Surprisingly, the Japanese mass media does not report on these types of damages, but instead exaggerates the concerns about the joint custody system and reports in a way that stirs up anxiety.
Such a tough show to watch. On the one hand, the standing law prevents victims of abuse from having forced contact with their abusers… on the other, I feel so sorry for those parents who have had a falling out with their partner, only for their partner to take the children in spite. If you are an abuser, you SHOULDNT be able to see your kids. You lost that right when you put your hands on your partner… but for everyone else, the CHILD has a right to love and be loved by both parents
The panic that is constantly produced in Japanese media regarding abusive parents is enabled by the utter failure of the Japanese system - the utter lack of will - to even attempt to overcome the problem of domestic violence. Domestic violence is not even remotely treated as a crime in Japan; it's so normalized and people are systematically discouraged and made fun of and blamed for its occurrence, so it flourishes. If the cops and courts would just arrest domestic abusers and the courts enforce laws against it, and if solid on-gong educational campaigns were created to undermine and put a stop to it, then EVERYONE would benefit... except the corporate powerful Japanese ruling class which doesn't want its traditional privileges clipped.
In Japan, the sales activities of divorce lawyers have led to a mass production of child abductions and parent-child separations. Divorce lawyers get paid to make them successful.
My ex will not even let me see recent pictures of my boys. It is not fair to them and she could care less. There needs to be legal punishment for these “cold parents”. 😞
I've seen the same documentary from an Australian Network, and it hurts me a lot to see those fathers' who've been deprived by their own children. It is so disheartening and at the same time makes me angry at the Japanese Government for not doing anything.
There is nothing left for me to do but pray. Anyone there, I am constantly told that if I have a lawyer I will be able to see my boys again , but what about Vincent ? How about yourself ? I am on the 3rd year in court fighting for visitation . Is there any ways to make this work?
While it's understandable to be angry at the law itself, there should be equal blame on the parent with sole custody that doesn't seem emotionally intelligent enough to put their child ahead of their pride beyond the break up of 2 adults. Sure, if genuine abuse has occurred, I can understand why one would want the former spouse/parent out of your life, but an awful lot of cases are simple matters of growing apart, yet using the child as a powerful "weapon" against the ex.
Maybe they should also adjust the legal definition of kidnapping or child abduction in Japan if they can't even recognize something like that as child "abduction" per say to the point of refusing someone to use the word😮
Children needs to establish a stable relationship with both parents, in order to become balanced individuals. The courts could arrange supervision visits with the non-custodial parent at a center.
There are at least two points which should (and were not) made here about the children making obscene gestures at their mother in photos. One, as others in the comments are observing, is that this is solid evidence that the father of these children who took the photos AND sent them or allowed them to be sent to her is an UNFIT parent. But the definition of this has to be updated to contemporary understanding. Given that children will bond with their caregiver and adult parent figures no matter how horrible they are, the definition of an "unfit" parent is a person that has ceased to be a healthy psychological parent to the children; and continued bonding with them is verifiably deleterious to their mental health. So, this father should be relieved of these children immediately! SECOND point to be made, closely related, is to reiterate that an unfit parent is one with whom further bonding / attachment endangers them. It endangers their mental health, and has already permanently damaged their emotional capacity. This is EASILY demonstrated by the vast psychological literature on this topic, and ONLY JAPAN has a family "law" system that is so extremely overloaded with denial of the basic necessary understandings of children which have been in existence for as long as children have been studied. Ignorance of psychological realities is not the issue in Japanese society in general; but it is obviously an ENORMOUS gaping hole if we're talking about the judges. The refusal to acknowledge fundamental psychological realities and make them the foundation of a system of child care, child rights, and child well being is the primary grounding that has to be changed. First recognition must be given that children are persons in development; and that fact must be the foundation of remaking the legal order with the aim of making children's well-being the fundamental interest under consideration. A parent who cannot subordinate his or her selfish, mean-spirited worst tendencies to the interests of children should NOT be a parent. This mother deserves her children, of course. MORE IMPORTANTLY, because they are the vulnerable party, the children deserve their mother.
This is why Japan's birthrate is in terminal decline. Almost impossible to reproduce to the required levels to sustain the economic future of the nation. Laws that penalise a father for leaving the mother. Unfair on the children. Nobody is even I terested I. The children's views on this form of abuse even when the children caught in the middle give an account if their experience. Humans can be evil and cruel to the point of outright stupidity
Japan has 125 million people. It's not small. But the problem is that the parents are deemed to break the law if they see their children without the consent of the custodial parent.
It's highly misleading to start with a story about a mom losing her kids. This problem is overwhelmingly of MOTHERS kidnapping kids and leaving FATHERS without access to them. Should have started with a FATHER story.
The system would benefit GREATLY if Tanamura would admit publicly in each of the interviews he has done that he was an ENEMY of the children of left behind parents until he changed his mind and decided to support the primacy of children's psychological well-being. I would tell him this to his face if I could. He OPPOSED the rights of children to both parents and supported the insanity of the Japanese family law's systemic child abuse until some time after 2010 or 2011, when something (I don't know what!?) caused him to switch sides. The claims here that he makes... "consider the child's opinion" is a cop-out. What he knows perfectly well is that it is not a question of finding out the child's "opinion". They are children!! It is a question of determining and protecting the children's material legal rights! If you cannot make an honest and concrete fact the foundation, then you will founder forever! His understanding of what the reality is from "both perspectives" and open admission of this so that others could follow would be an act of courage. But he won't take it. He is Japanese. Too concerned about looking perfect and all good on the outside to become a Mandela, or a ML King, on behalf of children.
United States concluded bilateral mou with Taiwan regarding consular function /international parental child abduction. Japan not conclude bilateral mou with Taiwan regarding consular function /international parental child abduction. This is flagrant disregard of Japan's treaty obligation of un convention on the rights of the child (article 11) UN crc article11 1. States Parties shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad. 2. To this end, States Parties shall promote the conclusion of bilateral or multilateral agreements or accession to existing agreements
Why do you only talk to parents? WHY don't you talk to sociologists and psychologists who understand this problem and can diagnose it? You recognize, right, that the son/ victim Anthony says he welcomes the change to the law because he DESPARATELY needs to believe in it, even though it is a superficial, fictional change. It doesn't give him what the Japanese State took from him by allowing his mother to make use of Japan as a safe haven for child abduction. The law is a blunt instrument. It can't create family bonds. It can just destroy them.
But at least joint custody has been an option there. In Japan, there's no such thing until they changed the law which hasn't been fully implemented yet. 🤷
Summary 第二一三回 213th session of national congress 閣第四七号 Bill No.47 submitted by cabinet 民法等の一部を改正する法律案 Bill for partial amendment of Civil Code （審判による父母以外の親族と子との交流の定め） (Providing for exchange between the child and relatives other than the parents by a judge) 第七百六十六条の二 家庭裁判所は、前条第二項又は第三項の場合において、子の利益のため特に必要があると認めるときは、同条第一項に規定する子の監護について必要な事項として父母以外の親族と子との交流を実施する旨を定めることができる。 Article 766-2 In the case of paragraph (2) or (3) of the preceding Article, the family court may, when it finds it particularly necessary for the interest of the child, provide for the implementation of exchanges between the child and relatives other than the parents as necessary matters for the custody of the child as prescribed in paragraph (1) of the same Article. ２ 前項の定めについての前条第二項又は第三項の規定による審判の請求は、次に掲げる者（第二号に掲げる者にあっては、その者と子との交流についての定めをするため他に適当な方法がないときに限る。）がすることができる。 A request for a trial under paragraph (2) or (3) of the preceding Article with respect to the provisions of the preceding paragraph may be filed by any of the following persons (in the case of a person listed in item (ii), limited to cases where there is no other appropriate method to make a stipulation on the interaction between such person and the child) 一 父母 father and mother 二 父母以外の子の親族（子の直系尊属及び兄弟姉妹以外の者にあっては、過去に当該子を監護していた者に限る。） (ii) A relative of the child other than the child's parents(In the case of a person other than the child's lineal descendants and siblings, limited to those who had custody of said child in the past)
（判決前の親子交流の試行的実施) (Pilot implementation of parent-child interaction prior to judgment) 第三十四条の四 裁判所は、第三十二条第一項の子の監護者の指定その他の子の監護に関する処分（子の監護に要する費用の分担に関する処分を除く。）の申立てがされている場合において、子の心身の状態に照らして相当でないと認める事情がなく、かつ、事実の調査のため必要があると認めるときは、当事者に対し、子との交流の試行的実施を促すことができる。 Article 34-4 In cases where a petition for designation of a person to take custody of a child under Article 32(1) or any other disposition concerning custody of a child (excluding a disposition concerning sharing of expenses required for custody of a child) has been filed, the court may, when it finds no circumstances that are found to be inappropriate in light of the physical and mental condition of the child and when it finds it necessary for the investigation of the facts, urge the parties concerned(abducting parent etc ) to conduct a pilot implementation of exchange with the child. ２ 裁判所は、前項の試行的実施を促すに当たっては、交流の方法、交流をする日時及び場所並びに家庭裁判所調査官その他の者の立会いその他の関与の有無を定めるとともに、当事者に対して子の心身に有害な影響を及ぼす言動を禁止することその他適当と認める条件を付することができる。 The court in facilitating the pilot implementation of parental child access prior to judgment set forth in the preceding paragraph, The court may specify the method of the exchange, the date, time and place of the exchange and whether or not a family court investigator or any other person is to be present or otherwise involved, and may prohibit the parties(left behind parent etc) from saying or doing anything that may have a harmful influence on the child's mind or body, or attach any other conditions it deems appropriate. ３ 裁判所は、第一項の試行的実施を促したときは、当事者に対してその結果の報告（当該試行的実施をしなかったときは、その理由の説明）を求めることができる。 3 When the court has facilitated the pilot implementation under paragraph (1), it may request the parties(abducting parent etc ) to report the results of the pilot implementation of parental child access . (If the parties did not make a said pilot implementation of parental child access prior judgment, an explanation of the reasons for the failure to do so).
Members of Family legislation subcommittee, legislative council and Japanese lawmakers also not faithfully response and categorically rejected this un resolution in parental child abduction cases ↓ Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in Which They Live General Assembly resolution 40/144 New York, 13 December 1985 Article 10 Any alien shall be free at any time to communicate with the consulate or diplomatic mission of the state of which he or she is a national or in their absence thereof,with the consulate or diplomatic mission of any other State entrusted with the protection of the interests of the State of which he or she is a national in the State where he or she reside
On the other hand, if a parent (who tend to be a husband) was abusive and his wife had to run away from him with her children, the law forces her to relate with him, even he is beyond reasonable. He would do anything to harrase her just to feel powerful. This law was made for men.
That's absolutely not true. Usually women get custody of the children (unless she is not japanese). If there is DV she should prove it. Usually she just has to say it without proof. That's why most women can get away with the abduction of their kids. Living in Tokyo for a while I saw many foreign dads having their children taken away from them, without a real proof of DV . This is so sad.
I dont think it's all about domestic violence. Fyi, in the US , 70% of domestic violence is initiated by the female. Learn something other than Hillary clinton and the Democrat party hate propaganda
Surprisingly, the Japanese mass media does not report on these types of damages, but instead exaggerates the concerns about the joint custody system and reports in a way that stirs up anxiety.
Such a tough show to watch. On the one hand, the standing law prevents victims of abuse from having forced contact with their abusers… on the other, I feel so sorry for those parents who have had a falling out with their partner, only for their partner to take the children in spite.
If you are an abuser, you SHOULDNT be able to see your kids. You lost that right when you put your hands on your partner… but for everyone else, the CHILD has a right to love and be loved by both parents
The panic that is constantly produced in Japanese media regarding abusive parents is enabled by the utter failure of the Japanese system - the utter lack of will - to even attempt to overcome the problem of domestic violence. Domestic violence is not even remotely treated as a crime in Japan; it's so normalized and people are systematically discouraged and made fun of and blamed for its occurrence, so it flourishes. If the cops and courts would just arrest domestic abusers and the courts enforce laws against it, and if solid on-gong educational campaigns were created to undermine and put a stop to it, then EVERYONE would benefit... except the corporate powerful Japanese ruling class which doesn't want its traditional privileges clipped.
So because parents fought kids are also punished by denying them access to one parent?
I had no idea this was a thing that happened in japan....
It even happens in South Korea hate to say unfortunately 😢
Me either
@@taniahhorton6162we’re talking about Japan you dmb bch
Had no idea this was even a thing
This is my current situation here in Japan😭I have no contact with my daughter for almost 3 years now .
what really worries me is the photos of the children cursing at her mother, the father is a sick person and those photos are enough evidence
This country should not be on the G7, for this very reason.
This country family law is not member state of G7,OECD countries .
Moron
Al Jazeera English, Wow, this made my day brighter! Thank you!
In Japan, the sales activities of divorce lawyers have led to a mass production of child abductions and parent-child separations. Divorce lawyers get paid to make them successful.
Ofcourse.wake up . who doesn’t work for money?
NEVER have children in a nation that has laws like this.
My ex will not even let me see recent pictures of my boys. It is not fair to them and she could care less. There needs to be legal punishment for these “cold parents”. 😞
Where are you Japan ?
....and they wonder why the low birthrate!
Anthony’s mother sounds unhinged. I empathise greatly with him!
Fascinating.reporting. Amazing country and people. Terrible law
I've seen the same documentary from an Australian Network, and it hurts me a lot to see those fathers' who've been deprived by their own children. It is so disheartening and at the same time makes me angry at the Japanese Government for not doing anything.
There is nothing left for me to do but pray. Anyone there, I am constantly told that if I have a lawyer I will be able to see my boys again , but what about Vincent ? How about yourself ? I am on the 3rd year in court fighting for visitation . Is there any ways to make this work?
While it's understandable to be angry at the law itself, there should be equal blame on the parent with sole custody that doesn't seem emotionally intelligent enough to put their child ahead of their pride beyond the break up of 2 adults. Sure, if genuine abuse has occurred, I can understand why one would want the former spouse/parent out of your life, but an awful lot of cases are simple matters of growing apart, yet using the child as a powerful "weapon" against the ex.
Maybe they should also adjust the legal definition of kidnapping or child abduction in Japan if they can't even recognize something like that as child "abduction" per say to the point of refusing someone to use the word😮
Children needs to establish a stable relationship with both parents, in order to become balanced individuals. The courts could arrange supervision visits with the non-custodial parent at a center.
There are at least two points which should (and were not) made here about the children making obscene gestures at their mother in photos. One, as others in the comments are observing, is that this is solid evidence that the father of these children who took the photos AND sent them or allowed them to be sent to her is an UNFIT parent. But the definition of this has to be updated to contemporary understanding. Given that children will bond with their caregiver and adult parent figures no matter how horrible they are, the definition of an "unfit" parent is a person that has ceased to be a healthy psychological parent to the children; and continued bonding with them is verifiably deleterious to their mental health. So, this father should be relieved of these children immediately!
SECOND point to be made, closely related, is to reiterate that an unfit parent is one with whom further bonding / attachment endangers them. It endangers their mental health, and has already permanently damaged their emotional capacity. This is EASILY demonstrated by the vast psychological literature on this topic, and ONLY JAPAN has a family "law" system that is so extremely overloaded with denial of the basic necessary understandings of children which have been in existence for as long as children have been studied. Ignorance of psychological realities is not the issue in Japanese society in general; but it is obviously an ENORMOUS gaping hole if we're talking about the judges. The refusal to acknowledge fundamental psychological realities and make them the foundation of a system of child care, child rights, and child well being is the primary grounding that has to be changed. First recognition must be given that children are persons in development; and that fact must be the foundation of remaking the legal order with the aim of making children's well-being the fundamental interest under consideration. A parent who cannot subordinate his or her selfish, mean-spirited worst tendencies to the interests of children should NOT be a parent. This mother deserves her children, of course. MORE IMPORTANTLY, because they are the vulnerable party, the children deserve their mother.
This is why Japan's birthrate is in terminal decline. Almost impossible to reproduce to the required levels to sustain the economic future of the nation. Laws that penalise a father for leaving the mother. Unfair on the children. Nobody is even I terested I. The children's views on this form of abuse even when the children caught in the middle give an account if their experience. Humans can be evil and cruel to the point of outright stupidity
Madness, only after immigrants with the help of international pressure are they now trying make small changes.
For such a small country, how can parents hide with abducted children?
Japan has 125 million people. It's not small.
But the problem is that the parents are deemed to break the law if they see their children without the consent of the custodial parent.
And the police protected the abducting parent. The parent left behind can do nothing. Didn't u understand the reportage?
@@TheNonpariel the OP said small not unpopulated... logical fallacy much? Japan is small. Consisting of timy islands.
Japan is not small. Compared to Sweden (same landmass) Japan is huge
@@bevs9995 you are confusing population with size... japan is small.
when the law is above the law you go to the outlaws to get justice.
Wtf are i talking about? The main victims here are the children! Do u think about all the trauma caused to the kids.
@@katojousama3905 indeed. You should need a license to reproduce.
It's highly misleading to start with a story about a mom losing her kids. This problem is overwhelmingly of MOTHERS kidnapping kids and leaving FATHERS without access to them.
Should have started with a FATHER story.
The system would benefit GREATLY if Tanamura would admit publicly in each of the interviews he has done that he was an ENEMY of the children of left behind parents until he changed his mind and decided to support the primacy of children's psychological well-being. I would tell him this to his face if I could. He OPPOSED the rights of children to both parents and supported the insanity of the Japanese family law's systemic child abuse until some time after 2010 or 2011, when something (I don't know what!?) caused him to switch sides. The claims here that he makes... "consider the child's opinion" is a cop-out. What he knows perfectly well is that it is not a question of finding out the child's "opinion". They are children!! It is a question of determining and protecting the children's material legal rights! If you cannot make an honest and concrete fact the foundation, then you will founder forever!
His understanding of what the reality is from "both perspectives" and open admission of this so that others could follow would be an act of courage. But he won't take it. He is Japanese. Too concerned about looking perfect and all good on the outside to become a Mandela, or a ML King, on behalf of children.
Self happiness is TRUE😮❤
Problem with Japan is accepting flaws and accepting the need to change or improve.. It’s not easy being perfect
I also want half custody my child, my wife took away from me my child 😢 I’m facing this problem in osaka
United States concluded bilateral mou with Taiwan regarding consular function /international parental child abduction.
Japan not conclude bilateral mou with Taiwan regarding consular function /international parental child abduction.
This is flagrant disregard of Japan's treaty obligation of un convention on the rights of the child (article 11)
UN crc article11
1. States Parties shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad.
2. To this end, States Parties shall promote the conclusion of bilateral or multilateral agreements or accession to existing agreements
難しい問題ですね。
日本の裁判所のしてくる親子引き離しDV運用はハンパないです。
Translated
Japanese court separate child from parent by fake dv allegation.
This practices by court is rampant in Japan
Why? It seems pretty much the norm elsewhere!
Finally addressing the s-o++ topic!!!!!!!!!
Why do you only talk to parents? WHY don't you talk to sociologists and psychologists who understand this problem and can diagnose it?
You recognize, right, that the son/ victim Anthony says he welcomes the change to the law because he DESPARATELY needs to believe in it, even though it is a superficial, fictional change. It doesn't give him what the Japanese State took from him by allowing his mother to make use of Japan as a safe haven for child abduction. The law is a blunt instrument. It can't create family bonds. It can just destroy them.
Thought this was just an American thing , since divorce is very one sided in the US.
But at least joint custody has been an option there. In Japan, there's no such thing until they changed the law which hasn't been fully implemented yet. 🤷
how do u penalize brainwashing
Al Jazeera! Please, make a documentary about the Peshawar School Massacre in Pakistan in December 2014.
Summary
第二一三回 213th session of national congress
閣第四七号 Bill No.47 submitted by cabinet
民法等の一部を改正する法律案 Bill for partial amendment of Civil Code
（審判による父母以外の親族と子との交流の定め）
(Providing for exchange between the child and relatives other than the parents by a judge)
第七百六十六条の二 家庭裁判所は、前条第二項又は第三項の場合において、子の利益のため特に必要があると認めるときは、同条第一項に規定する子の監護について必要な事項として父母以外の親族と子との交流を実施する旨を定めることができる。
Article 766-2 In the case of paragraph (2) or (3) of the preceding Article, the family court may, when it finds it particularly necessary for the interest of the child, provide for the implementation of exchanges between the child and relatives other than the parents as necessary matters for the custody of the child as prescribed in paragraph (1) of the same Article.
２ 前項の定めについての前条第二項又は第三項の規定による審判の請求は、次に掲げる者（第二号に掲げる者にあっては、その者と子との交流についての定めをするため他に適当な方法がないときに限る。）がすることができる。
A request for a trial under paragraph (2) or (3) of the preceding Article with respect to the provisions of the preceding paragraph may be filed by any of the following persons
(in the case of a person listed in item (ii), limited to cases where there is no other appropriate method to make a stipulation on the interaction between such person and the child)
一 父母 father and mother
二 父母以外の子の親族（子の直系尊属及び兄弟姉妹以外の者にあっては、過去に当該子を監護していた者に限る。）
(ii) A relative of the child other than the child's parents(In the case of a person other than the child's lineal descendants and siblings, limited to those who had custody of said child in the past)
（判決前の親子交流の試行的実施)
(Pilot implementation of parent-child interaction prior to judgment)
第三十四条の四 裁判所は、第三十二条第一項の子の監護者の指定その他の子の監護に関する処分（子の監護に要する費用の分担に関する処分を除く。）の申立てがされている場合において、子の心身の状態に照らして相当でないと認める事情がなく、かつ、事実の調査のため必要があると認めるときは、当事者に対し、子との交流の試行的実施を促すことができる。
Article 34-4 In cases where a petition for designation of a person to take custody of a child under Article 32(1) or any other disposition concerning custody of a child (excluding a disposition concerning sharing of expenses required for custody of a child) has been filed, the court may, when it finds no circumstances that are found to be inappropriate in light of the physical and mental condition of the child and when it finds it necessary for the investigation of the facts, urge the parties concerned(abducting parent etc ) to conduct a pilot implementation of exchange with the child.
２ 裁判所は、前項の試行的実施を促すに当たっては、交流の方法、交流をする日時及び場所並びに家庭裁判所調査官その他の者の立会いその他の関与の有無を定めるとともに、当事者に対して子の心身に有害な影響を及ぼす言動を禁止することその他適当と認める条件を付することができる。
The court in facilitating the pilot implementation of parental child access prior to judgment set forth in the preceding paragraph,
The court may specify the method of the exchange, the date, time and place of the exchange and whether or not a family court investigator or any other person is to be present or otherwise involved, and may prohibit the parties(left behind parent etc) from saying or doing anything that may have a harmful influence on the child's mind or body, or attach any other conditions it deems appropriate.
３ 裁判所は、第一項の試行的実施を促したときは、当事者に対してその結果の報告（当該試行的実施をしなかったときは、その理由の説明）を求めることができる。
3 When the court has facilitated the pilot implementation under paragraph (1), it may request the parties(abducting parent etc ) to report the results of the pilot implementation of parental child access . (If the parties did not make a said pilot implementation of parental child access prior judgment, an explanation of the reasons for the failure to do so).
Members of Family legislation subcommittee, legislative council and Japanese lawmakers also not faithfully response and categorically rejected this un resolution in parental child abduction cases
↓
Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in Which They Live
General Assembly resolution 40/144
New York, 13 December 1985
Article 10
Any alien shall be free at any time to communicate with the consulate or diplomatic mission of the state of which he or she is a national or in their absence thereof,with the consulate or diplomatic mission of any other State entrusted with the protection of the interests of the State of which he or she is a national in the State where he or she reside
Oda Tokugawa hisdyishi !!!!!!
What does this have to do with Gaza?
We can and should be able to care about more than one thing.
There are other things happening in the world.
Who said it does?
Nothing, thank goodness!
On the other hand, if a parent (who tend to be a husband) was abusive and his wife had to run away from him with her children, the law forces her to relate with him, even he is beyond reasonable. He would do anything to harrase her just to feel powerful. This law was made for men.
This is false.
You're spreading misinformation, please stop.
That's absolutely not true.
Usually women get custody of the children (unless she is not japanese).
If there is DV she should prove it. Usually she just has to say it without proof. That's why most women can get away with the abduction of their kids.
Living in Tokyo for a while I saw many foreign dads having their children taken away from them, without a real proof of DV . This is so sad.
I disagree. I have met numerous mentally unstable and abusive Japanese women. I have experienced it first hand. The women are just as bad.
What about the women who can't see their children?
I dont think it's all about domestic violence. Fyi, in the US , 70% of domestic violence is initiated by the female. Learn something other than Hillary clinton and the Democrat party hate propaganda