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.


ABC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Biden addressed the Nation from the Rose garden today November 7, 2024. His remarks were conciliatory. "You can't love your neighbor only when you agree."  "Something I hope we can do, no matter who you voted for, is see each other not as adversaries, but as fellow Americans. Bring down the temperature." It is a remarkable end to a remarkable presidency which history will judge as perhaps a single term in which more was done than in any other 4 year term of a presidency, except for FDR in 1932 and Lincoln in 1861, tackling a once in a century pandemic, and rebuilding the economy, manufacturing, and infrastructure. And even correcting missteps on immigration by getting the legislation to fix it. It is a tall order for anyone who succeeds Biden though in the current post election situation there will be the typical euphoria on one side and losing on the other.  During the Republican sweep by Herbert Hoover in 1928 Franklin Roosevelt was elected governor of New York and he used the intervening years to 1932 to prepare for the monumental task ahead by testing his plan for economic recovery using New York and a couple of states from Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire, setting up the first unemployment insurance, shorter week, annual employment and other ideas to stabilize employment for one third of the US economy. Biden says he has asked his administration to work with Trump's team for the peaceful transition to a newly elected president. None of the fears about the transition came true with the new president getting a clear mandate to tackle the cost of living crisis for Americans. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
No country benefited more than first Japan and then South Korea till 2000, and now China till 2022 from the trade and sharing of industrial technology enabled by the American backed system of trade and industry. Walter Russell Mead says in WSJ that China has chosen to challenge the system through which it developed into an industrialized nation with the US running huge trade deficits, sharing its technology and letting Chinese manufacturing displace American local manufacturing. China is seen as challenging the system. Yet what has happened is that this process of displacing American manufacturing and industry was not sustainable anyway and continued for a decade longer than it would otherwise have lasted because American industry could not easily reverse a course it had set of setting up manufacturing in China, once that manufacturing base had already been transferred from the US to China and American companies had grown accustomed to a new state of affairs of making overseas in China. Not much thought was given to how American workers would react to that situation as companies and industries making that transfer made independent decisions. This led to the election of Trump with wins in midwestern states that had suffered from loss of manufacturing communities.  The Trump tariffs on Chinese goods and the Biden administration lining up completely behind American workers and families for the first time for Democrats has sent the signal to China that it finds the situation of China's dominance in the trade system unacceptable. The document of "China 2030" of the Chinese Government with planned dominance in key sectors and industries was met with alarm across America in all parties. The paradox of Apple as a key sector in Chinese manufacturing and the largest American company is the result of policies pursued by America without realizing the true cost of shipping manufacturing out of the country. That process is now being reversed with change of management starting at Intel Corp. and other companies to bring the manufacturing base back to the US. This policy is being resolutely pursued by the US and will speed up following the pandemic which has further demonstrated how much of a mistake the policy of sending out manufacturing in critical areas such as health could be. This is the reality behind the rhetoric and verbal exchange between China and the US. With the rapid growth of Chinese manufacturing countries such as India were put in a difficult situation  as this was preventing the local industrial base developing in India with Chinese imports in the same way as it had damaged that of the US and the EU. Worse it led to the use of US and European technology in China's defense industrial base including aviation and other sectors that threatened India's borders with repeated Chinese incursions in the Himalayas, from the Pakistan western Himalayas to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayan mountains. That situation existed long before the Trump and Biden administration and the Modi administration called for a return to America of its industrial manufacturing base and its technological leadership. Both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Indian Congress administrations failed to realize the dangers of letting the US, European and Indian industrial base wither. India is not just a country but a culture that extends from the Himalayas all the way across Bangladesh to the Indonesian islands which shares a common cultural history of Buddhism and the Vedanta. This is a region that has a population of about 2 billion people. In a larger sense the cultural history extends to  Vietnam and Japan with its Buddhist culture whose origins go back to India, and also of China itself. In the larger sense this is a population of close to 3 billion people. The economic development of this region and learning from the parliamentary traditions and scientific discoveries of the modern period since 1700 is a task for both the US, Europe and the people of the region.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
French voters turned to parties outside the mainstream left Socialist Party and the right Republican Party for the first time in a run off presidential election. The National Front's Jean Le Pen made it to the runoff in 2002, then lost to Chirac of the Republican Party who won 78% of the vote. This time the Republican Party candidate Fillon had about 20%, the Socialist Party candidate Hamon won just 6% of the vote with the rest of the socialist vote going to a far left candidate Jean Luc Melenchon who had 19.6%. The winners were Emmanuel Macron, a former Economy minister under president Hollande of the socialist Party, getting about 24% and Marine Le Pen, the daughter of Jean Le Pen of the National Front, getting 21.5%. Compared to the U.S. the situation is slightly different in France because of the very high unemployment rate for young people- younger voters supported the National Front, and people especially in rural areas in the north, north east, and the south of the country around Nice and Marseille supported the National Front. Macron's movement En Marche, centrist party drawing support from centre right and centre left without clear ideology except to renew France and pro-EU, was strong in urban areas, among more educated people, especially in Paris and the area around Bordeaux and Toulouse in the south east of the country. Fillon did not do well in some traditional Republican Party areas including Nice, with inroads from Le Pen, who defined the party around anti-immigration, closed borders, and withdrawal from the European Union. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The CEO of the New York Times and the former director general of the BBC, takes a look at the public discourse in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and in the Brexit campaign, and finds some troubling changes. The use of words that can eaily be picked up by Twitter and social media to attack opponents, the complete disregard for facts, and outright attempts to denigrate and destroy using rhetorical tactics, and a section of the public that has turned away from the facts or is disinterested in facts, is deeply troubling for Mark Thompson. When the public discourse fails, then the politics as a whole starts to collapse, says Thompson. We are children of the enlightenment, says Thompson, and were taught to look underneath statements to discern the truth. This is a crisis in public discourse. Worse it is one in which truth telling by people who say they are outsiders and tell it like it is, is not about telling the truth. Which is what makes it so dangerous. Thompson cites the statement by Michael Gove that "people in this country have had enough of experts," as another dangerous sign. He says it is time that experts make themselves understandable and talk in a way the public can understand. The media needs to explain issues in clear ways, and professional policymakers language of discourse needs to be conveyed in better ways that the public can grasp, in which the Brexit Remain campaign failed, says Thompson. Its important to acknowledge the problem, as the health of our democracies depends on finding solutions to what has happened in 2015-2016 to change the public discourse and let it deteriorate to unimaginable levels.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt points out in the NYT that Hillary Clinton actually won in the popular vote by a substantial margin, by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. He says that Democrats need to pay more attention to the working class in midwestern states- the job losses, crumbling infrastructure, and the plight of communities such as Detroit, Michigan which suffered through the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM, and again with the foreclosure crisis, the financial crisis of the City of Detroit. With a similar situation in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Ohio, in places like Toledo and other parts of communities facing industrial decline. While the Silicon Valley centred region powered the economy in California, and the financial industry and real estate powered New York, older midwestern communities never really recovered from a long decline stretching over 2 decades. The result was the loss of faith in Democrats among union workers and young people, leading to the loss of Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. For most of its history the Democratic Party was based on its union and working class base including a large number of white voters. Only under Obama because of his unique candidacy was the coalition so dependent on the minorities vote. Before minorities were part of the Democratic coalition, but not in the way under the Obama candidacy. A return to its historic and normal base among whites in unions and working class communities, liberals, minorities, is a way to go back to the historic and natural base of Democratic support. In a sense dependence on tech communities for election funding and the tech booms, globalization, may have distorted Democrats sense of their historic role as champions of the working class and middle class communities throughout the country. There is now an opportunity to restore this lost mission of protecting the interests of the middle and working class who have seen huge drop in net worth as reported by Janet Yellen of the Federal Reserve at the Inequality Conference on October 17, 2014-"62 million households with a net worth of $11,000 for the year 2013." Poorly covered in the media and not made the utmost priority by Democrats (or Republicans). In the words of Janet Yellen, this was in the past several decades "the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality since the Great Depression." She added the shocking words "by some estimates, income and wealth inequality near their highest levels in the past hundred years, and probably much higher than much of American history before then." Even discussion in the media goes back to the Obama coalition and treats it as a way forward for Democrats, when history shows it was different and the situation described by Yellen calls for a serious response. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions raised by Nicholas Kristof of the NYT on Russian hacking during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Kristof says the implausible or far fetched idea of foreign interference in U.S. elections is not as implausible as it may appear.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This exceptional report by Ian Talley in the WSJ cites trade and currency expert William Cline about the prospect of a worsening trade deficit under the Trump administration. With an improving economy, says Cline, the dollar had already surged about 8% beyond its fair market value during the last 2 years under president Obama as the economy improved. After Trump's election it surged another 3%. This makes it likely that the trade deficit could approach 4% of GDP with the stronger dollar. More protectionist policy to support U.S. industry, worsening trade deficits, more trade friction could be expected in these conditions. He does point out that markets may be overestimating what will be spent on infrastructure, and how much interest rates will go up which support a stronger dollar. Yet the fact remains that under an administration that is keen on promoting U.S. exports a dynamic is underway that makes U.S. exports actually less competitive in international markets.

New York TImes Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Janet Yellen is nominee to be Treasury secretary in the new administration of Joe Biden. The economic rebound from the pandemic that started in the summer is faltering without additional stimulus and help to businesses and people affected by the pandemic. She is the former chairman of the U.S. central bank the Federal Reserve.  Yellen faces a divided country and likely a divided Congress on many issues facing the country. She says of these divisions and the challenging task she faces of forging compromises- "Right now we live in a country where people look at the same set of facts and come to diametrically opposite conclusions, so that is a big challenge to anyone who takes that job, to build support for your policy outcomes." Yellen believes that the slow recovery after the 2009 financial crisis was because of a lack of a big enough stimulus and policy consensus across parties and with public opinion backing this up. During the pandemic in March 2020 the first stimulus was passed for $3.3 trillion  with support from the Congress and the Trump administration. Today Congress is split on the second stimulus with Democrats pushing for about $2.2 trillion for aid to state and local governments, jobless workers virus testing strategy. Republicans calling for about one third of this or $650 billion to help small businesses and industries such as tourism, retail and airlines. Because  interest rates are near zero much depends on getting an effective stimulus for speedy economic recovery. Conversations between the Treasury Secretary and the Federal Reserve, America's central bank, are critical to getting things done. A lot also depends on how Democrats and Republicans can put aside differences for the sake of getting the recovery back in place where it was during the summer. The media has a role to play in not stoking differences in public opinion which was the case close to the election to an unprecedented degree. One critical aspect of American process in getting things done is to bring Congress and the public with an elected president. Without a conciliatory approach and humility few presidents have succeeded as Congress and public opinion is also critical to getting things done. The House changes every 2 years so that even with  majorities- made transient by the founders of the constitution- nothing is certain without getting the other political party on your side. For the sake of the country and the people devastated by the pandemic, the professional class, media and politicians, Congress and the president need to bring a clear and transparent willingness to look at the national interest going forward.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Martin in the NYT points out that Ohio no longer plays a critical role in U.S. presidential elections. It was critical for a Bush win over Gore, and president Obama carried it by 2 points against Romney in 2012. It is critical for Trump to win. For Hillary Clinton other states are gaining importance as they better reflect the demographic changes in the U.S. and the mix with minorities- states such as Georgia, N. Carolina, Colorado and Florida. Ohio has not seen an influx of Hispanics as other states, and is now more white, more evangelical voters, and reflects a mix that was prevalent earlier. 

Washington Post Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
If John F. Kennedy were writing Profiles of Courage in 2024 he would have James Lankford as one of these Senators who showed courage to take the right stand in the face of opposition from his fellow Republican Congressmen and people in his state and the country who support loyalty to president Trump. Lankford says in this NYT interview that in December 2023 the immigration bill would have passed Congress into law. He has always seen that no one person is the boss. Trump is not the boss even as president. He is a co-equal branch, says Lankford. He sums it up saying- I work for the people of Oklahoma not the president.  Senator Lankford of Oklahoma is interviewed by Lulu Garcia Navarro of the NYT for his role in negotiating a immigration bill with Democrats in Congress and president Biden that would fix asylum policy and close the Border with Mexico. It is a tough bill says Lankford, and the Republicans held onto their position that there would be no citizenship for the immigrants who crossed the border illegally since 2024. If it came up in December 2023 it would have fixed the Border, says Lankford. It came up in February, and by this time the election nominee was Trump who decided not to support it, as it would take away the immigration issue that he hoped to run on against Democrats. It is still alive as Kamala Harris says it is her top priority to get the Lankford immigration bill passed into law. To know Lankford is to know that he ran the largest Baptist youth camp in the Nation at Fall Creek. He believes every person has value and worth and even if he disagreed with them that person has value and worth. His faith, he says, is something important for him, and not something you take off and put on.  The title should be The Men and Women who Solved Immigration for the Nation. This includes Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma, Senator Krysten Sinema of Arizona, and Democrat Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. Lankford for 22 years a youth Baptist minister from Oklahoma, Sinema immigration attorney from southern Arizona, and Murphy a lawyer from Connecticut. The man who selected Lankford to negotiate the immigration bill on behalf of the Republicans in Congress was Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. For the Democratic party Pat Schumer helped bring Democrats in Congress and president Biden behind a tough bill that reflected the consensus view that something serious had to be done about the US Border for a lasting solution. This opportunity may come again if Kamala Harris wins as she says it will be her top priority to get the Lankford -Sinema Bill passed. ...
Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the primaries Trump appealed to blue collar voters of a white working class that felt neglected by leaders and policies of both parties that did not seem to work for ordinary people. Having caught onto this early long before Republican candidates, Trump registered a series of wins in the Republican primaries. He continued this theme in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on July 21, 2016, saying- "The forgotten men and women of our country- people who work but no longer have a voice: I am your voice." The idea was to couple this with the theme of law and order and put perception of Hillary Clinton as part of the rigged system of the past that Trump would change, with Clinton's legacy described in terms of "death, destruction, terrorism and weakness." As a change agent Trump described his entering the political arena in terms of coming into this election only to help blue collar people "so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people that cannot defend themselves." The two themes for the rest of the election season- law and order, and blue collar lives- and who can best defend them a traditional Democratic politician with a fighting spirit for traditional Democratic values, or a blustery newcomer adept with slogans and the public mood and ironically representing the Democratic values of representing the working class to become the  Republican nominee, with the law and order theme thrown in. The voter or independent listening in to all this will hopefully ask what all this means. As the WSJ, July 19, 2016, pointed out in a recent look at economc policies under the two candidates- on Glass Steagall Act being reinstated to increase safety of the banking system that caused many of today's problems through the 2008 financial crisis both Trump and Clinton are similiar, on opposing trade agreements similiar except that Trump's bluster is a riskier approach, on infrastructure building similiar with Clinton's $275 billion plan spelled out out for source of financing and Trump's unclear as to source of financing. On immigration the candidates are different, on the minimum wage which impacts low income people Clinton supports $15 minimum wage and Trump has not taken a stand. On ISIS and the Middle East Clinton is in reality a hawk and not much difference in the candidates, on law and order more chance of divisions in the country with Trump than Clinton. Overall for the working class and blue collar voter his life will take a decade or more to rebuild, with both candidates commiting to go in that direction. And the bluster and ads to come- just that.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After the Phase 1 trade deal with China led to cancellation of new tariffs on computers, mobile phones and the remaining products imported from China, tariffs are still in place on $370 billion of imports from China. President Trump says China agreed to import $32 billion of agricultural goods, with the figures reaching $50 billion in 2020. The prior high was $26 billion in 2012. This comes as a big relief for the agricultural farm sector which had 24% more bankruptcies in 2019. Farmers are now more likely to vote for president Trump as they did in the last election. In addition China agreed to buy $200 billion more of American goods over the next 2 years. This combined with the USMCA agreement to replace NAFTA, for North American trade, is good news for president Trump and for the U.S. economy for 2% annual growth. The S&P stock index went up by 29% in 2019. The big concession by China is its agreement to agree to penalties if it does not keep up its part of the bargain.  Intellectual property protection remains a challenge and Mr. Trump may have decided to take a tactical success and shore up his base of farmers and small business people before taking up these issues in the future. China for its part may have decided to make a tactical move of its own as it has nothing to lose in importing more farm products from the U.S. in exchange for being able to continue to make the computers, iPhones and tech products it manufactures, just like before. China has not conceded much in terms of its goals set  in "Made in China 2025." Both sides are taking a much needed pause to consolidate their positions, as the fundamental differences remain to be tackled. Huawei and Chinese technology issue remains as before with the U.S. wary of China's technological gains in 5G telecom equipment and keen on building and protecting America's technological advantage in future trade relations. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Dudley Althaus looks at Mexico's 2018 election from a working class suburb of Mexico City called Valle de Chalco. Once a squatter settlement outside Mexico City this area was courted by the ruling PRI Institutional Revolutionary party for 3 decades with a social investing program building sewers, water and power lines. Today this area like others in the state of Mexico have turned to a new party Morena led by Manuel Lopez Obrador, to find a way out of the corruption, violence and failure of the rule of law under the PRI. Obrador left the socialist PRD party to form Morena in 2014 after running for president on the PRD ticket twice. The thirst for change is widespread inside Mexico giving Obrador a higher vote margin in state of Mexico than the 53% he won overall in Mexico. The PRI won just 16% of the vote. The old politics of piggy bank and patronage of the PRI is now discredited in Mexico.  The reason the old politics does not work anymore is the change in places like this from a shanty town of tin shacks to a bustling city of 400,000. This place has a technical school, a state university branch, rows of well kept cinder  block homes along with malls and wealthier homes. With basic necessities being met Mexican workers are turning to larger issues of national identity and how the next chapter can be written in the social contract. Obrador's nationalist message and criticism of the globalized economy struck workers and middle class as the right direction for Mexico. This came just as president Trump brought new views on immigration and NAFTA on the other side of the border challenging Mexico to find its own direction and independent position in the world economy, even building new links to other countries in Europe and Asia. ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this essay in Der Spiegel, Charles Hawley says that the Trump movement has become a movement of patriotic downtrodden whites, with a whole range of interests-of extreme right talk show hosts, Tea Party politicians, white power supremacists, those left out by globalization in the working class especially in the midwestern states. The danger he says is that this movement of which Trump has become a part, rejects the narrative on which America is based of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers establishing a country based on principles of "the inalienable rights of man," that have evolved through the years to include black people, women, and minorities.  To put this in perspective, president Obama writing for The Economist magazine in October 2016, puts this movement in a different context- that of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Know Nothing Movement of the 1800's, the anti-Asian sentiment in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, periods when anti-immigrant or anti-foreign sentiment gained prominence. Obama's view is that it is not fundamentally economic. In this he is right in that some of the forces on the far right do not stem from globalization. Yet he would be missing a great deal if he did not address the economic problems for the middle and working class that have given such views the support of a broad segment of the population, especially in some midwestern and older industrial states compared to say the economy of California or New York. Obama is aware of the problems in his essay as he points to the problems of workers trying to get a decent wage, of job losses through globalization, and the aggravation of these problems by the financial crisis of 2008 when some of the potential physicists and engineers as he calls them went into the financial sector to create faulty mortgages. Yet he goes back to the free trade and global networks of supply chains as having reduced global poverty, without showing a keen awareness of how it has through a combination of events and decades of policy indifference to manufacturing communities in the U.S.- as documented by experts and shown in Lyrarc, with David Autor and Gordon Hansen in the WSJ, 2016- 08-16. A Gallup Study, WSJ, 2016-05-16, supports Obama's assertion by showing that many of Trump supporters are actually self-employed and not in economic distress. Yet the movement would not have taken its proportions without the merging of different groups particularly largely disadvantaged working class voters, and fortunately Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, have a better sense of this than the president. It is by their efforts that income and wealth disparities can be tackled in a way that restores the social fusion of all parts of society- in Hillary Clinton's emphatic words in the final debate by "growing the middle," growing the middle class. This is the task of the next decade, or possibly two decades. (For Gallup study see WSJ, How Economic Anxieties Explain Trump's Appeal- And Where They Fall Short, Nick Timiraos, 08-16-2016. And for Autor, Hanson, see Tallying the Toll of U.S.-China Trade, Justin Lahart, 08-27-2011)   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chozick and Parker of the NYT show how Donald Trump's frequent sexist comments on women and references to Hillary Clinton in similiar terms are likely to influence the outcome of the general election of 2016. The women's vote has played a significant part in the recent elections of 2008 and 2012 helping Democratic candidate Obama. Trump has a astonishingly high disapproval rating with women, unprecedented in U.S. election history, cited by the WSJ as 75%. Cruz's choice of Carly Fiorina as a running mate shows an awareness of the importance of the women's vote. Some of the comments cited here include the Trump comment that "if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don't think she would get 5% of the vote." It is not clear if this will help the Republican party, as such comments could alienate the mass base of women voters, including the base of young women voters who supported Sanders, women who are independents and moderate Republican women. Hillary Clinton is carefully planning a fall campaign in which such Trump attacks are expected, and the response will be handled not directly by Hillary but by Super PAC's, as Hillary sticks to calling them sexist and energizing her base from the attacks. CBS polls show Trump has the support of 39 percent of white women, compared to 50% for Hillary Clinton. Trump's attacks on women are strangely enough targeted at getting the support of white women- and men - in another wild twist of the 2016 campaign....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Sanford, Republican Governor of South Carolina, cites Donald Trump in May 2014 on releasing tax returns. At the time Trump is quoted as saying: "If I run for office, I will release my tax returns, absolutely, I would love that." Sanford says he released his tax returns, and Mike Spence, the Republican vice presidential candidate has released his tax returns, and calls on Trump to release his returns as promised. Hillary Clinton has released her tax returns, which show she paid 34% of income in taxes. Sanford says it is important information both for transparency in the political process and in giving voters an opportunity to evaluate those who want to govern the country. He also says that this is the reason a banker asks for tax returns before making a loan, that talking is'nt enough tax returns tell the real story,  and the reason why this is a precedent too important to be broken in 2016. This has become increasingly important in this election year with the public expecting corporations and wealthy individuals to pay their fair share of taxes, so that programs to aid workers left behind during the recession, provide job retraining, finance the infrastructure that will create new jobs, provide access to college for working class and poor, require adequate government revenues. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The view from Germany on Trump's economic plan and the need for changes by his advisors. DW.com's Wenkel says Trump needs to understand that 80% of job losses in recent years have come from not from globalization, but automation and higher productivity, rationalization. He says higher tariffs on Mexico could backfire.


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