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.


The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mediators Pakistan, Turkey sought to separate Iranian nuclear issue to a second stage with a vague Iranian commitment to discuss the issue and future dragging of feet by Iran. The US DJT administration has made this the only issue that must be settled first before a settlement can be reached, and not by a repeat of the half hearted effort by the Obama administration that led to reconstituting Iran's nuclear effort a second time with US financial assistance. For a day on Saturday it appeared that mediators Pakistan and Turkey had accomplished for Iran just that, to the alarm of Republicans in general and in particular senior Senator Graham. Many sections of the media including the WSJ and the business community, see this as a repetition of the mistakes made by Obama and his administration. Not only did Obama not act to work with Republicans on a border policy- simply protecting himself from Republican attack by deportation policies. Obama continued the war in Afghanistan/Iraq for the same reason to protect his chances for reelection. He also used immigration policy to get the Hispanic vote in the closing months of the reelection year. Obama's other foreign policy failure was in believing Iran had been persuaded to give up nuclear weapons, and gave Iran the financial backing that could easily be shifted from economic to military uses and rebuild the nuclear program,  which he has handed to a future Republican adminstration. Obama also ignored how this would affect the economic wellbeing of the Iranian people with the kind of protests and suppression that has happened in 2026. Democrats and the media, some Republicans, are simply ignoring these errors and have never really faced up to the problems in the Middle East and asked the question why there are 5 decades of wars in the Middle East, and coups, strife, wars for the entire period since 1950. In this situation the US, China, India, EU, Brazil and other nations can learn from this experience and act to secure alternative sources of energy, speed up renewable energy transition, and rapidly end all dependence/intervention on a perpetually strife ridden Middle East, which much of the US and international media in a baffling way ignores or does not say outright. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Democrats continue to believe they lost in 2024 because they did not attack DJT enough. This fails to cite issues such as cost of living- surge in the third year of the Biden administration with 20% increase in prices and Biden failing to take notice and address this quickly. A wave of illegal immigration- the failure of Mayorkas, himself a Cuban immigrant in 1960, put in charge of Homeland Security and ICE, and Harris who was an attorney helping indigents in inner city San Francisco, to grasp the fears of border states and southern states. The failure to understand that the border was open and inviting waves of illegal immigrants, some with questionable backgrounds. This issue created a sense of unease in the fabric of society and American people. Other issues simply showed how Harris could not relate to the conservative people and average people in the country in the cultural aspect such as transgender, rural America. Biden pulling out suddenly, loss of rural vote- failure of Democrats since Obama to pay attention to rural voters, Harris not appealing to the white male vote in the US, are other factors that hurt Democrats. DJT gained with the shooting incident in Pennsylvania in which he survived, and the perception raised during a garbage truck and DJT photo that the Democrats derided, seen by the public as looking down on working class people. Democrats never really grasped how the political system had gone in reverse- the Republicans had put cultural aspect first and conservative now meant working class voters and white voters in rural areas/small towns, big cities, ( the Archie Bunker type of an earlier era who was now a Democrat, not the college educated and Ivy league Harvard type that had taken over the Democratic party). This continues to this day with some paradox as the business class and the billionaire class sit alongside the working class person in the Republican party DJT created. DJT did this in 2016 by pulling together workers hurt by Bush and Obama's policies favoring the educated classes and affluent, ignoring rural areas and farmers, and committing US to wars in the Middle East that squandered the Nations' resources and human lives. This was aggravated in the Biden/Harris/Mayorkas years by letting in migrants across the border by the millions that created a great deal of unease in the working classes. In this way labor unions or their rank and file left the Democratic party- a problem that plagues Democrats to this day, that Biden tried but failed to fix. The border issues had become complex by the latter part of the Biden administration because of the complete collapse of Venezuelan economy and the drug cartels in Mexico smuggling people and drugs across the border, for which the Biden administration or Harris had no answer.  It was the failure of administrations to continue the Monroe Doctrine in the form given by FDR as "Good Neigbor Policy," and JFK as the Alliance for Progress, allowing drug cartels and foreign European powers to intervene in the western hemisphere, desorying good governance in Mexico, Venezuela, Cuba and other nations in Latin America. By the second year of the DJT administration Venezuela, and the border were brought under control, and the situation in Mexico put in a new direction. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks of the NYT says the Republican party is failing when it embraces Trump's version of populism with its racial division, tax plan that favors Republican donors and ignores fiscal conservative concern over deficits that affect future generations, supporting the election of Moore in Alabama, the constant Twitter comments that show prejudice. He says this will have destructive effects that could last an entire generation. This isn't the Republican party he has known for so long, says Brooks. The time is passed says Brooks when sensible republicans could go along in the middle by not agreeing with Trump, yet avoiding the task of opposing the elements of Trump policies that conflict with America's long held ideals shared by both parties. He calls its a corrupt deal that Republican party leaders in the Senate and Congress have agreed to make with Trump thinking that somehow this will all work out for them even if it doesn't for the party. Selling one's soul is somehow not an option that people would take in their right mid, so he wonders aloud what is happening in the party- and calls it a rot besetting the party of Lincoln, TR and Eisenhower that won't get it to any good place.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The last Republican presidential debate before the Republican primaries focussed attention on foreign policy issues with candidates critical of president Obama's policies in the Middle East and calling for tougher anti-terrorist measures. Trump says he does not think Bush really believes he is "unhinged" when he called for action to bar Muslims from entry into the U.S., adding that this reflected more about the disaster that Bush's election effort has become.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden proposes to reduce the US deficit by $2 trillion by increasing taxes on American households worth more than $100 million that would apply to their earned income, and their unrealized gains on liquid assets like stocks. Biden also plans quadrupling the tax on stock buybacks by companies, a tax approved in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2021. The deficit in 2023 will be about $1.4 trillion and rise to about $2 trillion, so that Biden's plan is to practically eliminate the  large deficit if the Republicans come on board. Republicans prefer cuts in spending. US companies have engaged in a dramatic increase in stock buybacks in recent years leading to calls for increasing the tax on stock buybacks. Biden says even high income households will not see an increase in their taxes, only the wealthiest households with over $100 million who have benefited vastly through the Reagan type policies of the last two decades. These households with over $100 million in assets will not be affected in the same way as students, workers, and middle income households are affected in shouldering a large part of the burden of these Reagan type policies that did not adequately fund education, healthcare, and manufacturing in communities across America. This was a period when Democrats in Congress awed by Reagan type policies failed to vigorously oppose policy that increased the US deficit and burden on households for health costs by not allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. A senior AARP official says that when we talk about the Biden Inflation Reduction Act of 2021 the key component is the Medicare price negotiation with companies that is now law. Why Republicans and Democrats before Mr. Biden allowed such a gross distortion for two decades since 2001 that burdened ordinary  working Americans while neglecting American manufacturing, till Mr. Biden assumed the presidency, says much about the policies of the last two decades and how it has affected ordinary working families. Shriveling factory towns and creating much distress in these communities with these distortions that are a legacy of Reagan type laissez faire policies that government should do little. The result of these policies is that manufacturing is concentrated in only one country for the whole supply chain something that would never have happened with a thoughtful policy planning process. India and Vietnam are only today seen as alternatives for the supply chain in 2023 when policies were in place in these countries since 2014 for the supply chain to be distributed in a way that would be a win-win situation for all countries, avoiding the national security threats of today with overconcentration of manufacturing in China. This has not benefited China or the US because of the rancor and tension it has created. It was the fall of the Berlin Wall that created some of this awe for Reagan, when looking at it objectively it was nothing more than a course correction in Europe after the Hungarian revolution suppressed in 1956, Czech in 1968. It had little to do with what policies the US should pursue for workers and families, just as the war in Ukraine today remains another course correction in a different direction in Europe, and does not affect domestic policy in the US to build a better society for workers and families that Mr. Biden is doing. ...
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.  ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Lulu Garcia-Navarro interviews Homeland Security head Alejandro Mayorkas and asks him direct questions about the border with Mexico, published Feb 2, 2024 in NYT. Why the surge in migrants asks Navarro. Mayorkas is himself a Cuban born immigrant. Republicans in the House are impeaching Mayorkas. Navarro asks can you clearly say what has gotten us to this place and what went wrong? Clearly something had happened in Latin America. Central America drove migrants north after conflicts in Salvador, in Nicaragua and drought affecting Guatemala's agriculture for over 2 decades under different administrations. Mayorkas says in response to the question that the world is experiencing the largest level of human displacement that it has seen since World War II. He says the entire hemisphere is experiencing the enormous displacement in Venezuela as its economy collapsed. During the nineteenth century after president Monroe put forward the Monroe Doctrine that created a uniquely American sphere that asked European powers to stay away from the Americas north and south, any attempt by European powers was seen as an hostile act. It was American opposition to European colonialism. By the time of the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations this policy was not followed with the intervention of the Soviet Union in Cuba leading to a a wave of refugees from Cuba in the sixties. In the last decade the situation in Venezuela has worsened to the point that 8 million people have left Venezuela for neighboring nations, 2 million to Colombia alone, destabilizing the southern hemisphere. Venezuelans many from the educated middle class form the bulk of the surge in migrants across the US border with Mexico in 2022 and 2023. The problems were actually exacerbated under the Republican administration as the Venezuelan inflation spiralled after 2016 skyrocketing into hyper inflation by 2018 leading to the flow of immigrants outward that reached 8 million. This kind of hyperinflation the worst in the history of Latin America need not have happened with better managing of the crisis at that time. Mayorkas says the problem is that America's system of asylum is broken and both parties need to fix it. This is proposed by Tillis-Graham and Lankford all Republicans in the US Senate with president Biden's support. When he joined the Department of Homeland Security in 2009 Mayorkas says, US Border Patrol chief told him the real problem was that from the moment a migrant claims asylum at the border under US law and the adjudication of that claim it takes several years. This is the root of the problem the law can be fixed with the will of enlightened persons in both parties by simply passing a new law. Immigrants from Latin America are just as likely to vote Republican as Democratic and this may be particularly true for Venezuela's middle class that left the country as the economy collapsed with policies that led to inflation not seen in this hemisphere.  The other alternative is for the US and both parties to agree to what would be today's version of the Monroe doctrine- then opposing European colonialism, now opposing the breakup from within of Democratic countries in Latin America leading to waves of migration north of the border and causing upheavals all over the western hemisphere. Much less a policy of such resolution both parties have failed to fix basic policies of asylum and parole that today are being addressed by legislation being put together by Senator Lankford of Oklahoma, Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, Senator Tillis of North Carolina, three core states that are Republican since the Civil War, with the help of the White House and Senator Schumer. Yet in the House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson calls it dead on arrival simply refusing to break the status quo. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gerald Seib, executive editor of of the WSJ, attributes the divisions in America both on the left and the right to a deep skepticism among people about the intentions of the U.S. political and financial establishment to conduct the country's affairs in a way that benefits all people. Both the traditional Democratic and Republican establishments, the Bush-Reagan, Clinton-Obama politicians and the financial community were seen as self-serving and looking after their own interests. The right of center supply side economics and the the tolerance for immigration levels of 30% rise in the last decade were discredited. A much larger recovery program was seen as needed from the deeply bruising effects of the financial crisis of 2008, started by the reckless financial establishment behaviours, than either the Reagan supply siders or the Obama people had understood or planned. This opened the way for Mr. Trump to take up the cause of ordinary Americans with a message of ambitious infrastructure development, confronting China's use of trade adversely affecting American workers, and slowing down immigration. And within the Democratic party the emergence of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders with programs for a wealth tax that would finance Medicare for All and college education supported by the federal government. Both the traditional Republicans under Bush and Democrats under Clinton Obama were seen not upto the task, after the 2008 financial and economic crisis created deeper scars than were imagined possible. The lack of effective policies under Bush or Obama simply aggravating the situation further. The culture wars have split Americans down the middle with a breakdown of the traditional American family and social structures creating deep anxieties in America. Obama's comments unsettled people in the heartland when he said that economic decline in the Rust Belt had made people there to "cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them."   The trillions of dollars spent in wars in Asia and the Middle East were seen by Mr. Trump as an enormous waste when much needed investment was deprived of attention at home. Mr. Trump hammered this point home till today it is well accepted across America.  Even as political divisions persist they are now on how to tackle the redevelopment and growth of the U.S. The new focus of agreement has shifted with agreement across the country that infrastructure development in the U.S. and defending workers rights to jobs and opportunities is the top priority. That trade relations need to be reshaped keeping this priority ever present in negotiations. As a result all parties could agree on infrastructure and the recently concluded agreement for trade with Mexico and Canada and phase 1 of negotiated agreement with China. In overseas affairs the U.S. under Trump seeks cost sharing with a 2% of GDP defense spending by other nations so that money can be diverted to use at home. In this sense the debate has already shifted in the U.S. and the UK to how to address the problems of uneven development and growth across the two countries and better allocation of scarce resources to needs at home. Which is for the U.S. a good thing in the middle of all the perception of divisions.      ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The first presidential debate in Denver, Oct 3, 2012. For the first time Romney came out as a recent Republican governor of Massachusetts, the most liberal leaning state in the U.S. For a reason that remains a mystery, except that Romney had to shore up support with the conservative base of the Republican party, Romney did not aggressively adopt positions that would appeal to the vast majority of Americans- from people on foodstamps which he said in this debate had increased by millions under the Obama administration, working class Americans, ordinary Americans about to lose insurance with higher premium costs from the unending increase in the cost of healthcare, seniors on Social Security, workers insecure or losing jobs as the economy fails to recover, and young people who cannot find work. As governor of Massachusetts Romney had to be able to address the needs of different income groups, the middle class and working Americans, and his own father who is his role model was a governor of Michigan, a liberal leaning midwestern state with the largest number of autoworkers in the U.S. He asked Obama directly how he could have focussed on Obama care and passed it without a single Republican vote when 23 million Americans were out of work and the first priority should have been high unemployment. Obama responded by saying he would defend the middle class but did not say what he would do in the next 4 years that was different from the economic policies between 2004-2008. Romney made clear that he was not going to reduce taxes if it would increase the deficit even though Obama said Romney planned to increase taxes by $5 trillion and worsen the deficit. At one point Romney said looking at Obama that he could own a house, a plane, but could not own the facts....
MIT News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This review of Acemoglu and Robinson in the MIT News is relevant to the situation faced today. The two professors at MIT and University of Chicago, have provided two books relevant to today's crises, the first "When Nations Fail" in 2012 about the need for inclusive nations, and the second "The Narrow Corridor" about the importance of the role of individual and society in sustaining democracy. Their point in the first book "When Nations Fail" in 2012 coming after the financial crisis caused by banking excesses stated that the nations fail when they are not inclusive.  In practice it is about " the system being rigged" to favor some groups as the Republican party and Mr. Trump say has happened. The banks and lobbyists, pharmaceutical industry and lobbyists, tech industry and lobbyists, leading to a system where individual and society are pushed into a corner. Social theorist and economists fail to look at things in practice such as profit seeking behaviours and unethical behaviour that goes unchecked, which continued after the financial crisis into the election of 2016, with charges of rigged systems.  This week Germany's DW.com oped pages covered New York with the statement that treatment in New York costs $15,000 for coronavirus infection illness yet many New York residents in the worst affected neighborhoods would find a $500 expense difficult to bear. Early closing of schools to control infection rate was resisted by Mayor De Blasio of New York because many parents depended on schools for lunches for their kids. The situation had been allowed to deteriorate to that level.  In their second book the MIT authors are saying that the role of the individual and society are important to check that of the state (for example if it is perceived as being rigged by the influence of lobbying of legislators and politicians as the Republican party and Mr. Trump have maintained). It is only when it is checked and there is some tension is there the possibility of democracy and democratic processes, say the two MIT authors. In the absence of this the states and elites of politicians and business interests supporting the leaders and their common behaviours, become a perpetual state, in effect a one party rule of two parties with similar behaviours and interests in the state. A situation that allowed the outshoring of American manufacturing and European manufacturing to China including critical infrastructure, essential infrastructure over 2 decades even over the protests of Mr. Lighthizer since 2010. As the twin crises evolved in Europe of austerity policies after banking excesses in Europe, and the migration crisis of migrants coming from North Africa and the wars in the Middle East, a similar situation began to develop in Europe as the political elites entrenched in Germany, France, and Spain faced new voices. The tensions that arose were constructive bringing in the role of society and individual that the MIT authors say are so necessary for the narrow corridor of democratic process to function. New parties emerged in France with Macron's La Republique En Marche, Podemos and Ciudadanos in Spain, and in Germany with the SPD and CDU shrinking till the revival of Merkel for her handling of the pandemic. Coming from an intuitive way born from experience in East Germany, Germany's recent president Joachim Gauck, civil rights activist  came up with the same ideas. He is a Lutheran pastor in former East Germany who struggled against the government of the German Democratic Republic (former communist East Germany) for a role for individual and society against the state. We profiled and quoted him in "The Way Forward"  column in Lyrarc.com. Gauck's point was that  having diverse groups in the conversation is important, not excluding others from outside in the conversation is important. Gauck called  debate "the oxygen of democracy,"  that needed to be maintained.  Genuine democratic process is hard to sustain, it happens only when the role of individual and society is given prominence, so that only a narrow corridor exists for democracy, a narrow space in which can be sustained only if the effort is there, the goodwill is there, and the grace of Divine Providence.  It is fragile and it is critical to sustain.   In this sense the sometimes heated debate in the U.S. and Europe, Asia and Latin America about words such as- austerity, community, solidarity, migration, New York Mayor De Blasio's choice between school lunches and infections, about infrastructure, pharmaceutical prices, infrastructure, outshoring, jobs sent overseas, manufacturing locally, made in USA or made in India or made in France, Atmannirbhar Bharat, misallocation of capital starving health and public services, are all relevant and essential for democracy. This includes the discussion to avoid use of the military in protests in American cities in the middle of a pandemic which just crossed the 2 million mark in cases in the U.S., that was taken up by Defense Secretary Esper. In it lies the hope for democracy and many voices. Der Spiegel recent look at the pandemic how it happened in China, closes with the line- you need more than one voice in society. A constant reminder that many voices be heard, counseling patience, but also that wise choices be made with divine providence.           ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Donald Trump's remarks at a Wilmington rally that caused a storm- "Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know." The second Amendment in the U.S. Constitution gives people the right to bear arms. Some newspapers saw it as threat, especially considering the heated rhetoric in Trump's other remarks in his campaigning. Speaker Paul Ryan called it a joke gone bad, and that the Second Amendment should not be talked about in this way.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
 Harris's role for the Border was limited to telling Central American migrants to stay home. Much of the migration was a result of wars started in the Reagan years in Central American states of Nicaragua and San Salvador. This destabilized the region and led to gangs taking over parts of the country in San Salvador and entrenching Castro style regime in Nicaragua, leading to outward migration of young people. As this report points out Harris was supposed to take on decades of such misguided policies in Central America in a few months. A drought hit agricultural coffee regions of Guatemala increasing migration. Her role instead was to ensure several wins. Win No.1 to generate stability setting up the peaceful transfer of power in Guatemala, singling out corrupt regimes. Win No. 2 to generate jobs. US AID and IFDC loans were increased, foreign investment attracted to generate 250,000 jobs. Win No. 3 the increased stability led to gradually declining migration from Central America. What replaced it was Venezuela. And that is a repeat story of Reagan style wars in Central America. Under the Trump Administration the US did not take up the Monroe Doctrine and act directly to support a stable fairly elected government in Venezuela, an obvious solution. Instead going half way- destabilizing the government but then left it on its own. The result about a third of the population leaving the country in these years to Colombia and other parts of Latin America in a immense humanitarian tragedy.  In 2023 Venezuelans not Guatemalans entered at the US Border in large numbers, most of them middle class families that left Venezuela after hyperinflation and mismanagement of the economy. Realizing the danger by January 2024 Biden negotiated with Senate Minority Leader McConnell and his Republican representative Senator Lankford to pass legislation in the Senate closing the Border. All that was needed was the House to act and 30 years of Border problem would be solved.This was blocked in the House by new Speaker Mike Johnson on advice from former president Trump who chose to use the issue in the 2024 election. Biden then used his executive powers to close the Border leading to lower numbers of migrants under Biden by July 2024 than under Trump. Migration Border Czar was never a term used by Democrats in the Obama and Biden years. Biden who also served in a role given migration as one of the issues to handle under Obama, had this as only one of his assignments. Biden played more important roles in foreign policy with his experience as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for decades. Border policy was made by president Obama and his advisers. The same is true of Harris, Border policy being done by president Biden and his advisers. Similar to Biden's role as VP Harris was given assignment to cover foreign policy and was the US representative at 3 Munich Security Conferences in 2021-2024 following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Chancellor Scholz of Germany said of Harris last week that he had full confidence in Harris as both competent and experienced. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The last thing we want to do is to bring back the images of the 1953 American sponsored coup, which ousted Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh and returned Shah Pahlavi to power, says Senator John Kerry in an op-ed article in the NYT. He cautions America getting involved in Iran, letting Iranians decide on their own, as the CIA supported coup that overthrew Mossadegh's elected government and put a king in his place because he would be more friendly to American oil and other interests in the region, may arouse bitter memories of America's influence in avery negative way in an earlier period. Most Americans may not remember the American sponsored coup. Mossadegh was a socialist during the Cold War and wnated to nationalize the oil industry run by foreign companies in the country. During those days the interests of American oil companies, the Cold War with the Soviet Union, and British-French colonial era interests in the Middle and Africa and Asia, were all intertwined. The Korean war had just ended, Suez crisis of 1956 with the nationalization of the Suez Canal by Egypt, was a few years away, the French were fighting to keep their colonial empire in Vietnam, and America was supporting Pakistan with Sabre fighter jets bringing a version of the cold war to the Indian subcontinent even though India was the largest democracy in Asia. Partly because its leader Jawaharlal Nehru, was an independent minded socialist, who avoided joining the cold war with his non-alignment policies. Adlai Stevenson, Democratic candidate for President against Eisenhower was very enthusiastic about Nehru in his speeches, but Republican Secretary of State Dulles saw things differently, just as today there are huge differences between the way a Rumsfeld and an Obama see the world. Many of the problems today in places like Pakistan Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq had their beginning during this period....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the NYT by Halbfinger and Kershner shows a Israel that is divided in its views about prime minister Netanyahu. In early 2018 with the police report on the investigation into Mr. Netanyahu on campaign finances, half of Israelis support Netanyahu, with the other half thinking that Netanyahu should resign. Mr. Netanyahu has dismissed the investigation as full of holes like Swiss cheese. His supporters see it as part of a left wing conspiracy including state prosecutors and police. Supporters of Netanyahu see him as having improved Israel's security in its region, people who oppose him see him as being too divisive, using divisive rhetoric to improve his own position.  Younger voters in particular have a distaste for divisive politics practiced under Netanyahu, which extends to the supporters of Israel in America, and the policies leading to delaying of the peace project.  That peace project is also seen as part of the nation's mission to seek peace with its immediate neighbors, an unfinished project for Israel as a nation. After many years in office Netanyahu's party lacks the dynamic vision needed and it now appears only to see remaining in office as its goal, according to this NYT report. This is happening at a time when a larger centrist constituency is developing in Israel as most of the moderates are outside government. ...
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's proposed budget for fiscal 2013- for the year beginning Oct. 1, 2012- shows the budget deficit for the year at over $1 trillion. It shows new revenue of $1.7 trillion over 10 years mostly from ending the Bush period tax cuts on families earning more than $250,000 a year, restoring the estate tax to the 2009 level and limiting subsidies for oil and gas companies. It proposes raising the tax rate on dividends from 15% to as much as 39.6%, for households earning more than $250,000 a year. This measure is expected to generate $206 billion over 10 years. The budget also offers "principles" for future tax reform by proposing the Buffett rule replace the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT was not indexed for inflation so it has the weakness of putting more middle class taxpayers into AMT, leading to temporary solutions by Congress. The Buffett rule would have people earning more than $1 million pay a tax rate of at least 30%. Many wealthy Americans like Mitt Romney paid lower taxes using deductions to lower tax rates- Romney's tax disclosures show he paid effective tax rate of 14%. The White House says the budget will reduce the deficit by $3 trillion over 10 years through the new taxes, and small changes to Medicare and Medicaid and other spending cuts. This is in addition to the $1 trillion in spending cuts agreed to in a deficit reduction agreement in 2011 between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. The budget proposal proposes investment in education and transportation projects of $137 billion, and continuing through Dec. 2012, a tax break for businesses to increase investment. It includes mandatory spending of $2.7 billion for new community college programs, $6 billion to modernize schools, and $1.8 billion to make homes more energy efficient. It also increases the resources of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC (two agencies overseeing the banks), $26 million for a new Interagency Trade Enforcement Center to counter unfair trade practices, and cuts U.S. postal delivery to 5 days a week. The result is a program designed to be balanced in terms of economic fairness, making modest investments in the future for education and energy, continuing policies to stimulate growth, and extending the date for bringing the deficit under control to 2018 instead of 2014 as planned earlier....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman describes the poor choices remaining in the Middle East with Iran, Iraq, Islamic State, Egypt, and the conflict in Libya. The last days of the election campaign in Israel have also worsened tensions in Israel with deep differences between the Likud and the Zionist Union.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Freeman contrasts the speeches given by Obama and Trump, one in Cairo after becoming president, and the other in Riyadh. Freeman says Obama did not give enough credit to American leadership and progress on women's rights, and was not critical of Iran during a period in which sectarian strife has led to the situation in Syria and Iraq. 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›

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