on TRT state television, Erdoğan followed suit.

When Ince declared he would lift the two-year-old state of emergency if elected, Erdoğan — who had previously insisted that the emergency law was necessary for Turkey’s security — pledged to do so, too.

And while Erdoğan hopes to win over voters with a nationalist agenda, blaming Turkey’s economic problems on Western meddling and emphasizing the threat of terrorism, the opposition has run a campaign marked by a sense of hope.

Ince, who has accused Erdoğan of creating a “society of fear,” has crisscrossed the country promising democracy and rule of law, a stable economy and greater freedoms. At his rallies, he has charmed voters by dancing and cycling on stage.

Recent polls suggest Ince may score between 20 percent and 30 percent of votes in the first round, with Erdoğan between 45 percent and 48 percent (though a few surveys put him at above 50 percent). Akşener’s vote share is projected between 9 percent and 15 percent. 

Though only a few analysts predict a narrow victory for Erdoğan, a second round would see a closely fought race.

Dilara, a 19-year-old first-time voter who attended Ince’s event in Üsküdar, said she sees the CHP candidate as “fresh blood” for the opposition.

“I’ve never seen Üsküdar like this,” she said. “Things are changing. There’s a chance — a small chance — he can win in the second round.”

Like many voters, Dilara counted Turkey’s economic troubles among her chief concerns. Double-digit inflation, rising unemployment and the plummeting lira pose major threats to Erdoğan’s plans for reelection, given his promise of continued growth.

Where the opposition stands a real chance is in the parliamentary election, where they are threatening the AKP’s majority, thanks to an unlikely alliance between secularists, Islamists and nationalists.

The Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) has been left out of the alliance, but Ince has gained popularity among Kurdish voters with his inclusive approach.

Ince has visited HDP’s imprisoned candidate, Selahattin Demirtaş, in jail — a risky undertaking that exposed him to accusations of sympathizing with terrorists — and pledged to support Kurdish-language education.

His overtures are paying off: Last week, a large crowd welcomed him in the Kurdish city Diyarbakır — a rare feat for a lawmaker from CHP, the party responsible for Turkey’s historical repression of Kurds

The Kurdish vote may prove crucial. The AKP will only lose its majority if HDP surpasses the 10 percent threshold to enter parliament. Opposition parties are also vying for the vote of conservative Kurds, who have favored AKP and Erdoğan in the past.

“Kurdish voters are key,” said Baris Yarkadas, a CHP MP for Istanbul. “Whoever the Kurds vote for in the second round will become president.”

With just days remaining before the elections, opposition parties and their supporters are growing bolder. Saturday’s Üsküdar rally resembled a festival, with families picnicking on the grass and vendors hawking cotton candy.

Optimism abounded, as well as a sense of unity. Aside from staunch CHP supporters, many first-time voters and even supporters of other parties were in attendance. Some waved HDP and Iyi Party flags.

“It’s a different atmosphere this time,” said Deniz Uludağ, 39, who was at the rally with her siblings. “I think the government, they’re a little bit afraid.”

EU-Digest

Malta-Mafia State?: as Malta buries journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia EU tells Malta leave "no stone unturned" in finding culprits

Investigative Blogger:Daphne Caruana Galizi, cowardly assassinated

Deutsche Welle reported that the  EU Commission has told Malta its investigation into the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia should leave "no stone unturned" as the funeral of the journalist took place. Politicians she probed stayed away. tells Malta

Hundreds of mourners attended the funeral on Friday of Daphne Caruana Galizia, Malta's best-known blogger and journalist and a fierce critic of government and opposition figures. The Mediterranean island observed a national day of mourning as the ceremony took place in Mosta, a town close to the rural home where her car was blown apart.

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans said Europe's "eyes" were on authorities in Malta where democracy was at stake after the "atrocious" car-bomb murder on October 16.

EU headquarters flew flags at half-mast in honor of Caruana Galizia and "all those who have given their lives for the freedom of speech." On Malta itself a day of national mourning had been declared.

In her last blogpost, published the day she died, Daphne Caruana Galizia signed off with a sentence that seems particularly chilling now.

“There are crooks everywhere you look. The situation is desperate.”

She believed, in essence, that malign and criminal interests had captured Malta and turned it into an island mafia state; she reported on a political system rife with corruption, businesses seemingly used to launder money or pay bribes, and a criminal justice system that seemed incapable, or unwilling, to take on the controlling minds behind it all.

EU headquarters flew flags at half-mast in honor of Caruana Galizia and "all those who have given their lives for the freedom of speech..
 
Note EU-Digest: May she rest in peace and may those who planned her assassination and those who placed the explosive device under her car be found and brought to justice.

EU-Digest

Anti-Trump Protests: Over 1 million join anti-Trump women's marches worldwide-by Nancy Benac

Anti-Trump Demonstrations around the world

In a global exclamation of defiance and solidarity, more than 1 million people rallied at women's marches in the nation's capital and cities around the world Saturday to send President Donald Trump an emphatic message on his first full day in office that they won't let his agenda go unchallenged.

"Welcome to your first day, we will not go away!" marchers in Washington chanted

Many of the women came wearing pink, pointy-eared "pussyhats" to mock the new president. Plenty of men joined in, too, contributing to surprising numbers everywhere from New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Los Angeles to Mexico City, Paris, Berlin, London, Prague and Sydney.

The Washington rally alone attracted over 500,000 people according to city officials — apparently more than Trump's inauguration drew on Friday. It was easily one of the biggest demonstrations in the city's history, and as night fell, not a single arrest was reported.

The international outpouring served to underscore the degree to which Trump has unsettled people in both hemispheres.

"We march today for the moral core of this nation, against which our new president is waging a war," actress America Ferrera told the Washington crowd. "Our dignity, our character, our rights have all been under attack, and a platform of hate and division assumed power yesterday. But the president is not America. ... We are America, and we are here to stay."

Turnout in the capital was so heavy that the designated march route alongside the National Mall was impassable. Protesters were told to make their way to the Ellipse near the White House by way of other streets, triggering a chaotic scene that snarled downtown Washington. Long after the program had ended, groups of demonstrators were still marching and chanting in different parts of the city.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer had no comment on the march except to note that there were no firm numbers for turnout.

Note EU-Digest:  As one participant noted during the Washington Rally: "This is not only just a rally, this is the beginning of a revolution to end the takeover of America by a delusional  President supported by corporate interests and a corrupt political system.
Thousands of women took to the streets of European capitals to join "sister marches" in Asia against newly installed U.S. President Trump ahead of a major rally in Washington expected to draw nearly a quarter of a million people.

Waving banners with slogans like "Special relationship, just say no" and "Nasty women unite," British demonstrators gathered outside the American embassy in Grosvenor Square before heading to a rally in central Trafalgar Square.

Worldwide some 670 marches were held, according to the organizers' website which says more than two million marchers protested against Trump, who was sworn in as the 45th U.S. president on this past Friday.

Read More: Over 1 million join anti-Trump women's marches worldwide

Corruption in the European Union: Scandals in Banking, Fraud and Secretive TTIP Negotiations - by Graham Vanbergen

In Brussels alone there are now over 30,000 corporate lobbyists, shadowy agitators as The Guardian puts it, which are responsible for influencing three quarters of legislation in the EU. But even they are left in the shade when it comes to the power being afforded to corporations in the TTIP negotiations.

The US Chamber of Commerce the wealthiest of all US corporate lobbies and DigitalEurope, whose members include all the big IT names like Apple, Blackberry, IBM, and Microsoft are there. So are the Transatlantic Business Council, a corporate lobby group representing over 70 EU and US-based multinationals. ACEA, the car lobby working for BMW, Ford, Renault and others, the Chemical Industry Council lobbying for BASF, Bayer, Dow, and the like, are all there.

The European Services Forum, a lobby outfit banding together large services companies are present as are powerful big Pharma companies and FoodDrinkEurope, the biggest food industry lobby group representing multinationals like Nestlé, Coca Cola, and Unilever are sitting at the negotiating table.

One in every 5 corporate lobby groups, which have lobbied for trade on TTIP (80 out of 372 corporate actors), is not registered in the EU’s Transparency Register. Of 597 closed meetings the EU Commissioners conducted over TTIP, 88% were with big corporations. Just 9% were with public interest groups.

Many, if not most of these corporations are not strangers to scandals of corruption in one sort or another. TTIP if successful, would perhaps be the apex of their achievement.

Transparency International explains the connection between lobbying and corruption thus:

    Any activity carried out to influence a government or institution’s policies and decisions in favour of a specific cause or outcome. Even when allowed by law, these acts can become distortive if disproportionate levels of influence exist — by companies, associations, organisations and individuals. (4)

 It should be clear to anyone that when transparency of policy making, basic safeguards and accountability are limited, this can lead to illegal, undue and unfair influence in a country’s policies and politics. TTIP is the embodiment of a corrupt system where corporations decide what are best, not democratic principles.

In the meantime, Cecelia Malmstrom has faced huge public opposition over TTIP. Millions have signed petitions. Mass protests groups have rallied in many cities across Europe and America, some have turned ugly with protestors facing riot police in Brussels and elsewhere. In response the EU Commission conducted the largest ever survey since its 1951 birth and reluctantly published the results in January 2015 where 97% of 150,000 respondents from 28 nations voiced their unequivocal opposition to the deal. At the same time, the Commission also received individual replies from more than 450 organisations who represented a wider spectrum of EU civil society, including trade unions, NGOs, business organisations, consumer groups, charities, legal firms and academics, all of whom expressed either deep concern or outright opposition – to no avail. (5)

Questioned by a reporter from The Independent on why she continued her persistent promotion of the deal against such massive public opposition, Malmström’s chilling response was: “I do not take my mandate from the European people.” EU commissioners are supposed to follow the elected governments of Europe and so this deal proves it is nothing more than a corporate coups d’état that clearly breaches any definition, no matter how low the bar, of corruption. (6)

This stark reality is highlighted by a report from War on Want who revealed that The European Commissioner for Trade receives orders directly from the corporate lobbyists that swarm around Brussels.

    Given that the European Commission takes its steer from industry lobbies it’s hardly surprising that 70 per cent of Europe’s population think corruption is now centered on politics and corporations.

New World Order Equals "Global Disorder": as the frail structures of peace are collapsing around us - by RM

A Nuclear War Is looming

What was sold to the world as "the New World Order" by George Bush, the father of  George W.Bush can only be described today as a total failure and should really be known as the "World Corporate Takeover".

As a result things are escalating in the world today: tensions, wars, guns, refugee crises, poverty, economic crises, immigration, etc.

The world must solve these problems before they explode into  a Third World Nuclear War.

World leaders, politicians, people cannot continue keep silent on atrocities going on around the world, especially the Middle East and Africa, or even in our own Western cities and neighborhoods.

Only when enough voices are raised can something change.

Feel encouraged to use the social media, not only for pleasantries, culinary delights, travel, or navel staring, but also use it as a non-violent, but very effective weapon to criticize your elected leaders, corporations, the press, on issues that are important for your survival.

Those of you using Blogs or other communications tools, as an oversight to expose governments and corporate "hanky-panky" need to be cheered on and complimented.

The younger generation, reading this report, are also encouraged to use their energy and skills, not only to make money, but also to become an activists, by speaking their minds on issues they believe in.

After all as Alexis de Tocqueville once said said: "The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of functions performed by its private citizens" .

Take the time to look around you and you will soon realize that the so-called "status-quo " enjoyed by only a few, is not sufficient to guarantee a productive living environment for all.

It is no longer acceptable before God, and people with conscience. Nations who have no voice in the world are being purged, gutted out and destroyed.

Today there is conflict all over the world. You name it, the Middle East, Africa, Central America, Ukraine, etc. Thousands have perished in Syria, and millions fled from their homes; thousands are perishing in Yemen, mostly children; thousand in Iraq and the destruction of an ancient city; thousands fled in Libya where another war is raging; 60, 000 just fled their homes a few days ago in South Sudan; Mali, Central African Republic, Somali, Congo all in conflict and millions in refugee camps. Thousands have perished and millions fled to seek refugee status in Europe, Turkey, Lebanon and even the US.

Something must be done soon before the frail structures still holding the world from collapsing into a Third World Nuclear War” also collapse.

Many of the areas where you have conflicts these days are usually the so-called Third World Nations or as somecall them, Developing Nations. They do, however, contain most of the natural resources in the world, but still remain among the poorest nations of the world.

The obvious question is why?

Mainly because the global centers of power in the world, including the US, EU, China, Russia, Britain, either use these developing countries to expand their political sphere of influence, or to control their natural resources, under all kinds of pretenses; including the setting-up of puppet leaders who do their bidding.

Once a grip is established by "an outside power", it will put a "friendly" Puppet Government in place providing it with weapons to control the people they govern.

When those leaders, however,  for one reason or another, are not able to meet the goals set for them by their "foreign benefactor", they are either exciled or assassinated, under whatever pretense.

This is the way leaders in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, etc. were toppled.

Consequently many of the world's Third World leaders are ruthless, wicked, and not able to develop these natural resources for the benefit of their own people, specially in Africa, blessed with just about every natural resource the world needs.

Our own Western leaders are not much better in that respect, specially when it comes to Democracy or governance.

They seldom show any remorse for the atrocities they have created around the world; are godless and immoral; will promise anything to keep control over the people, only to deceive, will not do what they promise and usually create more problems than opportunities for the people they are supposed to serve.

Poverty has spread across the globe, not only in Africa, but now also to the rich and powerful nations of the world, including, the US, India, Russia, China, Britain, Greece, France, Braxil, Venezuela and many more.

When it comes to politics, people these days the world over have a lot in common. From Fukushima to Athens, and from Washington to Shanghai, China, the collective refrain is that government is not to be trusted, or working the way it should, and that corporations are calling the shots today.

People in the so-called "civilized" world now pay dearly for energy, medicine,insurance, healthcare, banking, and telecommunications services.  In the past it was called Voodoo Economics and today it has become Strangle-Hold Economics.

Research reveals that people are paying more -- much more -- in a variety of ways that our business-friendly mainstream media won't talk about.

Just look at America's Middle class. It  is almost wiped out; either you are rich, or poor now; poverty levels stand at 46 percent and is increasing; millions are in shelters, and millions without jobs. 

To add insult to injury - The wide-spread availability of guns in America has killed thousands of Americans, and everyday, many more die from gun violence; yet, Congress doesn't want to pass gun control law. Mainly again because of the powerful NRA lobby, which has its hands on the pocketbook of just about every legislator in both major parties.

In the meantime the corporate power structure has taken over most of the political decision making in Western Countries, and even more so in America. It now influences and controls just about anything  you can imagine. From the healthcare Industry to the food industry, even influencing what kind of hormones and pesticides are allowed in the food you eat, and all else in between. 

The Pharmaceutical industry uses sales agents, not only to peddle their drugs, but also to bribe Drs. with a variety of incentives, including money. 

Drs. are prescribing drugs and performing surgery on patients that don't really need those particular drugs or the surgery, while new effective and cheaper .drugs that can cure patient are delayed in being put on to the marketplace,t so that the Pharmaceutical Industry can continue selling expensive drugs which don't work. .  


A report by Battelle Memorial Institute determined that the $4 billion government-funded Human Genome Project (HGP) will generate economic activity of about $140 for every dollar spent. Although that estimate controversial, drug industry executives say it's just a matter of time before the profits roll in.

Big business has quickly made its move on this. 

One-fifth of the human genome is now privately owned through patents. Strains of influenza and hepatitis have been claimed by corporate and private university labs, preventing researchers from using the patented life forms to perform cancer research. This is not only bad it is plainly criminal.

As if to mock us, while taking over our public research, some of the largest drug companies haven't been paying much in taxes. Pfizer had 40% of its 2011-12 revenues in the U.S., but declared almost $7 billion in U.S. losses to go along with $31 billion in foreign profits. Abbott Labs had 42% of its sales in the U.S., but declared a loss in the U.S. along with $12 billion in foreign profits.

These alliances between the political establishment and the corporate world are now commonplace and even expanding further..

In the area of communications we see similar developments. 

In the US the CIA and NSA have been using public tax money to pay AT&T. Google, and other companies to access its data - basically your private data - for surveillance purposes. 

With almost no transparency or oversight, the CIA has been paying AT&T to monitor US citizens overseas phone calls. Hundreds of dollars per customer per month goes to Verizon for similar snooping. 

The NSA also compensated Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and Facebook for penalties accrued in the secretive Prism surveillance program.

Many US  corporations consequently feel very powerful as a result of the inequitable support they receive from their government when operating in other countries, and often act accordingly in an arrogant way, when dealing with foreign governments.

Recently Facebook rejected claims made by Germany's state authorities that it was reluctant to co-operate with them on criminal investigations, saying many of the requests it received for user data were incorrectly formulated.

Several regional interior ministers have complained that the social media group is hesitant to respond to requests for data and have called on the Federal Justice Ministry to introduce new laws.

German Police said the Ansbach bomber had six Facebook accounts including one held under a false identity. Traces of an online messaging conversation found on his phone also suggest he was influenced by an unknown person up until the time of the attack, said Bavaria's interior minister.

Germany's spy chief called on Monday for a more intensive exchange of information between social networks and security agencies in the fight against terrorism.

Bottom-line: The state of the world is not looking good, and maybe in this respect one should quote Scripture which says: “You will reap whatever you sow in life.” 

Mankind certainly can not be proud about what it sowed. 

The time of reckoning is fast approaching -and we must act before it is too late,

EU-Digest                                                                                               

EU: Corruption costs EU ‘up to €990 billion a year’ – by Ryan Collin

EU Corruption costs: close to  € 1 trillion a year

The EU has a corruption problem that could cost it up to €990 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by the European Parliament and released on Monday.

Corruption in the EU comes in many forms and has multiple economic, social and political effects, according to the Cost of Non-Europe in the Area of Corruption Study by RAND Europe. Based on three scenarios using different methodologies that included both direct and indirect effects, the study found the EU suffers losses in its gross domestic product that range between €179 billion and €990 billion each year.

The figures are much higher than a 2014 estimate by the European Commission of €120 billion. However, the Commission’s study focused only on direct effects of corruption.

“Corruption is a big black hole at the heart of the European economy,” said Carl Dolan, director of Transparency International. “If companies see the public procurement process is rigged then they are not going to take part in that bid and therefore the public loses out because these aren’t competitive tenders.”

The study found that corruption related to public procurement was estimated to cost nearly €5 billion per year. Procurement corruption includes deliberately removing companies from the bidding process so there is only one viable candidate and limiting the amount of time a company has to respond to a tender for a new contract.

To reduce it, RAND Europe suggested that the EU implement a Union-wide e-procurement system, which would bring down the cost of corruption by an estimated €920 million. Another measure to cut corruption would be establishing a European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the study said. Such an office would investigate corruption cases and could reduce corruption costs by €0.2 billion per year.

Read more: Corruption costs EU ‘up to €990 billion a year’ – POLITICO

EU - Middle East: ISIS Defectors Reveal Frustration Over Corruption, Atrocities and Sunni Infighting - by Jack Moore

An increasing number of ISIS fighters are becoming disillusioned with the group and defecting from its ranks, according to a new study published on Monday. Furthermore, Western governments should protect these defectors from reprisals and legal "disincentives" to encourage them to speak out about the group, the study says.

A report published by the London-based International Center for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence (ICSR) at King's College London, entitled Victims, Perpetrators, Assets: The Narratives of Islamic State Defectors, argues that governments and activists should "recognize the value and credibility" of defectors speaking out against the group and should assist in their "resettlement" and "safety."

The jihadi monitoring think tank, which has tracked foreign fighters traveling to and from the terror group's self-proclaimed caliphate in Iraq and Syria, has recorded 58 defectors in total but says that these only "represent a small fraction" of the total number as there are many more who are unwilling to come forward for fear of reprisals or imprisonment.

Read more: ISIS Defectors Reveal Frustration Over Corruption, Atrocities and Sunni Infighting: Study

Suriname Elections: (Poll) Party President Bouters,former dictator and convicted drug fugitive,seems to have upper hand

Desi Bouterse the colorful dictator-turned-president who has ruled Suriname ( a former Dutch colony) on and off since 1980, is looking to consolidate power when the small South American country holds general elections on Monday.

A convicted drug trafficker who has been a coup leader and an international fugitive, Bouterse is seeking to dispense with his alliance with one-time nemesis Ronnie Brunswijk and preside over the first non-coalition democratic government in Suriname's history. 

Bouterse's National Democratic Party (NDP) formed a government after the last elections in 2010 by forging a motley mega-coalition, returning him to power for the second time since his 1980-1987 military government.

But after the coalition fell apart, the NDP decided to go it alone this time, buoyed by strong standings in opinion polls.

The party needs to win at least 26 seats in the 51-member National Assembly to govern alone, and 34 seats to re-elect Bouterse -- the president is chosen by a two-thirds majority of parliament.

The main opposition is the V7, a coalition of six parties that accuses Bouterse of massive corruption and has a broad ethnic base in the racially diverse country whose 500,000 people have roots in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas.

The third main group, and possible power-broker, is the Alternative Combination alliance led by Brunswijk, a former guerrilla leader who fought a civil war against Bouterse's military government before teaming up with his former foe in 2010.

The party's base are the Maroons, the descendants of fugitive slaves who set up settlements in the Surinamese interior.

The smallest country in South America, Suriname was colonized by the British and Dutch and gained independence from the Netherlands in 1975.

Five years later, a group of sergeants led by Bouterse overthrew prime minister Henck Arron and installed a military government.

Whether in his dictator's fatigues and sunglasses or his sharp president's suit, Bouterse, 69, has loomed large over the country's politics ever since.

His regime put down two counter-coups and rounded up and executed 15 opponents in 1982, an event known as the "December killings."

Bouterse stepped down in 1987, but returned to power in 1990 in a second bloodless coup.

After leaving power a second time, Bouterse was indicted and court-martialed for the December killings, but his coalition passed a controversial amnesty law in 2012 that aborted the trial.

The president and his family have faced a host of other legal woes, adding to the country's reputation for drug running, money laundering and graft.

The Netherlands convicted him in absentia of cocaine smuggling in 1999, but he remained free because Suriname does not extradite its citizens.

Earlier this year, a Dutch court rejected his third bid to have the conviction overturned.

In March, a US court sentenced his son Dino, who had served as his father's top counter-terrorism official, to 16 years in prison on charges of trying to aid and arm Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah and conspiring to import cocaine into the United States.

Bouterse has shrugged off these scandals and bolstered his popularity with expanded social welfare programs, free university education and lavish spending on infrastructure projects such as bridges, schools and housing.

The V7, formerly known as the New Front, accuses him of corruption and populism, and warns the tab for these projects will hurt when it arrives.

It also blames the NDP for an energy crisis it says was caused by shady deals with US-based aluminum giant Alcoa for the Afobaka hydroelectric dam, which generates most of the mineral-rich, upper-middle-income country's power.

In all, seven parties and four coalitions are vying for the ballots of 350,000 registered voters, who will also elect their district and local representatives.

Polls open at 7:00 am (1000 GMT) and close 12 hours later.

The first, partial results are expected at 10:00 pm, with a projection of the full results early Tuesday.

EU-Digest

Turkish Elections: Ahead of Turkey's Crucial Election, Citizens Take Action to Protect Their Vote - by K. Akkoyunlu

Many things are at stake in Turkey's upcoming parliamentary poll on June 7: Will the Kurds overcome the world's highest election threshold of 10% to enter the parliament as a party for the first time? Or will the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) win enough seats to change the constitution and introduce the system of strong presidentialism that President Tayyip Erdoğan has long wanted?

It is a historic moment where a single vote could possibly shape the course of Turkey's bloodiest conflict and its future regime type, with repercussions beyond the country's borders. With so much hanging on the outcome, this is also a crucial test for Turkey's embattled electoral system.

Turkey has never become an 'advanced' democracy: For decades, political contestation took place in the shadow of military tutelage, now being replaced with an illiberal populism under Erdoğan and the AKP. Its record on civil liberties and human rights has been bleak. Yet ever since the country held its first competitive multiparty election in 1950, the ballot box has taken on a quality as one of Turkey's few non-contested institutions to the point of becoming sacrosanct.

Politicians have routinely accepted defeat and handed over power peacefully. Turnout has been traditionally high, as well as popular trust in declared results. The fact that it has preserved this most basic democratic institution despite all other shortcomings has set Turkey apart from many of its neighbors, where elections have been thoroughly rigged or did not take place at all.

That core institution is now in jeopardy. A major survey has found that public trust in the electoral process has deteriorated sharply: only 48% believe that the upcoming poll will be conducted fairly (comparable to the level of trust for elections in Russia), down from 70% in 2007 (on par with the US). The OSCE has cited concerns about fairness and transparency and recommended appointing observers for the June election.

In part, this is a result of the country's deepening political polarization and party tribalism. It also reflects the rising number of fraud allegations at polling stations in recent elections. In an insecure political atmosphere driven by wild conspiracy theories, high level corruption scandals and judicial vendettas that can land the losers in prison, more voters appear convinced that office holders will do whatever necessary to hold on to power.

Read more: Ahead of Turkey's Crucial Election, Citizens Take Action to Protect Their Vote | Karabekir Akkoyunlu

Greece: Syriza declares war at home on Greece's 'oligarchs'

International attention on Greece since the Syriza party took over has focused on the leftist government's fight against austerity.

But Panagiotis Nikoloudis (65), a supreme court prosecutor and specialist on economic crime, is leading another battle declared by Syriza: one on the home front, against some of the wealthy businessmen who dominate Greek political and economic life.

Speaking to parliament last week, Nikoloudis denounced an elite that included a "handful of families who think that the state and public service exists to service their own interests."

"Such businessmen influence politicians and state officials abuse their control of the media to unfairly win state
contracts, change regulations to their advantage or escape prosecution for illegal conduct," he said.

As a non-political outsider with a clean record, Nikoloudis is a popular appointment among Greeks who believe corruption is deeply embedded in society.

He has a reputation for action, and says the financial intelligence unit, which he led until now, developed a system of audits that identified over 20,000 people whose assets do not match their tax declarations.

Read more: Syriza declares war at home on Greece's 'oligarchs' - Independent.ie

Turkey: AKP faces tough test in Turkey's local polls - by Osman Kaytazoglu

Turkey is going to the polls in local elections on March 30. The vote comes amid allegations of government corruption and bribery, debates about a so-called "parallel state", and with government moves to block Twitter and YouTube heavily criticized.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his ruling Justice and Development Party [AKP] have come out of each general election since the party was first elected to power in 2002 with more votes than before, securing nearly 50 percent of the vote in 2011 general elections.

But this election may represent the AKP’s biggest challenge to date, and is being described as a litmus test for upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections. The main parties fielding candidates are Erdogan’s AKP, the main opposition party Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the pro-Kurdish Justice and Development Party (BDP).

The local elections first garnered attention with anti-government Gezi Park protests in June 2013, when thousands of people descended on a park in central Istanbul against the municipality’s gentrification plans.

The elections have been dominated by a new scandal that began on December 17 last year, when three AKP cabinet ministers’ children were arrested on corruption charges, and several government figures were implicated in graft probes.

Turkey’s main opposition party, the Republic People’s Party (CHP), has tried to make sure the graft probe remains at the centre of the election process. "The state’s conscience woke up on December 17," CHP leader, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, said, referring to when the first arrests were made.

Erdogan blamed rival Fethullah Gulen, the US-based head of the Gulen movement, for the recent controversies, and their feud has dominated the headlines. Erdogan described the Gulen movement as "a threat to national security" and called the Gulen movement "a terrorist organisation".

Recent opinion polls show that people are confused about the public AKP-Gulen feud. While 60 percent of Turkish people believe the corruption allegations are true, 57 percent also think that the graft probe is a coup attempt targeting Erdogan.

Ahead of the polls, various audio recordings have also leaked, with the latest reportedly showing top government and security officials discussing launching military operations into Syria. The Turkish government banned Twitter and YouTube over these leaks.

Read more: AKP faces tough test in Turkey's local polls - Europe - Al Jazeera English

Turkey: Local elections to determine Erdogan's future

Turkish citizens going to the polls for local elections will decide on far more than new mayors. After corruption and censorship scandals, they are also going to vote on the future of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Istanbul, the 15-million-metropolis where Recep Tayyip Erdogan started his political career as the city's mayor 20 years ago, is going to play a decisive role in Turkey's local elections on Sunday (30.03.2014). If Erdogan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) were to lose here, it would translate to a serious blow to the prime minister's power.

Mustafa Sarigul is prepared to deal that blow to Erdogan. The 57-year-old mayor of Istanbul's wealthy district of Sisli is on the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) ticket and faces Erdogan's fellow party member and ruling city mayor Kadi Topbas in elections.

 Polls suggest it's going to be a neck-and-neck contest. During the campaign, Sarigul has promised to introduce free Wi-Fi across the city and provide free public transport for students - a clear signal that he wants to win over Turkey's young generation. According to Erdogan, Sarigul is an "anarchist."

Recent corruption allegations have taken their toll on Erdogan. Every other day, new embarrassing recordings of phone conversations have been leaked online - taped conversations between Erdogan and other government officials on bribery or how to put pressure on the media.

Erdogan has called it a conspiracy orchestrated by the movement of Islamic cleric Fethullah Gulen, who is currently living in the United States. The Gulen movement used to support the AKP but is now at odds with the government.

Erdogan has blamed Gulen supporters for launching a major corruption probe and sacked several thousand police officials, judges and prosecutors believed to be linked to the Gulen movement. Last week Erdogan shut down popular micro-blogging site Twitter to prevent further revelations. Telecommunications authorities on Thursday also enacted "administrative measures" against the YouTube video site. Erdogan's supporters have said such steps are necessary to protect the state while his opponents argue Erdogan launched an attack on democracy and that his actions represent a sign of panic and an increasingly authoritative style of politics.

Fethi Acikel, a professor of political science at Ankara University, said Erdogan's harsh and polarizing demeanor was a carefully calculated strategy. After the protests in Gezi Park last summer, the prime minister tried to aim for a strong Turkish presidential system by applying "controlled pressure" on society, Acikel told DW. Instead of the current, rather weak presidential position, Erdogan was pushing for a powerful head of state, similar to the French or US system - with himself at the helm.

But his plan didn't work out as he intended as more and more Turkish citizens turned away from him. Eight people died during the Gezi protests and polarization in society continued to increase. Corruption allegations fueled the anger even more, because they pointed to the party's alleged dark side. "That's why the local elections are a referendum so to speak on the AKP's nepotistic, corrupt and authoritarian politics," Acikel said.

Read more: Local elections to determine Erdogan's future | Europe | DW.DE | 27.03.2014

Turkish PM Corruption Activities Exposed: Turkey PM Erdogan says 'tapped' phone call to son 'fabricated'

Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan has angrily condemned as fabricated an audio recording that appears to show him talking to his son about hiding large sums of money.

He said the recording, allegedly tapped and posted on social media, was a "treacherous attack".
It appears to reveal Mr Erdogan asking his son Bilal to dispose of millions of euros in cash from a house.

The opposition has called for the prime minister's resignation.

The recordings, which could not be independently verified, were said to be of four conversations dating back to 17 December, when the sons of three ministers and business allies of the prime minister were detained in a high-level corruption investigation.

Correspondents say that the inquiry has presented a major challenge to Mr Erdogan's 11 years in power ahead of key local elections in March.

Cagil Kasapoglu from BBC Turkish says that, interestingly, neither the prime minister nor his party's spokespeople have denied that the voices on the recording belong to Erdogan and his son.

Their statement so far is that their voices were "montaged" to implicate them, our correspondent says.

During the conversation, a voice can be heard discussing how to reduce the funds to "zero" by distributing them among several businessmen.

At one point, the second voice says some 30 million euros ($40m/£24m) remains to be disposed of.

Read more: BBC News - Turkey PM Erdogan says 'tapped' phone call to son 'fabricated'