World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Claudia Sheinbaum's father was a biology professor at UNAM, her mother a chemical engineer. She studied physics at UNAM (Universidad Autonomo de Mexico) and did her dissertation for doctoral work comparing energy use of the US and Mexico at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory in Berkeley, California. She returned to the faculty of engineering at UNAM in 1995. In 2000 she was appointed energy minister in the Mexico City government by the city's Mayor Lopez Obrador.  From 2018 to 2023 she was Mayor of Mexico City and a close associate of Lopez Obrador who supported her for president in 2024. Mexico limits presidents to one six year term. This period was overshadowed by the migration crisis with the US, building of the Border Wall by Trump, the negotiation of the new trade agreement with the US and Canada, the pandemic and its impact on the poorer classes in Mexico. Obrador attacked corruption in Mexico that had become entrenched under previous parties to bring good governance. Under Obrador Mexico brought millions out of poverty. Sheinbaum's sweeping election win shows that Obrador is one of the most popular presidents in the world. Mexico has an opportunity to bring tens of millions more into the mainstream economy under Sheinbaum. As a neighbor of the US Mexico stands to benefit from a diversifying supply chain for the US that includes Mexico and India that will boost Mexico's manufacturing, create jobs and increase economic growth. ...
Hindustan Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The full text of the letter is given here. In this letter the U.S. sets out some important facts about events that happened during the coronavirus crisis during the crucial 4 month period from December 2019 to March 2020. Every week lost in this time due to reasons of a lack of transparency, openness meant hundreds of thousands of people more infected and tens of thousands of deaths worldwide. There are questions of transparency, of openness and this raises questions about the manner in which the World Health Assembly operates with hundreds of small countries in Africa and Asia having votes equal to that of the U.S., India, Brazil, Mexico with votes taken of over 200 countries. The entire election process can now be seen as questionable, when over a billion people in one country alone such as India or hundreds of millions in Brazil and Mexico would have to bear the consequences of poor decisions made by small countries that can be swayed in one direction or another based on political bias and other considerations that have nothing to do with global health.  At the conclusion of the letter by the U.S. to the current WHO shaped by a controversial election in 2017 the following is stated about the standards set by Gro Harlem Brundtland and which helped the world prevent the SARS crisis which originated in China in 2003 from spreading to the large countries of the world India, Brazil, Mexico, and other such countries in Asia and Africa, Latin America, and the U.S. European Union. "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." Even this does not come to grips with the flawed way in which the election of WHO head is done. It can no longer be relied on when there is the danger that lack of transparency can emerge in the WHO leadership itself because of a flawed process. It risks endangering the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions in countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico, as well as in the relatively small countries of Africa and Latin America where even basic water supplies are at risk but which could tilt elections at the World Health Assembly. Consider that a cyclone just hit the Indian state of West Bengal and Bangladesh on May 20 just as the coronavirus pandemic is spreading. That this region of 1.5 billion people had just 2 votes out of over 200 cast at the World Health Assembly in 2017 shocking. And even these votes cast based on old geopolitical considerations not how good the candidate is, and how good the country he is coming from is in terms of its record  on public health. The irony here is that private foundations in the advanced countries in the U.S. and Europe some of whom are major donors to WHO did not think that more experienced candidates in their own countries with a better record of public health such as in France or Germany are better qualified, in a flawed NGO support mentality left from the Clinton years. Basically the people in these large countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico were disenfranchised, when the austerity policies were consuming the European Union, and the U.S. had just elected a new administration itself groping for ways to reverse years of neglect of public services and infrastructure priorities. They would trust good leaders no matter where they come from, who have a record of transparency, leadership, and all the values we cherish together no matter where we come from. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Abortion rights was at the centre of the governor's race in Kentucky and a constitutional amendment protecting abortion rights in Ohio in yesterday's US elections. Democrats supporting abortion rights won both races with large margins. Throughout 2023 abortion rights for women has emerged as a dominant issue in US elections.

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Britain's campaign finance laws limit each party to spending $29.5 million for the year before the election. British elections are determined by the results in 650 local constituencies, under a parliamentary system, making campaigning local. There too the laws are strict. Candidates for a parliamentary constituency have a limit of $60,000 for spending for the 5 months before the election, plus additional amounts depending on the number of voters and if it is rural or urban. Britain bans election advertising on commercial television and radio. Parties are provided pre-election broadcasts shown on commercial television and by the British Broadcasting Corporation. This stands in obvious contrast to the U.S. where an estimated $10 billion will be spent on the 2016 presidential election. Candidates spend as much time raising money as they do getting across their election message in the U.S. Britain also disproves the popular idea that election campaign spending inevitably moves in an upward trajectory. British researchers estimate the cost of the 1880 campaign to be 100 million pounds in 2002 prices, and the election spending in the 2010 British general election of 45.5 million pounds coming to less than half that....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden will give his farewell address on Jan 15 at 8 pm Eastern Time. It marks a vital point in a five decade career of public service, unprecedented in US history. Its impact is huge coming at the time of Covid pandemic and at a turning point in rebuilding America's infrastructure. What Biden missed was that migration needed to be brought under control taking immediate action as a top priority in 2021, not getting blindsided by the fact that Republicans were using strong language and the issue had become politicized. Biden did this for tariffs with China in 2020 keeping most of the DJT tariffs, he could have done the same keeping the basic border policies of the DJT administration and negotiating with Republicans in 2021 when he was in a good position to have legislation passed. Which he did late by Feb 2024 with Senator Lankford and Republicans but failed to get it through in the primary election season, by then too late. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ investigations of Facebook and Instagram showed how these social media companies business activity was damaging to young women's health in the US, Europe and other countries. Because of the reach of social media companies into the lives of millions of young people the damage was serious and extensive. This report in the WSJ describes the activities of management at Facebook and the resignation of one of the key executives from burnout herself. This WSJ report says that during the WSJ series on the investigations this and other key executives remained silent on the issues facing young women for mental health in the use of Facebook products.  One WSJ report in 2021 said that company documents showed Facebook knew that the company's products were toxic for teenage girls. Other issues emerged in the WSJ investigations such as the Outrage Algorithm which the WSJ says was made by tweaking some aspects of the company's algorithm as a way to counter dropping user engagement. This led to much angrier discourse on Facebook according to WSJ and other reports. The experiences at Facebook reflect the general experience of this period in 2000-2015 when business management shifted to an entirely different conception of business that ignored the importance of human values in the blind pursuit of rapid growth, profits to make acquisitions of smaller companies for further growth creating monopolistic firms. This extended to disruptions of democratic process with the Cambridge Analytica access to records of data of 87 million Facebook users as reported in WSJ, that were used to target social media users in the period leading to the 2018 election. With such activities the risks could be seen to the democratic process itself in addition to mental health by the emergence of social media in the short period of a dangerous decade 2010-2020, when there was little or no regulation of this medium.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ Explained looks at the House Speaker's election on Friday Jan 3, 2024. If one Republican vote joins Rep. Massie of Kentucky Mike Johnson cannot be reelected says WSJ. In that event Congress cannot ratify the election of DJT or Vance as president and vice president. On Jan 20 2025 Senate president Chuck Grassley would be made president of the US in such a situation.

BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Yoon Suk Yeol from visit to Biden at White House as South Korea's president to jail sentence for life for ordering arrests and deploying military troops on Dec 3 2024. It shows the unstable situation for democracy and politics in South Korea, with the country polarized. It is much more polarized than the US  or Europe. South Korea may have advanced rapidly with its economy using Japan as a model, yet the political situation in South Korea and the Korean peninsula remains highly unstable. By comparison India has a long history of elected assemblies in the states and regions dating back to the 1936-37 provincial assembly elections under the British- nearing a century of democratic self government by 2036, ten years from now. Even the shorter period of elected government in South Korea was interrupted by dictatorships and the military rule. The Indian Constitution modeled on the unwritten constitution of Britain and the written one in the US, has the allegiance of a population of 1.4 billion people, unprecedented in the history of mankind. There are as many languages in India as in Europe and the media is lively in every language, so that it is an encounter that is the one of the wonders of the world to know and grow up inside India in the second half of the twentieth and the first part of the 21st century. It is also the first modernization effort in the context of Britoish and American democratic forms of government for over 1.4 billion people, almost 2 billion people counting other regions such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines, that use India as their role model. The economic dynamism of the region required integration of sorts with the European Union and the US for scientific and industrial cooperation at every level which is now happening. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT's Flegenheimer provides this report on Ted Cruz as an aggressive young lawyer in the 2000 Bush campaign. Cruz had finished a clerkship with U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist in 1996-1997. He took the initiative to guide the legal filings before the Supreme Court in the 2000 Florida recount case Bush vs. Gore that decided the election result.
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hou You-Yi of the KMT and Tai Ching-Te of the DPP are candidates for the Taiwan elections in 2024. The Guardian looks at their differing positions in relation to China and the US.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US is on track to bring back 350,000 jobs in 2022 that were taken overseas during the two decades of hyper growth in China, according to the Reshoring Initiative. A false idea was created mostly by economists and business that shifted jobs to China during two Democratic and one Republican administration, the Clinton, Obama and the Bush administrations, that this would benefit the American workers and families through lower prices at the retail level. It ignored the severe damage this would do to jobs, incomes and whole communities when factories on which they depended for a living were shipped overseas. It damaged labor in ways that destroyed much of the American working class and the families built during the years of FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson. Business failed during this period to meet the challenge of higher American wages and productivity issues by using innovation and other steps to keep manufacturing at home.  This led to the hyper growth that did not benefit China, because a moderate pace of growth would have helped China control the rampant contamination of its air, water and soil. It also was leading China to a dead end reached during the 2016 election campaign with the election of president Trump with deep discontent from workers in midwestern states. The pandemic simply underscored the need for supply chains that were close to home and reliable in crises. By 2020 president  Biden was committing to a restructuring of the supply chains and pushing forward with it with legislation in the $369 billion Climate bill, and SCIENCE and Chips Act, to make solar panels, semiconductors and other products in the US. Reports from China showed that growth was slight or flat during 2022 and youth unemployment at 20%. The policy was to shift people back from the cities to the rural areas and support the informal economy, a sense of nationalist sentiment, and preparing for a future where the supply chain for the US and the European Union had moved away from China. In the long run the policies now look as ones that benefitted neither the US, the European Union, India or China.  ...
The Guardian Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Republicans won 218 seats to 211 for Democrats in a strongly contested election for the House with 6 Congressional races not yet called. Republicans unexpectedly gained 3 seats in New York to gain the majority. The NYT gives this visual presentation of where and what happened as seats switched on both sides in 2022 US Congressional midterms.

BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What the US wanted in the initial hours- use of Diego Garcia base and RAF base in Haverford Gloucestershire. UK's Keir Starmer first denied use of the bases and till he could verify US attacks were within international law. When Iran responded with a a barrage of drones and ballistic missiles 840 drones and 340 ballistic missiles and attacked the British base RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, suddenly Starmer saw the opportunity to justify US use of British bases on defensive grounds. DJT called the British response "very disappointing." Starmer told parliament-  "To be clear, the use of British bases is limited to the agreed defensive purposes; we are not joining the US and Israeli offensive strikes. The lessons of history have taught us that it is important when we make decisions like this, that we establish there is a lawful basis for what the United Kingdom is doing. That is one of the lessons from Iraq, and that there's a viable thought-through plan with an objective that can be achieved or has a viable prospect of being achieved.That is the principle that I applied to the decisions that I made over the weekend. This government does not believe in regime change from the skies." The situation Starmer faces domestically is that voters for Reform UK and Conservatives support full use of the airbases. Voters who vote for Liberals, Greens and Labour do not support use of the British airbases. Local elections in which Labour is seen losing a large share of its 2024 vote to Greens and Liberals is one factor the premier had in mind, in addition to issues in the war in Iraq.  Another is the consideration that Britain has a large presence in the Gulf from the days of the Empire when they were British colonies.Already in 24 hours 100,000 Britons have registered for help in the Gulf region. Britishers run much of the tourism, airlines and other business in the Gulf region as the Gulf states are small in area, with small populations and a large population from South Asia for certified migrant labor, and British managers at the higher levels. When Iran attacked UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia with drones and ballistic missiles it was clear that Britain was also being attacked though the attack on the RAF base in Cyprus was cited. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How the efforts of former Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, as head of the National Democratic Institute, and Senator John McCain, chairman of the International Republican Institute, to push for democratic processes in Egypt, failed to get the support of the Obama administration. Both wrote to Mr Mubarak in July 2010, asking that international monitors be allowed to observe the election in November 2010. The National Democratic Institute, is a US organization training Egyptians to be election monitors. After the renewal of martial law for another 2 years by Mubarak in May 2010, The Egypt Working Group, a bipartisan body of human rights activists, neoconservative policy makers and Mideast experts, was growing alarmed about the crackdown by Mubarak on anyone seeking transparency in the elections. It sent letters to Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in April and May 2010, saying the Mubarak move to rig the elections was dangerous as the young people in Egypt were increasingly agitated. The administration acted as if it was taken by surprise by the situation in Egypt, when respected leaders like Albright were cautioning the administration about the situation in Egypt from early 2010. Before and after the protests, the Obama administration was slow to support democratic processes in Egypt, and failed to take a clear consistent stand supporting the freedom of expression of the Egyptian people....
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US president DJT meets with Rutte of the Netherlands Jan 21, 2026. He says he has come up with a framework for US acquisition of Greenland, rights title, and ownership of the island for US security and world security. He called for immediate negotiations with the goal of US acquisition of the island of Greenland.  The political situation is evolving in this way. Germany is key in the developments for the US to acquire Greenland. Britain is standing it out with the Nordic countries as Starmer has shifted to the side of Sweden and Denmark with little to gain for the Labor government which is facing local elections and popularity of Reform UK Party. In this situation Italy and Germany have taken a posture of not making any statements. Germany facing Russian intervention in Ukrain on the east needs the US for joint security at a critical juncture when Russia and the US have agreed to respect each others area of influence. Italy is run by a northern Italy party leaning to the anti-immigration stance taken by DJT in the US. It makes little difference to Netherlands, Germany/Austria/Switzerland and Italy who controls Greenland and in the context of Russian advances and nuclear weapons technology would prefer US move to acquire Greenland and rapidly build up defenses in Greenland with large investments. To not disturb the alliance's northern countries (Britain and Nordics) Germany has taken a back seat to the rhetoric yet will be in the deciding role because of its stable government, support from all parts of the political spectrum for US control of Greenland except for the coalition junior partner the SPD. The SPD Defense Minister Pistorius may form parts of the SPD that see US owning the island as positive in the bolstering of its defense capabilities with th $1 trillion outlay in the budgeted investments. Starmer may have misread DJT and US support as the US president can make a very good case for US owning Greenland and getting Denmark to accept the offer of Harry Truman of $100 million made in 1947, updated for what that sum is today which is $1.5 billion. As DJT pointed out Macron has no longevity for his government in France, and cannot speak for that country. As Treasury Secretary Bessent who along with Rubio is part of the team that will work with the president says, Denmark is irrelevant to the issues US faces for US and world security. It is a small country, Denmark, with a population of 6 million most of it in the area near Copenhagen. Houston or Dallas has a much larger population. For Denmark to decide on momentous issues of US security for the entire eastern seaboard or world security, with ownership essential for the US,  when climate has made the Arctic important, is something the US does not accept.   ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Just 18% of the US population will decide who is the next president of the US. In 2020 even with a lead of 7 million votes Biden could have lost the election without 45,000 votes in Georgia, Wisconsin, and Arizona. Mrs. Clinton with 2.9 million vote lead lost the Electoral College without 80,000 votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The US Electoral College is unique among western countries and is based on a concept that the passions of the "general mass" of the population should be moderated by giving more power to smaller states. The US president is elected not by a direct vote but by a vote cast by state and its electoral college, and the total electoral college votes determines who won and who lost. The focus is on swingable states of which there were 10 in 2020. 

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The comparison by Goldsmith and Moyn has picked the wrong Roosevelt. Only Washington in the war of independence, Lincoln in the Civil War over slavery, and FDR Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the Great Depression and economic collapse, fall in that category and there is no one and nothing to compare with both the struggles they fought and the challenge to the survival of the US. On the next scale comes TR Teddy Roosevelt, and this is the Roosevelt to compare DJT with. TR was unconventional, TR spoke a different language and could be frank and outspoken. TR actions matched his words, as his days on the Indian frontier and with the Rough Riders. TR also had one term plus completing McKinley's term after his assasination. And TR like DJT did not like his successor and did everything to make the comeback denouncing the policies of his successor William Howard Taft in the 1912 election, which TR lost to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. All this is true for DJT in 2026. TR denounced the shift away from his "progressive policies" and the shift to corporate interests of Republican Taft. In this sense also DJT is similar as he denounced the shift to corporate interests of the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama years. TR was no country club Republican and was willing to confront opponents in the politics to fight for the benefit of the working man, splitting the Republican party in the process. This is true of DJT. TR launched the rebuilding of the Navy, and announced he would reassert the Monroe Doctrine. DJT is doing the same and is reasserting the Monroe Doctrine. One could say that DJT feels the hidden TR in him and like Teddy Roosevelt is putting America in the place it once was. For TR the industrial revolution had distorted a country founded on the backs of settlers owning the land independent and rugged, as industry turned the country into corporate interests and workers in factories with few rights, and poor working conditions and wages. This TR even as a Republican fought to reverse. In DJT there is the Republican also of a different mould who fights to reverse the situation created by Bush/Clinton/Bush/ Obama over three decades since the 1990's when America has fallen to new lows when drug trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela are able to run rampant over the western hemisphere, when elites in Canada and the US act impotent in the face of this, or living in their own world away from the streets and neighborhoods of America devastated by drug trafficking, towns and neighborhoods from Janesville to Flint economically deprived as elites shifted manufacturing overseas to China in complete indifference to the American worker and his family, and carried out wars in remote parts of the world such as hills of Afghanistan and deserts of Iraq no worker or farmer in America had even heard of or cared about since the American continent was settled in 1600. If there is a Woodrow Wilson around the corner who won in 1912, for the 2028 election, then it is someone who like Wilson will take policies to benefit the American worker and farmer and his family, and America as a Nation to a better place over the next decade. A passage from Teddy Roosevelt from his Autobiography about who TR was struggling against illustrates this point- "They favored Civil Service Reform; they favored copyright laws, and the removal of tariffs on works of art; they favored all the proper (and even more strongly the improper ) movements for international peace and arbitration; in short, they favored all good and many goody-goody, measures so long as they did not cut deep into social wrong or make demands on National and individual virility. They opposed, or were lukewarm, about efforts to build up the army and the navy, for they were not sensitive regarding National honor, and above all they opposed every non-milk-and-water effort, however sane to change our social and economic system in such a fashion as to substitute the ideal of justice towards all for the ideal of kindly charity from the favored few to the possibly grateful many." (Theodore Roosevelt, Autobiography, Chapter 5 title: Applied Idealism, 1913) ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
About 2.6 million eligible to vote people in Michigan and 3.5 million in Pennsylvania, and 1.3 million in Wisconsin did not vote in the 2016 election. The critical states this time are also Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and these three states went to the winner by less than 10,000 in Michigan, 20,000 in Wisconsin and 50,000 in Pennsylvania.  A NYT analysis of Census Bureau data for 2016 election reveals that most of these people who are eligible but do not vote have lost interest in both parties that show little interest in delivering for them. Many of them are shown to be lower income voters, voters doing 2 jobs, or voters struggling financially. Some are single child parents in today's social structures. Getting a small portion of this vote can make a difference in a close election.  From 1840 to 1900 the percent of voting age population that voted has been between 70 to 80%. By the 1920's this dropped to about 50%. And it has been around 55% since the period of the Great Depression except for elections in 1952 and 56 for General Eisenhower and 1960 for John Kennedy. Even Harry Truman's whistlestop train campaign in 1948 got only 51% out to vote. Even the Roosevelt FDR three campaigns in 1932, 1936 and 1940 got 52-58% of voting age population to vote. The highest of any election was the election that led to the Civil War in which Lincoln won where 81% of the voting age population voted. Is it possible that America was a relatively much more prosperous country in the period 1840-1900 before large scale immigration from poorer parts of Europe and then poorer parts of Latin America and Asia, and large scale urbanization. With ample land and independent farmers in the nineteenth century leaving less scope for the poverty that exists in urban areas and social decay in rural areas and small towns that is seen today. Resulting in a much more civic consciousness and awareness of America's future and destiny than exists today. By comparison voter turnout in India has increased to 66% in 2014 election and 67% in 2018 after alternating high and low between 50-60% since 1947. Some forecasts are for a high turnout in the U.S. in 2020 to exceed 60%. The bright side for democracy is shown by the 911 million people who voted in the last Indian election of 2018. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Biden hopes to kickstart the green hydrogen industry in the US with $7 billion in subsidies for new technologies and infrastructure. Green hydrogen is made by splitting water or H2O into its component parts and new cost effective technologies are needed. WSJ shows where in the US this money is going. About $1.75 billion will go to Appalachia and Mid Atlantic states such as West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania with Pennsylvania a key state in 2024 election.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump's conflict with the Justice Department in the last weeks of his presidency to appoint a new Attorney General with intent to contest the results of the presidential election of 2020, is shown in this report in NYT. This created risks for American democracy. The cracks in social cohesion following four decades of foreign wars 1980-2021, irresponsible behavior of financial institutions leading to financial crises and impoverishment of America, incompetent elites, neglect of rural America, ceding of technology and competitive position to China, failure to fund education, healthcare and infrastructure, under presidents Reagan, elder Bush, Clinton,  Bush, Obama, led to a situation of revolt against the status quo by a maverick politician using a new and proven dangerous form of communication social media. Ultimately this put democracy at risk. Lessons from this are only now being learned as people in the Biden administration and outside of it reflect on what happened. In this WSJ report Mr. Trump is seen pressuring officials of the Justice Department to agree to appointment of a new Attorney General shortly after the election. This was seen as an effort to question the results of the 2020 presidential election. A leading senator on the Judiciary Committee says this would lead to "shredding the US Constitution to stay in power." Of this and also of four decades of neglect in America Washington has this to say in his first Inaugural Address on April 30, 1789- "The blessed religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes. Should, hereafter, those entrusted with the management of this government, incited by the lust of power and prompted by the supineness or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution, and violate the inalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction and sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable- and if I may so express myself, that no wall of words, that no mound of parchment can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other." ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Seen as a rural urban divide, less educated and well educated and tech workers the situation in France looks similar to that in the US in the elections of 2016 and 2020. With business in the US and European Union shifting manufacturing to China and the governments neglecting rural areas, decline in standard of living for people on pensions that have not kept up with the cost of living, the situation in France as in the US is decades in the making. Bernie Sanders and Melenchon were appealing in different ways to younger people yearning for change and a system that would correct these changes.   Melenchon coming this close to less than one percentage point of Le Pen in the first round of French elections shows that a straight Macron Le Pen version of what has happened is an oversimplification, just as seeing the changes in America under president Biden vs Trump would be a simplification, as voters for Sanders who voted for Biden are changing the Biden agenda and setting America on a new path. A path to reshoring jobs that were sent to China, rebuilding American manufacturing, increasing workers wages and restoring workers leverage for higher wages, investing $2 trillion in child care, housing, supporting worker incomes and families, supporting older Americans on pensions. In the same way beneath the idea that nothing has happened after the yellow vest protests for cost of living, that has not only not gone away- but increased in the concern for cost of living in this election with the surging inflation - new developments are happening.  Even as Germany under Merkel appeared not be changing in 2020- 1 year after Merkel the situation will have changed completely to address social concerns that were ignored earlier and to invest in infrastructure in a big way. Behind this is a fundamental change that is taking place. Facing a challenge from totalitarian states the fabric of society in the free world, the US, Germany, France, other EU states, India, and nations in the free world will have to respond with changes that restore the fabric of society to what it was before this kind of fracturing, bringing all parts of society together to bring all the energies in place for rebuilding, investing in infrastructure, restoring local manufacturing and renewal. It requires a unified effort to be put in place to respond in the right way.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Boris Johnson wins an 80 seat majority for the Conservatives in parliament in the 2019 election. He gets a mandate for a quick exit from the European Union by the end of January 2020, and billions of dollars in public spending on infrastructure, the NHS, and public services. He gets an unexpected 364 seats in parliament after winning the support of working class voters hurt by the financial crisis and by industrial decline. Working class voters in the north of England and the Midlands decided to trust Mr. Johnson. The Labour party won 203 seats, its lowest total since 1935.  The British pound surged to its highest level since May 2018, and domestic stocks surged with their best day since 2010. Part of the optimism stems from the size of the win that gives Johnson more flexibility at home and more leverage with the European Union to negotiate Brexit that works best for Britain. Working class areas that suffered for decades with loss of heavy industry, decaying infrastructure and poorer public services put their trust in Johnson's pledge to spend more to revive these areas. Johnson called his government "The People's Government" in his victory speech and promised to spend $131 billion on infrastructure, the National Health Service, schools, and public services. Johnson said in the speech that working class families may- "only have lent us your vote. I am humbled that you have put your trust in me, and that you have put your trust in us. And I and we will never take your support for granted." The other big event in this election is the election win in Scotland of the Scottish National party winning 80% of the seats and seeking a referendum on independence. Mr. Johnson has stated that he clearly opposes this. In Northern Ireland a majority of legislators were elected who favor unity with Ireland. This sets up a constitutional struggle that Mr. Johnson faces in his first elected term in office.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Biden issued executive order on June 3, 2024 to close the Border with Mexico and deny asylum. Once border crossings reach 2500 a day the border is closed. Then it is opened only when crossings drop to 1500 a day and after 14 days. Officially permitted including humanitarian parole pathways are limited to 1500 a day. This is being done because the legislation that passed in the US Senate on bipartisan basis negotiated for closing the Border with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Republicans and Senator Lankford (R) was blocked in the Senate by Mike Johnson on instructions of Mr. Trump who sought to use it as an election issue. "Today I’m moving past Republican obstruction and using the executive authorities available to me as president to do what I can on my own to address the border,” said president Biden. The signs “SECURING OUR BORDER” were prominent in the White House East Room. “Frankly, I would have preferred to address this issue through bipartisan legislation,” he added, “but Republicans left me with no choice.” On this page the WSJ looks at the Border on August 5, 2024 and finds the border crossings have dropped to levels in 2020 and to levels seen during the last year of president Trump. The US and Mexico have cut border crossings with Mexico moving migrants back to southern Mexico in a Chutes and Ladders program where migrants head north, and the Mexican gocernment buses them back south, at which point some return to their home countries. At the Guatemala border there is busing to take them to other locations in the south of Mexico. ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us