Watching this brings back memories of Nigeria's 2023 elections. It was (one of a series of) turning point(s) for me when it slowly sank in that the country wasn't worth building a life in. Working remotely & spending in a local currency meant that for the past couple of years, I was insulated and could accumulate savings with little effort. But, the blatant corruption pushed me off the edge.
Quick scan of my social network just confirms the same: anyone extremely agentic, intelligent, or educated I know has either left, is in the process of leaving, or is considering leaving.
Last person out of Nigeria can turn the lights off.
rayiner · 31m ago
This is why my dad left Bangladesh in 1989. Over the years he developed hope that maybe things had turned around. For awhile, the government wasn’t quite so corrupt and GDP was growing at a fast clip. Then the people overthrew the government and now who knows. I could see that he was upset about having believed for the moment in the country getting better.
churchill · 13m ago
I've been through your comment history and I can relate. If you're highly placed enough as an elite, you can form a counter-elite and stage a change of government.
But, in most cases, if you have portable, in-demand skills, it's more reasonable to decamp to a better team than try to fix a failing one. The ones with enough proximity to make any change are usually co-opted, driven into exile, threatened into compliance, or straight-up murdered.
Based on what I read about her and the Awami League, I think removing Hasina will be a net-positive for Bangladesh. Yunus is a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist and widely-respected, and if they can keep AL out of power, and pacify any extremists, I think Bangladesh will quickly continue growing.
adiabatichottub · 2h ago
That's very sad to hear. I've been to Lagos and I always have wished I could have visited longer. As an American I found it an absolutely fascinating place.
churchill · 2h ago
I'm happy (?) you found it fascinating, but only because you were visiting. If you had to live in Lagos for, say, 1 year, your opinion would change drastically and you'd be eager to leave.
adiabatichottub · 14m ago
In many ways it seemed to be a very chaotic place, where money makes the rules, and most people get by however they can, some in the direst of circumstances. I can understand not wanting to live there long-term. But it's also a city of over 10 million people, so I can only image there's so much more to it. I'm just genuinely glad I had the opportunity to visit, because it made real to me the place and the people that I would otherwise only hear about on the news.
pastage · 1h ago
Considering the population growth of Nigeria I find it hard to believe that one of the most populated countries in the world will ever run out of talented people.
churchill · 59m ago
The systems eroding the country & making the educated & talented leave will make any new batch raised to self-select out of the country. In fact, successive generations of talented kids won't even be raised (or, only at a significantly reduced rate) because of poor investment in education.
Or, to be blunt: a syndicate of evil clown politicians have seized control of the ship of state, looting it of anything not bolted down, and murdering anyone who challenges them.
Fixing it is an extremely high-cost endeavor, so leaving is just the only logical option if you have a portable, in-demand skill.
Perfect example would be 1940s China vs. modern China. Same people, but went from a pre-industrial hellhole to a technological superpower because the gov. deliberately invested into creating a sustainable STEM pipeline and creating a nation where their talented young people are happy to live and work. Nigeria isn't doing any of that in any significant capacity.
On the population angle, Nigeria's politicians have a thing for fudging population numbers and realistic figures are closer to 120M to 140M, vs. the 240-260m Western demographers take at face value. I explained in detail in this comment here. [0]
Wild that he even had the opportunity to ask these questions and do his own investigating. The exact same issues happened in a recent US election, but in ours no one was allowed to examine any of the things he was able to.
Sounds like elections in both Russia and the US are rotten these days. Curious to note which party has no desire to rectify these issues.
No comments yet
nonethewiser · 2h ago
Well this starts off with a bang:
>In germany we just saw very public rigging of an election for the federal high court of justice.
Not familiar with that but I imagine that is going to be a controversial statement.
Using Russia as a subject is interesting. A western audience is probably a lot less defensive against the idea that Russia rigs their elections. The video looks interesting.
devjab · 2h ago
> Not familiar with that but I imagine that is going to be a controversial statement.
I'm not sure if it's fair to call it rigging, but there was a massive smear campaign against a judge nominated for their constitutional court. Leading to the nomination being withdrawn when it really should've been an appointment as usual. Which is likely the first massive step toward Germany politicising one of the foundations of their democracy, similar to how the USA supreme court seems like it's red vs blue when looked on from the outside.
I'm guessing this conference is rather left leaning, which is why they'd called that rigging, but there wasn't election fraud. It's an issue of course, since this means that rich people can essentially buy massive influence on the German democracy by clever use of social media and lies. Which may seem like the norm to a lot of people on HN, but that's not how it has traditionally been in Germany.
nozzlegear · 2h ago
> similar to how the USA supreme court seems like it's red vs blue when looked on from the outside.
It's not just the outside who see it that way!
meibo · 1h ago
Not to mention that one of the major issues in that debate (for the supposedly "centrist" party) was abortion rights - even though most of her views on the topic were fairly in line with other sitting judges.
It's now alleged that this was caused by a disinformation campaign targeting MPs of that party.
You are talking like this is the first time judges have been blocked for political reasons. See Horst Dreier in 2008 as a high-profile example.
stronglikedan · 2h ago
So they Kavanaugh'd him, but it actually worked!
dylan604 · 1h ago
If Kavanaugh has become a verb, shouldn't Garland'd be a thing too when the Senate denies POTUS his constitutional right?
delichon · 1h ago
Since Garland didn't even get to a vote, it wasn't necessary to Kavanaugh (or Bork) him to the same degree. Abe Fortus got denied a vote via filibuster in '68, so you could say that Merrick Garland was Fortused.
dylan604 · 1h ago
But a filibuster is an accepted way for the minority to fight back. That's not the same thing as making up a new rule and denying a vote because it's a lame duck year. To equate the two is just strained logic at best.
No comments yet
FergusArgyll · 1h ago
Borked was the original
robterrell · 1h ago
This is the correct answer. More memorable and better number of syllables. Although I'm sure he wasn't the first either.
hungryhobbit · 2h ago
There's no "seeming": the current US Supreme Court is nakedly political.
stronglikedan · 2h ago
Well, they're just people, so of course they are. Thankfully, there are folks representing both parties to keep it fair.
dylan604 · 2h ago
Thankfully??? Did I miss the /s at the end of that? Do you honestly believe it is fairly representing?
MisterMower · 1h ago
I am shocked, shocked I say, at discovering the US Supreme Court engages in politics! I got bad news for you friend: it always has been. That, or maybe you’re one of those knaves who thinks it’s only fair when your side gets to rule.
dylan604 · 1h ago
What part of my comment leads you to take away whatever is in your head? I just pointed out that SCOTUS is not a fair representation. You've clearly read somethings in between the lines or are confusing other threads.
MisterMower · 55m ago
It is by definition representative and fair: Senators chosen by the people approved thier nomination to the court. You’re not this uninformed about how US politics work, are you?
sixothree · 57m ago
I see this so often it gets old especially from a certain side of the aisle. If I make an intentionally contained and concise argument someone always seems to interpret it as if it was part of some larger point I'm making. I used to believe it was a tactic to draw you in. But more and more I believe it's reading comprehension and a good bit of built-in bias.
tietjens · 2h ago
It shouldn’t be that controversial a statement. It’s an accurate assessment of what happened this summer in Germany. A judicial candidate was destroyed by false claims online. To me it seemed like German politicians were reading too much US news and wound up aping patterns seen there.
dathinab · 2h ago
> imagine that is going to be a controversial statement.
not really
but compared to what seems to be happened nearly daily in the US it really is not a big deal
but compared to what is supposed to happen it was a big deal
which seems to be a common trend, being very pissed of about what happened in German politics, then looking to the US and being "they did what now!?", oh it seems things are still fine here
sho_hn · 2h ago
Maybe pick a functional democracy as your yardstick?
Norway is better ranked, sure so are most other Nordic countries.
But the difference between a (using their terms) "full democracy" and a noticeable better (in the index) "full democracy" is much less noticeable then the difference between a "full democracy" and a "flawed democracy".
The other thing is that is a more then imperfect index. To be able to create such an index you need to select metrics and criteria which are strongly oversimplified. Weather or not this can lead to a bias. Also there is a time delay e.g. 2025 stats are not yet out.
Anyway I'm really getting off topic. The more relevant thing is, that it doesn't matter too much if there are better (or worse) of countries in the index. What rally matters is that you see where your country can improve an try to push for it, even if it's just with voting, otherwise you will stagnate improvements once you reach a relative high standard.
V__ · 2h ago
It isn't. A right wind millionaire and his media outlet started a fake campaign against the potential judge. Other media and social media jumped on it as well and the "normal" conservative party was "concerned". A lot of heel-dragging later, the judge had enough and withdrew herself from consideration.
immibis · 2h ago
In Germany it's often illegal to make strong statements like this unless they can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Is that the case?
(That's partly why Germany is getting infested with Nazis again. You can go to jail for calling them out.)
V__ · 2h ago
It's a civil matter, but yes. Sadly, courts are slow and the whole story was "there might have been plagiarism in her thesis". Even as traditional media started to explain the story as baseless, social media is a different beast.
ranger_danger · 1h ago
Can you provide some sources to back up your claims?
echelon_musk · 2h ago
Courageous.
kwanbix · 2h ago
Very.
reactordev · 1h ago
[flagged]
krapp · 1h ago
The funny thing is after Trump cried wolf so hard about the 2020 election even if that were true no one would take any Democratic attempt at an investigation seriously.
And Trump has even made statements which can easily be interpreted as admission[0].
That’s right. Cry wolf, no foul, cry wolf again but this time, commit foul. Cry wolf one more time for good measure and unleash the military on the citizens.
derbOac · 1h ago
Are there center or organizations that focus on studying election fraud and manipulation and how to identify it? In a rigorous nonpartisan (to the extent that's possible) way? Organizations that would regularly support and disseminate the sorts of papers being discussed?
clownworld1 · 2h ago
[flagged]
dang · 1h ago
Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News. This subthread (and other similar ones) has nothing to do with anything specific or interesting about the actual OP. That makes it bad for this site. That remains true, btw, even if you're 100% right about everything.
Since unsubstantive/indignant rhetoric tends to attract upvotes, generic dross like often floats to the top of threads, choking out any actually interesting discussion. Therefore please don't post it.
Now do when your country is a democracy. Step 1 would just need a few tweaks like defund public media, start your own social platforms, have existing social platforms bend the knee, appointing judges, appointing executive board members.
dkiebd · 1h ago
I live in a democracy, Spain, and the government controls the press through subsidies and ads. All mass media is losing money; our biggest media conglomerate has been in a hole of almost 1 billion euros for decades. The president of the country openly brags on TV about how he controls the public prosecutors. A former president (of the same party) changed the law so the government elects the judges directly decades ago.
Of course you will never hear about this because we are not Poland or Hungary, we did not have the audacity of voting the way they did :)
Quick scan of my social network just confirms the same: anyone extremely agentic, intelligent, or educated I know has either left, is in the process of leaving, or is considering leaving.
Last person out of Nigeria can turn the lights off.
But, in most cases, if you have portable, in-demand skills, it's more reasonable to decamp to a better team than try to fix a failing one. The ones with enough proximity to make any change are usually co-opted, driven into exile, threatened into compliance, or straight-up murdered.
Based on what I read about her and the Awami League, I think removing Hasina will be a net-positive for Bangladesh. Yunus is a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist and widely-respected, and if they can keep AL out of power, and pacify any extremists, I think Bangladesh will quickly continue growing.
Or, to be blunt: a syndicate of evil clown politicians have seized control of the ship of state, looting it of anything not bolted down, and murdering anyone who challenges them.
Fixing it is an extremely high-cost endeavor, so leaving is just the only logical option if you have a portable, in-demand skill.
Perfect example would be 1940s China vs. modern China. Same people, but went from a pre-industrial hellhole to a technological superpower because the gov. deliberately invested into creating a sustainable STEM pipeline and creating a nation where their talented young people are happy to live and work. Nigeria isn't doing any of that in any significant capacity.
On the population angle, Nigeria's politicians have a thing for fudging population numbers and realistic figures are closer to 120M to 140M, vs. the 240-260m Western demographers take at face value. I explained in detail in this comment here. [0]
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44870564
Sounds like elections in both Russia and the US are rotten these days. Curious to note which party has no desire to rectify these issues.
No comments yet
>In germany we just saw very public rigging of an election for the federal high court of justice.
Not familiar with that but I imagine that is going to be a controversial statement.
Using Russia as a subject is interesting. A western audience is probably a lot less defensive against the idea that Russia rigs their elections. The video looks interesting.
I'm not sure if it's fair to call it rigging, but there was a massive smear campaign against a judge nominated for their constitutional court. Leading to the nomination being withdrawn when it really should've been an appointment as usual. Which is likely the first massive step toward Germany politicising one of the foundations of their democracy, similar to how the USA supreme court seems like it's red vs blue when looked on from the outside.
I'm guessing this conference is rather left leaning, which is why they'd called that rigging, but there wasn't election fraud. It's an issue of course, since this means that rich people can essentially buy massive influence on the German democracy by clever use of social media and lies. Which may seem like the norm to a lot of people on HN, but that's not how it has traditionally been in Germany.
It's not just the outside who see it that way!
It's now alleged that this was caused by a disinformation campaign targeting MPs of that party.
https://www.volksverpetzer.de/analyse/brosius-gersdorf-union...
No comments yet
not really
but compared to what seems to be happened nearly daily in the US it really is not a big deal
but compared to what is supposed to happen it was a big deal
which seems to be a common trend, being very pissed of about what happened in German politics, then looking to the US and being "they did what now!?", oh it seems things are still fine here
UK, Canada, Spain are similar ranked.
Norway is better ranked, sure so are most other Nordic countries.
But the difference between a (using their terms) "full democracy" and a noticeable better (in the index) "full democracy" is much less noticeable then the difference between a "full democracy" and a "flawed democracy".
The other thing is that is a more then imperfect index. To be able to create such an index you need to select metrics and criteria which are strongly oversimplified. Weather or not this can lead to a bias. Also there is a time delay e.g. 2025 stats are not yet out.
Anyway I'm really getting off topic. The more relevant thing is, that it doesn't matter too much if there are better (or worse) of countries in the index. What rally matters is that you see where your country can improve an try to push for it, even if it's just with voting, otherwise you will stagnate improvements once you reach a relative high standard.
(That's partly why Germany is getting infested with Nazis again. You can go to jail for calling them out.)
And Trump has even made statements which can easily be interpreted as admission[0].
But it doesn't matter.
[0]https://www.c-span.org/clip/white-house-event/user-clip-trum...
Since unsubstantive/indignant rhetoric tends to attract upvotes, generic dross like often floats to the top of threads, choking out any actually interesting discussion. Therefore please don't post it.
From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:
"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."
"Please don't fulminate."
No comments yet
Of course you will never hear about this because we are not Poland or Hungary, we did not have the audacity of voting the way they did :)