اینترنت

برچسب: America

  • Why is Trump Killing the Voice of America?

    Why is Trump Killing the Voice of America?


    Yesterday was World Press Freedom Day.

    Press Freedom is at risk in every authoritarian regime, but also in the U.S. Trump has filed frivolous lawsuits against ABC and other news outlets. ABC paid him $15 million to make peace.

    Trump sued CBS for $10 billion for editing a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris and is now in settlement talks. Editing a pre-taped interview is standard practice. The interview may last for an hour, but only 20 minutes is aired. Since Trump won the election, how was he damaged? It is hard to imagine he would win anything in court.

    But Trump’s FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, has the power to destroy CBS. And the owner of CBS–Shari Redstone– is currently negotiating a lucrative deal that needs FCC approval. What will CBS pay Trump?

    Given Trump’s legendary vindictiveness, will he succeed in eviscerating press freedom? Will the media dare criticize him as they have criticized every other president?

    See CNN’s Brian Stelter on the state of press freedom today.

    Now comes Trump’s puzzling vendetta against the Voice of America. In March, he issued an executive order to shut it down, although Republicans have traditionally supported it. On April 22, a federal district court judge overturned Trump’s executive order and demanded the rehiring of VOA staff. They were told they would be back at work in days. But yesterday, a three judge appeals court stayed the lower court’s ruling and VOA’s future is again in doubt. Two of the three appeals court judges were appointed by Trump.

    The Voice of America has a unique responsibility. It brings objective, factual, unbiased news to people around the globe. For millions of people, the Voice of America is their only alternative to either government propaganda or no news at all.

    Why does Donald Trump want to kill the Voice of America.

    He has never explained.

    He has called VOA “radical,” “leftwing,” and “woke,” but there is no factual basis for those attacks. They are talking points, not facts.

    He appointed his devoted friend, Kari Lake, who ran for office in Arizona and lost both times, as the agent of VOA’s demise. She was an on-air commentator, so she knows something about media.

    VOA seems to be in a death spiral, like USAID and the Department of Education.

    The Washington Post reported on the Appeals Court’s ruling. Kari Lake described the decision as a “huge victory for President Trump.”

    Trump has never explained why the Voice of America should be silenced.

    Apparently no one at the VOA understands. I found this interview by Nick Schifrin of PBS (also on Trump’s chopping block), Lisa Curtis, and Michael Abramowitz, Director of VOA:

    • Nick Schifrin: Lisa Curtis is the chair of the board of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and a former senior director on President Trump’s first National Security Council staff.
    • Lisa Curtis: While it’s understandable that President Trump wants to cut down on government waste and fraud, I think this is the wrong organization to be attacking. Russia, Iran, China, these countries are spending billions in their own propaganda, their own anti-American propaganda. So I think it’s critical that the U.S. government is supporting organizations like RFE/RL that are pushing back against that disinformation, misinformation.
    • Nick Schifrin: And she says RFE/RL’s content reaches more than 10 percent of Iranians, many of whom have protested the regime.
    • Lisa Curtis:So I think it really is part of U.S. soft power, but they actually call it the hard edge of soft power because it is so effective in getting out the truth about America, about what’s happening in their local environments. And this is absolutely critical.
    • Nick Schifrin:Curtis said she considers the freeze and their funding illegal because the money is congressionally appropriated and RFE/RL’s mission is congressionally mandated. And they will sue the Trump administration to get it restored.To discuss this, I turn to Michael Abramowitz, who since last year has been the president of Voice of America and before that was the president of Freedom House.Michael Abramowitz, thanks very much. Welcome back to the “News Hour.”As you heard, President Trump in his statement on Friday night referred to VOA as a radical propaganda with a liberal bias. Is it?Michael Abramowitz, Director, Voice of America: I don’t think so.I do think that people at many different news organizations have been accused of bias on both right and left, like many different news organizations. VOA is not perfect, but we’re unusual among news organizations because we are one of the few news organizations that by law has to be fair and balanced.Every year, we look at each of our language services, review it for fairness, for balance. I have been a journalist in this field for a long time, and I think the journalists at VOA stand up very well against people from CNN, FOX, New York Times, et cetera, in terms of the commitment to balance.When we do talk shows, for instance, broadcasting into Iran, we will have Republicans, we will have Democrats. We are presenting the full spectrum of American political opinion, which is required by our charter.
    • Nick Schifrin:You have heard from other administration officials or allies of the president. Ric Grenell, who is a special envoy, called it — quote — “a relic of the past. We don’t need government-paid media outlets.”
    • Elon Musk says:“Shut them down. Nobody listens to them anymore.”Fundamentally, why do you believe taxpayers should pay for VOA journalism?
    • Michael Abramowitz:You know, the media is changing, the world is changing, and the Cold War doesn’t exist anymore.But what is happening around the world is that there is a huge, really, battle over information. The world is awash in propaganda and lies, and our adversaries like Russia and China, Iran are really spreading narratives that directly undermine accurate views about America.And we have to fight back. And VOA in particular has been an incredible asset for fighting back by providing objective news and information in the languages, in 48 languages that people in the local markets we serve. No other news organization does that.
    • Nick Schifrin:Let me ask a little bit about the status of the agency. You and every employee were put on leave over the weekend. Today, all contractors have been terminated. Do you have any notion of what the goal is from the administration? Is it to reform VOA, or is it simply to destroy it?
    • Michael Abramowitz:Candidly, I don’t know.Ms. Kari Lake, who is supposed to be my successor at some point she’s given some interviews, and I think she clearly recognizes in those interviews that VOA serves an important purpose. I think there are a lot of Republicans, in particular, especially on the Hill, who recognize the value of Voice of America, who recognize that, if we shut down, for instance, our program on Iran, which is really an incredible newsroom — we have 100 journalists, most of whom speak Farsi, has a huge audience inside Iran.When the president of Iran, when his helicopter went down over the summer, there was a huge spike in traffic on the VOA Web site because the people of Iran knew that they could not get accurate information about what was going on, so they came to VOA to get it. That’s the kind of thing that we can do.
    • Nick Schifrin:I want to point out, we heard from Lisa Curtis, the chair of the board of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.Voice of America and the Cuba Broadcasting, previously known as Radio Marti — we have got a graphic to show this — those are fully federal networks.(Crosstalk)
    • Nick Schifrin:What RFE/RL is talking about, they are a grantee. They get a grant from the U.S. government. RFE/RL will sue. Does VOA have any recourse today?
    • Michael Abramowitz:Well, I think we are — I mean, there’s a lot of discussion about some lawsuits that different parties are making. I know that the employees may be thinking about that.I think — I’m not sure that litigation in the end is going to be the most productive way. Maybe — I mean, you have to see what happens. But I think what would be really great is if Congress and the administration get together, recognize that this is a very important service, recognize that it’s sorely needed in a world in which our adversaries are spending billions of dollars, like Lisa said, and reformulate VOA to be effective for the modern age.
    • Nick Schifrin:And, finally, how — what’s the impact of this decision and the language that we have heard from the Trump administration on the very idea that information, that journalism sponsored by the U.S. government can support freedom and democracy?
    • Michael Abramowitz:We have been on the air essentially for 83 years through war, 9/11, government shutdown. VOA has kept — has kept its — has kept the lights on, has not been silent.So we’re silenced for the first time in 83 years. That’s devastating to me personally. It’s devastating to the staff. It’s devastating to all the thousands of people who used to work at VOA. I mean, this is a very special and unique news organization. It deserves to live. It doesn’t mean we can’t reform, but it deserves to survive.

    I still don’t understand why Trump wants to close down America’s voice to the world.

    I ask myself, who benefits if the Voice of America is stifled.

    The obvious culprits: America’s enemies, especially Russia.

    During the decades of the Cold War, VOA beamed information to dissenters behind the Iron Curtain. It kept hope alive.

    No one would be happier to see VOA shut down than Putin.



    Source link

  • Fareed Zakaria: Trump’s War on Science Is Bad for America

    Fareed Zakaria: Trump’s War on Science Is Bad for America


    TRUMP’S ATTACK on science has the backing of fundamentalist evangelical Christians, and especially virulent The New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). In fact, however, anti-science is anti-Christian, and the traditional Christian denominations which represent the large majority of Christians have even accepted as dogma that the human body and all other forms of life have evolved in a Drawinian manner. The media ignores this acceptance because the media likes to portray conflict. Take a look at the following: SAINT AUGUSTINE SAYS THAT ANTI-SCIENCE IS ANTI-CHRISTIAN —

    Christians today should heed the warning that St. Augustine gave to his fellow Christians: “It is a disgraceful and a dangerous thing for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talking nonsense about scientific topics. Many non-Christians are well-versed in scientific knowledge, so they can detect the ignorance in such a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The danger to Christianity is obvious: The failure to conform to demonstrated scientific knowledge opens the Christian, and Christianity as a whole, to ridicule. If non-Christians find a Christian mistaken on a scientific subject that they know well and hear such a Christian maintaining his foolish opinions, how are they going to believe our teachings in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven?”

    In short, St. Augustine was pointing out that God gave humans intellects and that Christians shouldn’t let anti-science political ideology make Christianity look foolish to the vast majority of people and cause them to turn their back on Christianity, which is one of the main reasons why fewer Americans profess any religion.

    Traditional Christian Churches To Which Nearly All Christians Belong Have Accepted the Science of Evolution — here are some of the official Christian church positions on their acceptance of evolution:

    The CATHOLIC CHURCH: Half of all Christians in the world are Catholic, and in the 1950 Papal Encyclical “Humani Generis,” Pope Pius XII declared that the human body came “from pre-existent and living matter” that evolved through a sequence of stages before God instilled a spiritual soul into the human body. Catholics accept that Genesis is not literal and are only bound by faith to believe that the natural evolution of the human body was a God-guided process, and that the spiritual human soul that inhabits the physical human body didn’t evolve, but is created by God.

    The EPISCOPAL CHURCH declared in its 67th General Assembly:

    “Whereas, the state legislatures of several states have recently passed so-called ‘balanced treatment’ laws requiring the teaching of ‘Creation Science’ whenever evolutionary models are taught; and

    Whereas, in many other states political pressures are developing for such “balanced treatment” laws; and

    “Whereas, the dogma of ‘Creationism’ and ‘Creation Science’ as understood in the above contexts has been discredited by scientific and theologic studies and rejected in the statements of many church leaders; and

    “Whereas, ‘Creationism’ and ‘Creation Science’ is not limited to just the origin of life, but intends to monitor public school courses, such as biology, life science, anthropology, sociology, and often also English, physics, chemistry, world history, philosophy, and social studies; therefore be it

    “Resolved: that the 67th General Convention affirm the glorious ability of God to create in any manner, whether men understand it or not, and in this affirmation reject the limited insight and rigid dogmatism of the ‘Creationist’ movement, and be it further

    “Resolved: by 67th General Convention of the Episcopal Church, 1982, that the Presiding Bishop appoint a Committee to organize Episcopalians and to cooperate with all Episcopalians to encourage actively urge their state legislators not to be persuaded by arguments and pressures of the ‘Creationists’ into legislating any form of ‘balanced treatment’ laws or any law requiring the teaching of ‘Creation Science’.”

    The LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION declared in its Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church, Vol. I, 1965, that: “An assessment of the prevailing situation makes it clear that evolution’s assumptions are as much around us as the air we breathe and no more escapable. At the same time theology’s affirmations are being made as responsibly as ever. In this sense both science and religion are here to stay, and the demands of either are great enough to keep most (if not all) from daring to profess competence in both. To preserve their own integrity both science and religion need to remain in a healthful tension of respect toward one another and to engage in a searching debate which no more permits theologians to pose as scientists than it permits scientists to pose as theologians.”

    The UNITED METHODIST CHURCH declared at its 1984 Annual Conference that:

    “Whereas, ‘Scientific’ creationism seeks to prove that natural history conforms absolutely to the Genesis account of origins; and,

    “Whereas, adherence to immutable theories is fundamentally antithetical to the nature of science; and,

    “Whereas, ‘Scientific’ creationism seeks covertly to promote a particular religious dogma; and,

    “Whereas, the promulgation of religious dogma in public schools is contrary to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution; therefore,

    “Be it resolved that The Iowa Annual Conference opposes efforts to introduce ‘scientific’ creationism into the science curriculum of the public schools.”

    The UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH in the USA declared at its 1982 General Assembly that:

    “Whereas, the dispute is not really over biology or faith, but is essentially about Biblical interpretation, particularly over two irreconcilable viewpoints regarding the characteristics of Biblical literature and the nature of Biblical authority:

    “Therefore, the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. General Assembly: Affirms that, despite efforts to establish ‘creationism’ or creation science’ as a valid science, it is teaching based upon a particular religious dogma; and,

    “Calls upon Presbyterians, and upon legislators and school board members, to resist all efforts to establish any requirements upon teachers and schools to teach ‘creationism’ or ‘creation science’.”

    The above Christian churches represent the overwhelming majority of Christians.

    Like



    Source link

  • Small College America – Profile Earlham College – Edu Alliance Journal


    February 17, 2025, by Dean Hoke: This profile of Earlham College is the second in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.

    Background

    Founded in 1847 in Richmond, Indiana, Earlham College is a private liberal arts institution with deep Quaker roots. The college maintains its commitment to principles such as integrity, peace, social justice, and community engagement, which shape both its academic and extracurricular life. Despite its modest size, Earlham has built a reputation for academic rigor, experiential learning, and global perspectives. Dr. Paul Sniegowski, a biologist and former dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, has served as President since August 2024.

    For the 2023-24 academic year, U.S. News & World Report estimates Earlham’s total annual cost (including tuition, housing, and other expenses) at $53,930, with an average net price after aid of $25,496.

    Curricula

    Earlham College offers a diverse range of undergraduate programs, with popular majors including Biology, Environmental Science, International Studies, Business, and Psychology. The college places a strong emphasis on interdisciplinary learning, allowing students to engage in cross-disciplinary courses and independent research. The Epic Advantage Program provides students with up to $5,000 in funding for hands-on learning experiences, such as internships, field studies, and international travel.

    The college also offers a 3+2 Engineering Program, where students spend three years at Earlham before transferring to an affiliated university, such as Columbia or Case Western Reserve, to complete an engineering degree. This dual-degree approach combines the benefits of a liberal arts education with technical training, preparing students for careers in engineering, business, and technology fields.

    Strengths

    • Commitment to Experiential Learning – Programs like Epic Advantage provide students with real-world experience, enhancing their competitiveness in the job market.
    • Strong International Focus – Nearly 70% of Earlham students study abroad, and the college has partnerships with institutions worldwide.
    • Small Class Sizes – With a 9:1 student-faculty ratio, Earlham offers personalized attention and mentoring opportunities.
    • Values-Driven Education – Quaker principles of peace, social justice, and ethical leadership are embedded in the curriculum and campus culture.
    • Strong Science and Environmental Programs – The Joseph Moore Museum and expansive natural study areas provide unique hands-on research opportunities.

    Weaknesses

    • Financial Stability Challenges – Like many small liberal arts colleges, Earlham faces financial pressures, including declining enrollment and reliance on tuition revenue.
    • Leadership Continuity – Since 2011, Earlham has had four Presidents and one interim.
    • Limited Graduate Programs – Earlham focuses almost exclusively on undergraduate education, which may limit options for students seeking to continue their studies within the same institution.
    • Limited Name Recognition – Despite its strong academic reputation, Earlham struggles with brand recognition outside the Midwest and higher education circles.

    Economic Impact

    Earlham College is a major economic driver in Richmond, Indiana, and the surrounding region. The college employs hundreds of faculty and staff, supports local businesses, and contributes significantly to the local economy.

    According to the Independent Colleges of Indiana, Earlham College has a total economic impact of $76 million on the state and has created nearly 725 jobs in Indiana. LinkedIn data suggests the college has nearly 9,000 alumni, with 1,400 residing in Indiana and 366 in the Richmond area.

    Through programs like the Center for Social Justice and the Bonner Scholars Program, Earlham students engage in community service projects throughout Richmond. The college also frequently hosts cultural and educational events open to the public, further integrating itself into the civic life of the region.

    Enrollment Trends

    Earlham College has experienced a decline in full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment over the past decade. In the 2013-14 academic year, enrollment stood at 1,159 students, dropping to 677 students in 2022-23. In the 2024 academic year, undergraduate FTE enrollment was 691.33 in the fall and 620.33 in the spring, reflecting ongoing challenges in retention and recruitment.

    Degrees Awarded by Major

    In 2024, Earlham College awarded 123 undergraduate degrees, including 84 single majors, 18 double majors, and one triple major. The distribution by major category is as follows:

    Alumni

    According to Earlham’s First-Destination Survey Report (2019-23):

    • 28% of graduates continue their education within six months of graduation.
    • 57% are employed within six months.
    • The top five employment industries are Education, Healthcare, Internet & Software, and Research.
    • Nearly 50% of alumni pursue graduate or professional school within 10 years.

    Notable Alumni:

    • Michael C. Hall (1993) – Emmy-nominated actor (Dexter, Six Feet Under).
    • Margaret Hamilton (1958) – NASA software engineer, led Apollo Program flight software development.
    • Michael Shellenberger (1993) – Author and journalist on free speech and environmental policy.
    • Venus Williams (2015) – Former World No. 1 tennis player and Olympic gold medalist.
    • Wendell Meredith Stanley (1926) – Nobel Prize-winning chemist in virus research.

    Endowment and Financial Standing

    Earlham College’s current endowment is $419 million, down from $475 million in 2021. Financial challenges stem from declining enrollment and reduced tuition revenue. In FY 2023, the college reported a net loss of $11.1 million.

    Despite these challenges, Forbes (2024) rated Earlham A- with a 3.499 GPA, signaling relative financial resilience. The college is actively implementing strategic budget adjustments and seeking alternative revenue sources to ensure long-term sustainability.

    Why Earlham Remains Relevant

    In an era where liberal arts colleges must justify their value, Earlham College stands out for its values-driven, experiential education. Its commitment to academic excellence, social responsibility, and global engagement makes it an attractive option for students looking for more than just a degree.

    Earlham’s focus on sustainability, diversity, and international collaboration positions it as a model institution that integrates ethical leadership with practical learning. As higher education continues to evolve, Earlham demonstrates that a small college can have a big impact on both students and the world.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, are co-hosts for the podcast series Small College America. Season two begins February. 25, 2025



    Source link

  • Small College America – Profile College of Wooster – Edu Alliance Journal

    Small College America – Profile College of Wooster – Edu Alliance Journal


    March 3, 2025, by Dean Hoke: This profile of the College of Wooster is the fourth in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.

    Background

    The College of Wooster, founded in 1866, is a private liberal arts institution located in Wooster, Ohio. Known for its commitment to mentored undergraduate research, Wooster offers a comprehensive liberal arts education in a residential setting. The college enrolls approximately 1,800 students representing diverse backgrounds from 47 U.S. states and 76 countries. The student-to-faculty ratio is 11:1, ensuring personalized attention and mentorship. For the 2022-2023 academic year, the total cost of attendance, including tuition, fees, room, and board, is $71,000. Notably, more than 85% of students receive financial aid, with an average award of $50,000.

    Curricula

    Wooster offers over 50 academic programs in the sciences, humanities, social sciences, and arts. A distinctive feature of the Wooster experience is the Independent Study program. In this program, students engage in a year-long research project under faculty mentorship, culminating in a thesis or creative work. This program fosters critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication skills.

    Strengths

    • Mentored Research: The Independent Study program exemplifies Wooster’s dedication to undergraduate research. It provides students with hands-on experience in their chosen fields.
    • Diverse Community: With 27% U.S. students of color and 14% international students, Wooster boasts a vibrant and inclusive campus environment.
    • High Graduate Success Rate: Within six months of graduation, 96% of alums are employed or enrolled in graduate programs, with 94% accepted into their top-choice graduate schools.

    Weaknesses

    • Cost of Attendance: Despite substantial financial aid offerings, the total cost may be a barrier for some prospective students.
    • Limited Graduate Programs: As an institution focused primarily on undergraduate education, Wooster offers limited opportunities for postgraduate studies.

    Economic Impact

    The College of Wooster significantly contributes to the local economy of Wooster, Ohio, which has a population of 27,012 and is the county seat of Wayne County, which has a population of 116,500. The college is a major employer in the region and attracts students, faculty, and visitors, bolstering local businesses and services. Additionally, cultural and academic events hosted by the college enrich the community’s cultural landscape. According to LeadIQ, approximately 1,200 people are employed by the college, and its annual operating expenses are over $88 million.

    LinkedIn data shows that the college has nearly 17,000 alums, 4,700 of whom reside in Ohio and 1,120 in the Wooster, Ohio, area.

    Enrollment Trends

    Over the past decade, Wooster’s enrollment has slightly declined, from 2,100 to 1875 over a 10-year period. The student base is 35% in-state and 65% out-of-state and international. The college consistently attracts a diverse student body from across the United States and around the world. 98% of the student population lives in campus housing, and the age range is 18-24. Wooster does not have any graduate degree programs.

    Degrees Awarded by Major

    In the most recent report, 18 majors had graduates Wooster Degrees Conferred.

    Alumni

    Employment and or attending graduate school is very high. In the class of 2023, 97% of Wooster graduates secured employment or enrolled in graduate programs within six months post-graduation. 78% entered the workforce, 15% are attending graduate or professional school, 4% were applying for graduate school, and only 3% are seeking employment. Also, an average over the past three years shows that 91% of the Wooster graduates were accepted into their top choice graduate school. (Source: College of Wooster Destination Report, Class of 2023)

    LinkedIn data shows the college has nearly 17,000 alumni. 28% live in Ohio, 18% in the greater Cleveland area, and 7% in the city of Wooster.

    Notable Alumni:

    • J.C. Chandor ‘96 Acclaimed filmmaker known for works such as “Margin Call” and “All Is Lost.” Nominated for the Academy Awards in 2011
    • Laurie Kosanovich ’94, general counsel for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
    • John Dean ’61 Former White House Counsel for President Richard Nixon, notable for his role in the Watergate scandal.
    • Duncan Jones, ‘95, award-winning filmmaker director of Source Code and Moon. He is the son of David Bowie.
    • Jennifer Haverkamp ’79, Professor of Practice Gerald R Ford School of Public Policy, the University of Michigan
    • Donald Kohn ’64, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve
    • Dr. Sangram Sisodia ’77, The Department of Neurobiology, specializing in Alzheimer’s disease. University of Chicago.

    Endowment and Financial Standing

    As of June 30, 2023, The College of Wooster’s endowment stands at $395.5 million, reflecting prudent financial management and generous alum support. This endowment supports scholarships, faculty positions, and various institutional initiatives, ensuring the college’s long-term financial health.  According to the 2023 Forbes financial report, The College of Wooster is rated 2.421 and a B- grade. Wooster has maintained a stable financial position. 

    Why is The College of Wooster Important?

    1. Commitment to Mentored Undergraduate Research – The College of Wooster is distinguished for its dedication to undergraduate research, providing students with personalized mentorship that fosters inquiry, intellectual growth, and academic excellence.
    2. Independent Study Program – A hallmark of Wooster’s education, the year-long Independent Study program requires every student to complete a rigorous research project, developing critical thinking, effective communication, and independent judgment skills.
    3. Diverse and Inclusive Community – Wooster attracts students from all 50 states and over 60 countries, creating a dynamic and inclusive environment where cross-cultural dialogue and global perspectives thrive.
    4. Strong Financial Foundation –Wooster maintains financial stability through prudent management and strategic investments, ensuring long-term institutional sustainability.
    5. Economic Impact – The College plays a vital role in the local economy, contributing to job creation, community development, and regional growth through its sustained presence and financial stewardship.
    6. Distinguished Alumni Network – Wooster graduates excel in various fields, including academia, business, public service, and the arts. The College’s alumni include Nobel laureates, influential public figures, and innovators who make significant contributions to society.

    This structured format highlights The College of Wooster’s key strengths, reinforcing its importance as a leading liberal arts institution.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, are co-hosts for the podcast series Small College America. Season two begins on March 11, 2025.



    Source link

  • Thomas L. Friedman: After Trump’s Tariff Fiasco, Will Any Other Nation Trust America?

    Thomas L. Friedman: After Trump’s Tariff Fiasco, Will Any Other Nation Trust America?


    Thomas L. Friedman is the foreign affairs opinion writer for The New York Times. In this post, he excoriates Trump for his arrogance and stupidity in handling the tariffs issue, and especially for his arrogance and stupidity in dealing with China. First, he insisted that he would “hang tough” on his plan to impose draconian tariffs. When the stock and bond markets crashed, he decided to put a 90-day pause on tariffs, exempting China.

    He has alienated our allies and outraged China. His arrogance has isolated us in the world as a faithless bully. It seems that Trump’s “art of the deal” consists of bullying, threatening, insulting, and humiliating the other party. It doesn’t work in the international stage. Trump dissipated long-standing alliances and has made us look foolish in the eyes of the world. In less than three months, he has squandered good will, scorned close relationships, and thrown away our reputation as “leader of the free world.” The emperor has no clothes. He stands naked before the world as a stupid and reckless man.

    It’s important to remember that Trump was never a successful businessman. He went bankrupt six times. No American bank would extend loans to him because of his abysmal record. Yet his MAGA cult believes in his business acumen because he played a successful businessman on TV. He is a performer who knows nothing about foreign trade, economics, or history.

    How will we survive four years of Trump’s demented whims?

    Friedman wrote:

    I have many reactions to President Trump’s largely caving on his harebrained plan to tariff the world, but overall, one reaction just keeps coming back to me: If you hire clowns, you should expect a circus. And my fellow Americans, we have hired a group of clowns.

    Think of what Trump; his chief knucklehead, Howard Lutnick (the commerce secretary); his assistant chief knucklehead, Scott Bessent (the Treasury secretary); and his deputy assistant chief knucklehead, Peter Navarro (the top trade adviser), have told us repeatedly for the past weeks: Trump won’t back off on these tariffs because — take your choice — he needs them to keep fentanyl from killing our kids, he needs them to raise revenue to pay for future tax cuts, and he needs them to pressure the world to buy more stuff from us. And he couldn’t care less what his rich pals on Wall Street say about their stock market losses.

    After creating havoc in the markets standing on these steadfast “principles” — undoubtedly prompting many Americans to sell low out of fear — Trump reversed much of it on Wednesday, announcing a 90-day pause on certain tariffs to most countries, excluding China.

    Message to the world — and to the Chinese: “I couldn’t take the heat.” If it were a book it would be called “The Art of the Squeal.”

    But don’t think for a second that all that’s been lost is money. A whole pile of invaluable trust just went up in smoke as well. In the last few weeks, we have told our closest friends in the world — countries that stood shoulder to shoulder with us after Sept. 11, in Iraq and in Afghanistan — that none of them were any different from China or Russia. They were all going to get tariffed under the same formula — no friends-and-family discounts allowed.

    Do you think these former close U.S. allies are ever going to trust getting into a trench with this administration again?

    This was the trade equivalent of the Biden administration’s botched exit from Afghanistan, from which it never quite recovered. But at least Joe Biden got us out of a costly no-win war for which America, in my opinion, is now much better off.

    Trump just put us into a no-win war.

    How so? We do have a trade imbalance with China that does need to be addressed. Trump is right about that. China now controls one-third of global manufacturing and has the industrial engines to pretty much make everything for everyone one day if it is allowed to. That is not good for us, for Europe or for many developing countries. It is not even good for China, given the fact that by putting so many resources into export industries it is ignoring the meager social safety net it offers its people and its even more threadbare public health care system.

    But when you have a country as big as China — 1.4 billion people — with the talent, infrastructure and savings it has, the only way to negotiate is with leverage on our side of the table. And the best way to get leverage would have been for Trump to enlist our allies in the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Brazil, Vietnam, Canada, Mexico, India, Australia and Indonesia into a united front. Make it a negotiation of the whole world versus China.

    Then you say to Beijing: All of us will gradually raise our tariffs on your exports over the next two years to pressure you to shift from your export economy to a more domestic-oriented one. But we will also invite you to build factories and supply chains in our countries — 50-50 joint ventures — to transfer your expertise back to us the way you compelled us to do for you. We don’t want a bifurcated world. It will be less prosperous for all and less stable.

    But instead of making it the whole industrial world against China, Trump made it America against the whole industrial world and China.

    Now, Beijing knows that Trump not only blinked, but he so alienated our allies, so demonstrated that his word cannot be trusted for a second, that many of them may never align with us against China in the same way. They may, instead, see China as a better, more stable long-term partner than us.

    What a pathetic, shameful performance. Happy Liberation Day.



    Source link