75.7 F
Chicago
Sunday, October 11, 2026
Home Blog Page 2094

Democrats Need Their Own Donald Trump

0
Democrats Need Their Own Donald Trump

Authored by J. Peder Zane via RealClearPolitics,

There may be five stages of grief, but there’s usually just one when it comes to political defeat – pretend to soul-search, then carry on as if nothing happened.

In the wake of Donald Trump’s clearcut victory on November 5, Democrats and their media allies acknowledged mistakes were made, but their mea culpa sounded more like humble brags as they suggested their real problem was a failure to communicate. If only we’d done a better job of describing our wonderful accomplishments and the dangers of fascism. Next time, our commercials will be much more effective.

The stand-pat strategy makes some sense in a two-party system where many elections are akin to a coin flip. Ironically, each side banks the other’s unwillingness to change to provide the opening they need to keep on keeping on.

The Democratic Party may well rise from the canvas in the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential race – but this would likely be more a result of potential Republican overreach than the wisdom of their policies. For the good of the country, however, Democrats should use their recent defeat as an opportunity to rethink and reorient their approach to governance.

It won’t be easy, because a fundamental reason Democrats lost goes to the core of their identity: competence. Polls show a large majority of Americans have lost faith in their ability to govern effectively. The GOP’s campaign slogan homed in on this failure: “Trump Will Fix It.”

Since the rise of the progressive movement more than a century ago, Democrats have argued that an expansive government run by experts can solve the nation’s problems. Especially through the ambitious legislative programs put forward by presidents Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, and Joe Biden, Democrats have assured voters: We know what works.

Decades of experience have proven otherwise. Democrat-run states and major cities have distinguished themselves not only for their poorly run schools, high crime, and massive debts, but also their corruption. The New York Times reported in August that California has now become the leader in political malfeasance, “exceeding the number of cases in states better known for public corruption, including [the deep blue states of] New York, New Jersey and Illinois.”

For its part, the Biden administration has taken a series of missteps – personified for all to see by the president’s weak, wobbly gait – that directly led to Kamala Harris’ defeat. Who thought it was a good idea to:

  • Open the southern U.S. border to millions of unvetted migrants?
  • Pass bills costing trillions that fueled inflation?
  • Hastily withdraw from Afghanistan, leaving behind billions in equipment to arm the Taliban?
  • Unlock billions of dollars that Iran used to fund the Hamas terrorists who attacked Israel on Oct. 7, leading to the wider regional war?
  • Weaponize the justice system to target Trump personally, increasing his popularity by turning him into a victim?
  • Pretend Joe Biden was sharp as a tack when it was clear to all that he was in decline?

While these and many other failures weakened confidence in the Democrats’ ability to steer the ship of state, their embrace of the woke agenda showed that the party was not just wrong about certain issues, but in the grips of an unhinged ideology. Claims that America is irredeemably racist, that illegal aliens should be allowed to vote, that gender is not a biological fact and that children should have the right to decide to mutilate their bodies without parental consent, struck most citizens as incomprehensible.

Yes, Harris and other Democrats tried to distance themselves from some of these positions, but they never repudiated them. If you have to run to the center so you can govern from the far left, your politics have become an exercise in deceptive cynicism.

Post-election revelations that the Harris campaign burned through $1.5 billion in 15 weeks – including showering celebrities with huge paydays to draw crowds to her rallies – reenforces the perception that Democrats see money as a slush fund for their allies.

Perhaps the greatest indictment of Democrats’ competence is the rise of Donald Trump. After eight years of Barack Obama – an exemplar of well-polished progressivism – the American people elected a man with no government experience, whose campaign focused on the failures of the ruling elites of both parties. Entrenched Republicans were, in fact, as disdainful of Trump as Democrats were.

Then, despite titanic efforts to undercut and delegitimize him at every turn, this quintessential outsider led a largely successful administration. Polls suggested he was likely to be reelected before the COVID-19 pandemic struck. Trump was returned to office earlier this month because many Americans remembered the policies of the man Democrats dismissed as a failed real estate developer and superficial reality TV star as far more effective than those advanced by his highly credentialed opponents.

The visceral hatred for Trump stems in large part from his competence. As he calls out the failures and corruption of the rulers on the left and the right, he has succeeded at their game without their alleged expertise. He points out obvious facts – China and Iran are not our friends, we can no longer pay the world’s bills – that they have long obscured. They call him a liar, and he does do that, but it’s his truth-telling they can’t forgive. His chief character flaw is that he isn’t part of the club.

All of which is to say, Democrats need their own Trump – a wrecking ball who will challenge the party’s dogmas; a disruptive outsider who can force them out of their ideological cul-de-sac. The radical transformation Democrats need seems beyond the capacity of the party’s entrenched leadership: To expect people who cannot admit error to change their minds and ways seems like wishful thinking. They probably don’t need a Trump-like figure to win elections, but they need one to find a way to govern effectively. This would not require abandoning progressive ideals, but developing new ways to actually achieve them.

This will not be easy. As a spur, Democrats should consider the fate of their allies in the legacy media. The partisan, left-wing turn many news organizations have taken in the last decade has undermined the trust Americans once had in their reporting – while contributing to shrinking audiences and mass layoffs. That failure is a major reason millions of Americans are turning to alternative outlets, including X, Substack, and podcasters such as Joe Rogan, for news.

Political parties are not subject to the swift and ruthless forces of the market. But Democrats would be wise to see the decline of their media allies as a canary in the coal mine. It should inspire them to begin a true process of soul-searching and change for their own good and for that of the nation.

J. Peder Zane is a RealClearInvestigations editor and columnist. He previously worked as a book review editor and book columnist for the News & Observer (Raleigh), where his writing won several national honors. Zane has also worked at the New York Times and taught writing at Duke University and Saint Augustine’s University.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 11:40

Justin Trudeau Watches Taylor Swift While Riots Erupt in Montreal

0
Justin Trudeau Watches Taylor Swift While Riots Erupt in Montreal

Riots erupted overnight in parts of Montreal after pro-Palestinian, anti-NATO protesters clashed with police officers, smashed windows of businesses, and even set vehicles ablaze in the downtown area. 

Canadian English-language daily newspaper The Gazette, also known as the Montreal Gazette, reported that the protests coincided with the 70th Annual Session of NATO in Montreal, which kicked off on Friday and lasts through Monday. About 300 delegates from NATO member states and partner countries are expected to attend the weekend high-level event. 

Here’s more from the local paper about the overnight chaos:

An initial group of protesters gathered at Émilie-Gamelin Parc downtown at around 4:30 p.m. before marching toward the Quartier des Spectacles, according to Manuel Couture, a spokesperson for the Montreal police. By 5:30 p.m., another group had converged at Place des Arts, and the two demonstrations merged.

The protesters then marched down St-Urbain St. At 6:10 p.m., tensions escalated as demonstrators set an effigy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on fire in the middle of the crowd. As the march continued, objects — including small explosive devices and metal items — were hurled into the street, targeting police officers. By 6:40 p.m., protesters had smashed shop windows near St-Urbain and René-Lévesque Blvd., and set two vehicles ablaze.

Couture said police deployed chemical irritants and conducted crowd-dispersal manoeuvres to regain control. Three protesters were arrested for allegedly assaulting police officers and obstructing police work.

Footage of the social unrest was shared on X:

Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was jamming out at a Taylor Swift concert in Toronto at the time of the incident. 

Hope you had fun, Justin. 

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 11:05

Expelliarmus!: HBO Delivers Blow Against The Anti-Rowling, Anti-Free Speech Movement

0
Expelliarmus!: HBO Delivers Blow Against The Anti-Rowling, Anti-Free Speech Movement

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

This week, HBO delivered the corporate version of the Expelliarmus or disarming curse for the long-standing cancel campaign targeting “Harry Potter” creator J.K. Rowling.

We have been discussing this campaign against Rowling, a feminist who has opposed transgender policies that she views as inimical to the rights of women. The cancel campaign against Rowling has been extreme and unhinged from blacklisting her books to even barring the playing of Harry Potter games in pubs. Even authors who support Rowling’s free speech have been targeted. Nevertheless, HBO, which has also been targeted in the past, is now saying enough. Rowling’s work will continue to be featured and developed by the company.

HBO has enraged the anti-Rowling movement by announcing that it will not yield and will continue to work with the author:

“J.K. Rowling has a right to express her personal views. We will remain focused on the development of the new series, which will only benefit from her involvement.” 

It added that “her contribution has been invaluable.”

HBO has a new upcoming Potter series set to premiere on HBO’s Max streaming platform in 2026.

Both Harry Potter stars, Daniel Radcliffe, who played Harry Potter, and Emma Watson, who played Hermine Granger, have joined the criticism of Rowling. However, the criticism itself is not the primary problem, even if they unfairly characterize Rowlings’ actual statements. That is a use of their own free speech rights.

However, the cancel campaigns are far more damaging for free speech, as I discuss in my book, The Indispensable Right. 

The issue of cancel campaigns came up in my recent debate at Harvard Law School on free speech with Professor Randall Kennedy. Kennedy defended cancel campaigns as the exercise of free speech. There is no question that such campaigns involve the act of free speech as people rallying for or against viewpoints. However, the impact of such campaigns, particularly in higher education, is to limit the diversity of viewpoints and reinforce an orthodoxy on our campuses. It is not to express a view but to seek to silence an opposing view. It is the antithesis of free speech values in higher education.

It also has a damaging effect on an academic community. When students see faculty supporting the canceling of conservative, libertarian, or dissenting speakers, it is hardly an invitation to speak freely yourself in class.

The same is true for publishers. We have discussed companies discontinuing publication of Rowling’s work and both editors and writers joining blacklisting campaigns against her and others. We have even seen the embracing of book burning.

For the activists behind this massive cancel campaign, HBO’s announcement is nothing short of a corporate Cruciatus (torture) Curse. However, both the arts and free speech are the winners in Rowling’s continuing to produce and expand her legendary body of work.

*  *  *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 10:30

AI’s Insatiable Appetite For Energy Threatens Ireland’s Grid

0
AI’s Insatiable Appetite For Energy Threatens Ireland’s Grid

By Haley Zaremba of Oilprice.com

Ireland is set to become the next country to face a major threat to its power grid due to the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence. Dublin has emerged as the heart of Europe’s data center hub, and hyperscale cloud providers have quickly become a pillar of the country’s economy. But powering the data centers that house the cloud has become a monumental task with the runaway growth of AI.

Artificial intelligence requires a stunning amount of energy to train and power its complex computation systems. Currently, the approximate amount of energy needed to sustain the sector’s growth is doubling every 100 days. At a global level, the AI sector alone could be responsible for 3.5 percent of all energy consumption by 2030 according to expert projections. “When you look at the numbers, it is staggering,” Jason Shaw, chairman of the Georgia Public Service Commission, an electricity regulator, told the Washington Post earlier this year. “It makes you scratch your head and wonder how we ended up in this situation. How were the projections that far off? This has created a challenge like we have never seen before.”

Already, the yearly power consumption of AI is more than most entire countries – only 16 nations in the entire world consume more annually. Ireland is a hotspot country – along with Saudi Arabia and Malaysia – where existing energy supplies are simply insufficient to power the data centers currently planned. “The almost overnight surge in electricity demand from data centers is now outstripping the available power supply in many parts of the world,” Bloomberg reported in June. 

This has major impacts – both adverse and otherwise – on the economy writ large, especially since the tech sector is frequently prioritized above other key market sectors and services. “That dynamic is leading to years-long waits for businesses to access the grid as well as growing concerns of outages and price increases for those living in the densest data center markets,” Bloomberg went on to say.

Ireland’s grid is wholly unprepared for this transition. Last year, data centers consumed 21 percent of all metered electricity, surpassing urban residential consumption. This runaway growth has put Ireland in a tough spot between energy security and keeping the lucrative data center sector within its borders. “There is a risk that the pace of demand growth is faster than the speed of which generation and network infrastructure can be built,” a spokesperson for the country’s energy regulator, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, told Politico this month. The spokesman confirmed that this dynamic could ultimately result in “power shortages” and  “increased costs for consumers” among other long-term negative externalities.

Ireland is not alone in this dilemma. The United Kingdom is expected to see a 500% increase of energy demand from AI over the next ten years. Sweden, which has a climate ideally suited to naturally cooling data centers, could see related power demand grow two-fold within the decade, followed by another two-fold increase by 2040. The United States, too, is already facing considerable power crunches due to AI expansion. At a global level, the energy consumption by data centers alone is expected to top 1,580 TWh – around the equivalent of the entire country of India, the most populated nation on Earth.

All this growth doesn’t only pose trouble for energy and the economy. It’s also a major issue for the climate. “The dramatic increase in power demands from Silicon Valley’s growth-at-all-costs approach to AI also threatens to upend the energy transition plans of entire nations and the clean energy goals of trillion-dollar tech companies,” Bloomberg reports.

However, AI could also prove to be the saving grace of the energy industry if employed strategically. The global clean energy transition, which represents an unprecedented process of planned rapid systems transformation, will require intelligent, responsive, and flexible computing systems able to rapidly recognize, respond to, and predict complex patterns of production and consumption. AI could therefore be invaluable in managing smart grids capable of handling huge inflows and outflows of variable energies like wind and solar. It’s a double-edged sword, and making sure that AI will be employed wisely is a monumental task that will be make or break for countries like Ireland. 

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 09:20

German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party ‘Anti-Human’

0
German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party ‘Anti-Human’

Germany’s Lutheran Church will now exclude members of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party from any leadership positions due to the party’s politics.

Remix News. Liz Heflin reports that The Evangelical Church of Central Germany, which serves most of the provinces of Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia, and smaller parts of the provinces of Brandenburg and Saxony, will no longer allow AfD members to serve in any church leadership positions, including on parish councils.

“Anti-human, xenophobic and anti-Church positions are incompatible with holding office either in a parish council or in other leadership positions of our church,”  county bishop Friedrich Kramer announced at the beginning of the church’s autumn synod, adding that membership in “extremist parties” is against the church constitution. 

The local constitutional protection office in both Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia have declared the AfD a far-right organization, reports Die Welt.

At the same time, Bishop Kramer claims that “the church doors are still open to all people.”

At the start of the year, the same church initiated proceedings against one of its pastors, Martin Michaels, serving in Quedlinburg in the Harz Mountains, who won a mandate in the city council as a non-party member, but with the support of the AfD. He has since been removed as a pastor. And over the summer, the Magdeburg Catholic bishopric made it clear that AfD members cannot work in church bodies.

In the midst of all this, Germany has also inched closer to instituting an all-out ban on the party itself.

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 08:45

Great Britain Cracks Down On “Non-Crime Hate” Speech, Including Playground Taunts

0
Great Britain Cracks Down On “Non-Crime Hate” Speech, Including Playground Taunts

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

In my book, The Indispensable Right, I discuss how free speech is in a free fall in Great Britain, where officials continue to crack down on an ever-widening array of viewpoints. Some of these actions are designated as “non-crime hate” but are still the subject of law enforcement actions. According to the Daily Mail, they now include children who have been pulled in for calling other children schoolyard names like “retard” or saying that other children smell “like fish.”

According to the Daily Mail:

“A nine-year-old child is among the youngsters being probed by police over hate incidents… Officers recorded incidents against the child, who called a fellow primary school pupil a ‘retard’, and against two schoolgirls who said another student smelled ‘like fish.’ The youngsters were among multiple cases of children being recorded as having committed non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs), The Times discovered through freedom of information requests to police forces.”

“Non-crime hate” was introduced in 2014 as part of the Hate Crime Operational Guidelines.

It is chilling in its ambiguity and scope. It only requires the perception of either a victim or a third party that a statement is motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or transgender identity.

The HCOG stresses, “The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception. Evidence of the hostility is not required.”

That guarantees the maximal level of investigation and documentation of speech incidents. The chilling effect on free speech is glacial.

For years, I have been writing about the decline of free speech in the United Kingdom and the steady stream of arrests. A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”Last year, Nicholas Brock, 52, was convicted of a thought crime in Maidenhead, Berkshire. The neo-Nazi was given a four-year sentence for what the court called his “toxic ideology” based on the contents of the home he shared with his mother in Maidenhead, Berkshire.

While most of us find Brock’s views repellent and hateful, they were confined to his head and his room. Yet, Judge Peter Lodder QC dismissed free speech or free thought concerns with a truly Orwellian statement:

“I do not sentence you for your political views, but the extremity of those views informs the assessment of dangerousness.”

Lodder lambasted Brock for holding Nazi and other hateful values:

“[i]t is clear that you are a right-wing extremist, your enthusiasm for this repulsive and toxic ideology is demonstrated by the graphic and racist iconography which you have studied and appeared to share with others…”

Even though Lodder agreed that the defendant was older, had limited mobility, and “there was no evidence of disseminating to others,” he still sent him to prison for holding extremist views.

After the sentencing, Detective Chief Superintendent Kath Barnes, Head of Counter Terrorism Policing South East (CTPSE), warned others that he was going to prison because he “showed a clear right-wing ideology with the evidence seized from his possessions during the investigation….We are committed to tackling all forms of toxic ideology which has the potential to threaten public safety and security.”

Great Britain is now turning, it appears, to their children in speech crackdowns. Schoolyard taunts can be investigated by officers. The impact on both parents and children will obviously be immense. It adds a coercive element to speech laws. Given the subjective and vague standard, the response is to self-censor to avoid any such accusations. Raising children in such an environment will only erode free speech values. Indeed, it fosters the type of speech-phobic generation that many activists may welcome. Speech is viewed as dangerous and subject to continual monitoring by the state.

Stopping some kid from using a playground taunt will do little to instill mutual respect, but it will instill fear over how the state may respond to your words. It is a lesson that many in the free speech community may relish but one that most citizens should reject. “Non-crime hate” investigations are meant to maintain a constant sense of oversight and monitoring of speech, even with our children.

*  *  *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 08:10

Former NATO Spokesperson Says Europe May Need To Spend 5% Of GDP On Defense

0
Former NATO Spokesperson Says Europe May Need To Spend 5% Of GDP On Defense

A former NATO spokesperson has said members of the 32-nation bloc may need to spend 4 or 5 percent of their GDP on defense in the coming years, especially if the United States pulls back on its commitments under President-elect Donald Trump.

The Epoch Times’ Chris Summers reports that Oana Lungescu, who worked at NATO between 2010 and 2024, told a Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) briefing in London on Thursday, that a majority of America’s allies in NATO were spending at least 2 percent of GDP on defense.

But she said, “Obviously, we’re in a better place than we used to be, but is 2 percent enough? Does anybody here think that 2 percent is enough?”

She was speaking as the Ukrainian military claimed Russian forces struck the Ukrainian city of Dnipro with an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Nov. 21.

The alleged ICBM strike happened just days after reports emerged the United States had allowed Ukraine to use U.S.-origin long-range weapons for deep strikes inside Russian territory; a request Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made for months.

Russia says Ukraine used the Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) against Russia’s Bryansk region on Nov. 19.

Amid the apparent escalation of the Ukrainian conflict, Lungescu, said: “I would think that there will be a big push towards 3 percent and frankly, we should not need Donald Trump to tell us that we need [to spend] 3 percent.

“Frankly, if there is any change or moderation of the US commitment to Europe … we will need 4 percent and 5 percent of GDP on defense.”

Lungescu said: “Interestingly, there’s a new poll in Germany just the other day showing that 50 percent of those asked said that 3 to 3.5 percent is about right, which is a huge, huge mindset change for Germany.”

In February, Trump told journalists in New York that “NATO countries have to pay up.”

“The United States is in for $2oo billion and they’re in for $25 billion,” he said. “They’re not paying what they should, and they laugh at the stupidity of the United States of America.”

Thursday’s briefing, hosted by the British defense think tank RUSI, was headlined “The impact of the U.S. presidential election on European security.”

Jim Townsend, a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO policy under President Barack Obama, said the world situation was very different from when Trump left office in 2020, partly because of the growing relationship between Russia and China.

Putin Expressing ‘Displeasure’

He said, “There’s a lot of things that Putin is doing right now to express his displeasure over ATACMS sure, but also to message to the incoming administration, ‘don’t think that we’re close friends with you guys and you’re going to roll over us, Trump.’”

Townsend said Russia was angry with the United States and he described the Kremlin’s reaction as: “We’re not happy with the West. We’re not happy with what you’re doing, and you’re going to see our fists about this.”

Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), described the relationship between Trump and Putin as a “bromance.”

He predicted Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) would be Trump’s choice for secretary of state, and he pointed out Rubio had voted against President Joe Biden’s $95 billion funding package for Ukraine in February.

Bergmann said the nominations Trump has so far made for his Cabinet suggested that in his second term, “the dial is turned up.”

“It is time to … take Trump very seriously about what he has indicated that he wants to do,” he said.

He added there had been lots of discussions about China’s leader Xi Jinping’s intentions with Taiwan, and “there was a common refrain, ‘You should read what he says and take them literally.’ And I think that’s true with Trump.”

Bergmann said the president-elect wants to fundamentally change U.S. policy on European security, on Ukraine, and Russia.

“I think when it comes to NATO that means basically a major paradigm shift.”

NATO spokesperson Oana Lungescu (L) and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg arrive for the NATO summit at the Ifema congress centre in Madrid on June 29, 2022. Javier Soriano/AFP via Getty Images

Lungescu, a Romanian former journalist, predicted: “The next four years will be turbulent, will be complicated, and there may be many things that we don’t like.

“But ultimately, if you look at the growing alignment between Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, these authoritarian states, which are all adversaries to what the U.S. stands for, and to what Europeans stand for.

“It’s in our interests to stay calm, to plan, and to invest in what unites us, rather than in what divides us,” she added.

Rutte Is ‘Friend of Trump’

Lungescu said the new NATO secretary general, former Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte, had a “good working relationship with Donald Trump” and described himself as a friend of Trump.

She said, “So I would expect Mark Rutte to try to go to Washington as quickly as possible to meet not just the new administration, but also the new Congress.”

She said bipartisan support for NATO will be part of the calculus in terms of how the administration proceeds.

“He will need to make the case … of why NATO is a good deal for the United States,” added Lungescu, who is now a senior fellow at RUSI.

Lungescu said she thought the NATO summit in The Hague in June would be shorter than originally planned.

She said Trump’s nomination of Matt Whitaker as the next U.S. permanent representative to NATO was “interesting” and “could be a positive sign.”

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 07:35

Berlin Teachers Sound Alarm Over Educational Crisis Caused By Multiculturalism

0
Berlin Teachers Sound Alarm Over Educational Crisis Caused By Multiculturalism

By Thomas Brooke of Remix News

Teachers at the Friedrich Bergius School in Berlin’s Schöneberg district have issued a stark warning about escalating issues they say are exacerbated by the city’s approach to mass immigration and integration.

In a seven-page letter to the district council, the staff described an environment of increasing aggression, violence, and educational struggles that has left them overwhelmed and desperate for support.

The letter highlights a central issue: Many students entering the school lack not only proficiency in German but also basic academic skills, with some having never attended school before. Around 80 percent of the students speak a language other than German at home, and over 70 percent of the seventh graders admitted in 2023 were unable to even read a clock.

These challenges, compounded by behavioral problems and a lack of resources, have created what teachers describe as “untenable” conditions.

The strained educational system is underscored by a dramatic rise in verbal abuse and physical threats toward teachers which educators say has now become routine, while serious incidents of bullying have further eroded the school environment.

Students have reportedly set off firecrackers in the schoolyard, thrown objects at peers and staff, and harassed others with phones in restrooms — “taking photos and videos in compromising situations.”

Their concerns are backed up by the stats. Over 1,500 incidents were recorded in the first 38 days of the school year alone, with over 500 students having to be removed from class for behavioral reasons.

Teachers report that their concerns have been ignored by local authorities. “The school is increasingly reaching its limits,” the letter states as teachers demand urgent intervention to address the crisis.

Unsurprisingly, the problems reverberate around the community, with local residents lodging complaints about anti-social behavior by students and supermarket owners banning youngsters from entering their establishments due to disruptive incidents.

Police are called far too frequently to the school to respond to escalating situations, the letter states, with clashes often stemming from the cultural divides that now exist.

Teachers say the current system does not provide the resources necessary to meet the demands of the increasing socio-economic backgrounds of many students, leaving schools to struggle alone with the consequences of Berlin’s immigration policies.

The teaching staff outlined six measures necessary to address the crisis, including a shift to classroom-based teaching methods and the hiring of a school psychologist to assist the four current social workers.

In addition, staff called for greater supervision of students during break times and for more robust security measures, including a gatekeeper.

Continue reading on remix.news

Tyler Durden
Sat, 11/23/2024 – 07:00

Make Army Futures Command Great Again

0
Make Army Futures Command Great Again

Authored by Michael McInerney via RealClearWire,

When President Trump takes office in January, his Army Secretary will need to refocus and re-energize the Army while eliminating bureaucratic waste. Among the many complex tasks ahead, one move is simple and clear: return Army Futures Command (AFC) to the purpose it was created for during the first Trump administration. Restore its authority, restore its power, and let AFC do what it does best—modernize the U.S. Army for the battlefields of tomorrow.

Established in 2018, AFC was envisioned as the spearhead of Army modernization. Backed with budget authority, AFC wielded real influence over investment decisions. Then-Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley created AFC to break free from two decades of failed modernization efforts. Years of over-budget, underperforming development projects prompted McCarthy and Milley to create a streamlined, fast-moving command able to dodge bureaucratic bottlenecks, cut through “analysis paralysis” and deliver next-generation capabilities. An empowered AFC began immediately to eliminate unnecessary programs and deliver the Army that we need—one equipped with state-of-the-art technology and ready to deter future adversaries.

But in late-2021, AFC’s momentum ground to a halt. The Biden administration issued two memos that stripped the command of its budget authority and effectively neutered its mission. The argument? That this move would restore “civilian control” over military spending. In reality, it threw AFC back into the tangled arms of the Pentagon’s infamous “acquisition blob”—a web of civilian bureaucrats, entrenched contractors, and out of touch acquisition officers. AFC’s loss of budget authority meant it no longer had the power to influence Army modernization decisions. Its voice—one that had cut through the red tape to make real progress—was practically silenced.

Without budgetary control, AFC became a figurehead, forced to provide unwanted advice from the sidelines while Army modernization returned to the same slow, bloated, and ineffective Pentagon bureaucracy it was meant to disrupt.

Returning AFC’s authorities is not about rolling back civilian control. Before 2022, AFC’s 4-star Commander shared acquisition budget authority with the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisitions, Logistics, and Technology, a civilian leader. Additionally, the civilian Secretary of the Army maintained final say over the Army’s annual budget request. This was a balanced system that empowered uniformed operationally focused military leaders while keeping civilian oversight intact.

Revoking budget authority left AFC’s role in the acquisition process up in the air, leaving it unable to execute its original vision. This was not what visionary leaders during Trump’s first administration had in mind. The bottom line? Restoring AFC’s authority means restoring the voice of uniformed leaders in Army modernization.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. As threats around the world multiply, from an aggressive Russia to a rising China, the U.S. Army must be ready. AFC was designed to deliver the weapons, technology, and capabilities needed for future conflicts. But without real authority, AFC remains little more than an advisory body—a high-level think tank when what we need is a lean, capable, and empowered modernization engine.

The incoming Trump administration has an opportunity to revive its original vision. Reinstating AFC’s budget authority would re-arm it in the battle against bureaucratic inertia and give it the tools needed to shape the Army of the future. Let’s make AFC great again, and in doing so, make our Army a force to be reckoned with for decades to come. The future of U.S. military superiority depends on it.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/22/2024 – 23:25

Who Is Stockpiling Anti-Personnel Mines?

0
Who Is Stockpiling Anti-Personnel Mines?

After authorizing Ukraine to use ATACMS long-range missiles on Russian territory Sunday, the outgoing Biden Administration has announced that it will be sending anti-personnel landmines to the country.

As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, the U.S. and Russia are non-signatories of the International Mine Ban Treaty and are among the world’s largest stockpilers of anti-personnel mines, while Ukraine is a signatory.

Infographic: Who Is Stockpiling Anti-Personnel Mines? | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

Russia specifically has more than 26 million landmines in its stockpile, the newly released Landmine Monitor by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines shows, and has used them on its front line with Ukraine “liberally.” Ukraine has so far only used improvised anti-personnel mines.

The U.S. stocks 3 million anti-personnel mines, according to the publication. The Biden Administration has intensified its push to aid Ukraine before President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January.

Anti-tank mines had been sent to Ukraine previously.

While anti-personnel mines have been condemned internationally due to their destructive effects on civilians, the U.S. will be sending non-persistent mines which have batteries and stop functioning after a short time span.

The country’s decision was still called into question by international organizations, as was the decision not to join the aforementioned 1999 treaty. The White House said that the mines were necessary for Ukraine to stop Russian advancements in smaller, less heavily armoured ground units.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/22/2024 – 23:00