Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul><li>A study by <keyword id="7028242" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="bbc-research">BBC Research</keyword> shows that <keyword id="59845" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Nationalism">nationalism</keyword> is the main driving force behind the advent of <keyword id="2479020" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Fake-news">fake news</keyword> in India. </li><li>Their analysis also highlights how the narrative of fake news is usually an attempt to bring the ‘right version’ of the story to light rather than actually verify the facts. </li><li>A Network analysis map of how fake news spreads shows an overlap between accounts that publish fake news and the support networks of the Indian Prime Minister, <keyword id="6354477" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Narendra-Modi">Narendra Modi</keyword>.</li></ul>Fake news and <keyword id="535763" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Misinformation">misinformation</keyword> continue to be menace in India. Now, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-46146877">a study by BBC Research</a> has revealed a number of these incidents have been in an effort to bolster India’s national identity. The study found that facts often take a backseat when nationalistic tendencies of ordinary citizens kick in. Propagating false news is all the more prevalent due to the inherent distrust in mainstream <keyword id="6354777" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Media">media</keyword> outlets. So, when a story praises India but contradicts what’s ordinarily being said, it’s perceived as the ‘right version’ of the story. Moreover, this ‘right version’ of the story is then spread through messaging apps like WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger without actually verifying the story from its source. The more disturbing revelation was the fact that there’s an overlap of accounts that publish fake news on Twitter and the support networks of India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi. The narratives The conditions necessary for spreading fake news include blurring the lines between all news and propagating mistrust towards official news media. The prevalence of digital media makes that even easier since there’s a higher frequency of news consumption. <keyword id="60684" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="BBC">BBC</keyword>’s research found that there were four main narratives that make fake news go viral — “Hindu power and superiority,” “preservation and revival,” “progress and national pride as well as the personality and prowess of Modi.” A network analysis map showed that Twitter handles that were pushing fake news forward were in a ‘pro-BJP’ cluster rather than the ‘anti-BJP’ cluster. The advent of fake news in India is not just about people being misinformed, but how this information is then used to propagate acts of violence. Lynchings and other acts of violence are enforced with a sense of vigilante justice and a duty to protect your loved ones. At least 32 people have lost their lives over incidents that have been instigated by rumours according to <a href="http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/duty-identity-credibility.pdf">another report</a> by the BBC. BBC’s report took 16,000 Twitter accounts and 3,000 Facebook pages into consideration in order to determine how fake news spreads in India. As per their research, there was a ‘strong and coherent’ promotion of right-wing messages.

Hyper-nationalism behind India’s fake news menace: Report

<keyword id="3658" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="india" source="Orion">India</keyword>'s crackdown on Chinese firms and mobile apps is "becoming increasingly unhinged" and the action is nothing but "politically-motivated crackdowns on businesses from <keyword id="1334" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="china" source="Orion">China</keyword>", state-run Chinese paper <keyword id="107898" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Global-Times" source="Orion">Global Times</keyword> has said. The Indian government this week banned 54 Chinese mobile applications, which are posing threat to national security. The Income Tax department on Wednesday also carried out raids at multiple premises linked to Chinese tech conglomerate Huawei across the country in connection with alleged tax evasion. The Global Times said in an editorial that after failing to gain any advantage by stirring up tension at the border with China, which drew stern responses from Chinese soldiers, "New Delhi has shifted its out-of-control jingoism toward a more vulnerable target - Chinese businesses operating in India". "Over the past several months, Indian authorities have banned dozens of Chinese mobile apps and raided local branches of many Chinese firms in shady 'tax investigations'," the editorial said late on Thursday. Chinese telecom giant <keyword id="110306" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="huawei-technologies" source="Orion">Huawei Technologies</keyword> confirmed earlier media reports that Indian tax authorities raided multiple offices of the firm and questioned its local employees. In a statement, Huawei said that it was confident that its operations in the South Asian country "are firmly compliant with all laws and regulations" and that it would "fully cooperate" with Indian authorities. "Huawei's response is standard for any business caught in such circumstances; however, let's be clear, Indian authorities' raid most likely has nothing to do with the Chinese firm's compliance issues, but has a great deal to do with the increasing hostility of officials in New Delhi toward China," read the editorial. Before Huawei, several Chinese companies, including smartphone maker <keyword id="874458" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="xiaomi" source="Orion">Xiaomi</keyword>, have already been targeted. In January, Xiaomi was ordered to pay 6.53 billion rupees ($87.8 million) for unpaid taxes alleged by the Indian authorities, claimed the editorial. Last month, multiple tax raids were carried out at the premises of Chinese smartphone makers in the country. The Finance Ministry issued a statement, saying that Chinese smartphone manufacturer Xiaomi's local company in India had engaged in "tax evasion" and demanded that it pay a total of Rs 6.53 billion ($88 million) in taxes owed between April 2017 and June 2020. Xiaomi denied the claim, saying that the company adheres to legal and compliant operations around the world and abides with the relevant laws and regulations of each jurisdiction in which it operates. Chinese mobile phone brands are highly popular in the Indian market, and their market share far exceeds that of local Indian brands. According to the editorial, Chinese officials have expressed concern over Indian authorities' actions against Chinese businesses and have repeatedly called on the Indian side to treat Chinese firms fairly. Commenting on India's latest raid of Huawei offices and bans on Chinese apps, a spokesperson for the Chinese Commerce Ministry on Thursday mounted a noticeably stronger response, calling the actions "a series of crackdown measures" that have seriously harmed the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese firms. "For that, China expresses serious concern," the spokesperson said. "However, though New Delhi appears to be constantly testing China's patience, Chinese officials have and will likely continue to avoid being dragged into tit-for-tat measures with India," read the editorial. "With this, we believe China will take necessary measures to protect Chinese interests overseas wherever they face discriminatory actions." SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/investment/news/cryptocurrency-criminals-are-turning-into-crypto-whales/articleshow/89664896.cms">Some of the biggest cryptocurrency HODLers are also crypto criminals, finds Chainalysis report</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/cbi-questions-former-nse-ceo-chitra-ramkrishna-regarding-alleged-abuse-of-co-location-facility/articleshow/89664579.cms">CBI questions former NSE CEO Chitra Ramkrishna regarding alleged abuse of co-location facility</a>

India's crackdown on Chinese firms, apps getting 'increasingly unhinged',  as per China's Global Times

<ul class="summary-list"><li>I love America, I support the troops, and I want <keyword id="6356028" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="sports">sports</keyword> teams to stop playing the <keyword id="100239" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="National-Anthem">national anthem</keyword> before every game. </li><li>It's not an act of genuine patriotism, it's a ritual of joyless conformity.</li><li>End the obligatory performances and shame-enforced head-bowing. For the love of America, make the "Star Spangled Banner" mean something again. </li><li>This is an <keyword id="6356002" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="opinion">opinion</keyword> column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author.</li></ul>A snarky Canadian beer vendor once gave me a well-deserved lesson in patriotism. It was in Toronto, my first time attending a Major League Baseball game outside the US. Shortly before game time, a friend and I ordered a couple of beers at a kiosk in the Rogers Centre's concourse. But upon hearing the opening notes of "The Star-Spangled Banner," we froze in our tracks, removed our caps, and gazed solemnly at the field.The beer vendor looked at us with puzzled bemusement."What are you doing?" "Well, in our country, if you don't stop what you're doing and take off your cap for the national anthem, they shame you," my friend sheepishly explained. "Well, you're not in your country," she Canadian-splained us. Canadians don't love their country any less than Americans. On the contrary, they will not shut up about how much more polite they are, how much cleaner their cities are, and how much better their overall quality of life is. Still, that national anthem moment in Toronto was an instructive one. It reinforced my belief that in America, the playing of the national anthem isn't a moment of prayer and reflection for those lost in war, or a communal expression of gratitude for all that makes America great. The pre-game anthem is a mass display of ritualized obedience, born of wartime jingoism, socially enforced by drunken yobs screaming "Hats off!" at anyone who's being innocently absentminded about the performative patriotism.Given the overwrought pomp and circumstance, sports teams should get rid of the tradition of playing the anthem before Every. Single. Sporting Event. And the American public should support that move.It'll be good for America.<h2>It's not a tribute to America, it's an ode to war and a ritual of joyless conformity</h2>This week, <keyword id="218068" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Dallas-Mavericks">Dallas Mavericks</keyword> owner <keyword id="219358" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Mark-Cuban">Mark Cuban</keyword> confirmed that for the entirety of the current National Basketball Association's season and preseason, the national anthem wasn't played prior to his team's home games. No one had noticed until Cuban confirmed it with <a href="https://theathletic.com/2376670/2021/02/09/dallas-mavericks-anthem-nba-mark-cuban/">The Athletic</a>.The <keyword id="6361805" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="NBA">NBA</keyword> told The Athletic that given the bizarre and difficult circumstances of the pandemic era, they were fine with teams deciding how to conduct their pre-game operations. But after <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1359505001081692162">conservative pushback</a> the league <a href="https://twitter.com/ShamsCharania/status/1359576560328724485">quickly relented</a>, as did <a href="https://twitter.com/tim_cato/status/1359595437309755392">Cuban</a>, and just like that we're back to the business-as-usual of acting out a quasi-religious devotion to a tuneless song about war.And make no mistake, both the anthem and its pregame performance are about war. The "Star Spangled Banner" had been performed at sporting events before, but it made its first prominent appearance in the 1918 World Series <a href="https://www.history.com/news/why-the-star-spangled-banner-is-played-at-sporting-events">during World War I</a>, thirteen years before it was even officially the national anthem. <a href="https://www.sbnation.com/2021/2/10/22276282/mark-cuban-national-anthem-mavericks-sports">SB Nation notes</a> that the anthem really became codified into American sporting life just after World War II, when the National Football League's commissioner ordered its compulsory pre-game performance. And after 9/11 - and the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq - many teams added the playing of "God Bless America" as a mid-game ritual. As an almost-lifelong New Yorker, I can attest to being truly moved by such performances in the immediate wake of the devastating attacks that killed almost 3,000 of my neighbors. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OTRRzSuWro">Ray Charles' stirring performance</a> of "God Bless America" during the 2001 World Series still bears the authentic passion to bring me to my knees. But by 2016, the <a href="https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/major-league-baseball-permanently-retire-god-bless-america-article-1.2693228">New York Daily News</a> reported that 61% of baseball fans wanted to get rid of the song's buzzkilling mid-game performance, with the writer Gersh Kuntzman lamenting the "ponderous Mussolini-esque introduction of the song, when fans are asked to rise, remove their caps and place them over their hearts."It is not healthy to spend this much time glorifying war and blind nationalism. And if all you have to do to "respect the troops" is obey the inebriated lout in the next row barking at you to take your hat off, then that "respect" is pretty worthless. There are more meaningful ways of respecting the troops, like volunteerism, generous donations to veterans' advocacy groups, and agitating for lawmakers to fix the wretchedly corrupt and mismanaged Department of Veterans Affairs.The law of scarcity is also at play here. If the anthem isn't played tens of thousands of times a year before every sporting event from high school to the pros, its performance inherently becomes more special.As it stands now, for many but not all, standing for the anthem is a joyless act performed for the sake of keeping out of trouble - like reciting the pledge of allegiance at the start of a school day in third grade. While it might seem counterintuitive, doing away with the anthem as a mandatory ritual could very well make its performance a more genuinely patriotic experience. So let's doff our caps to that maverick Mark Cuban and follow his lead. Save the national anthem for special occasions, or moments where we truly need to dip into collective patriotism as a gesture of national healing (like we did immediately after 9/11). End the obligatory performances and shame-enforced head-bowing. For the love of America, make the "Star Spangled Banner" mean something again.

For the love of America, stop playing the national anthem before sporting events

There are no two ways about it and no easier way of saying this- The government’s drive to make illegal 86% of its <keyword id="37885" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Cash">cash</keyword> in a bid to uproot corruption is an unmitigated management disaster of colossal levels. In fact, I fear tones of Op-eds will soon be written on the management lessons one needs to take out of this entire episode, that is as soon as the country and the economy emerge out of the gutter that this move has pushed it into. 
 
A little too harsh for a man with such noble ideals? <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/These-are-Olas-biggest-product-innovations-created-as-a-result-of-direct-user-insights/articleshow/55498327.cms">Well, the fact is ideals are good when followed with a plan in hand.</a> In this case, there was none. What was there, however, was trash bags full of jingoism, short-sightedness, and the overt desire to repeatedly bring forth one’s own power in all its 56 inches of glory! 
 However, what has seemed to help Prime Minister <keyword id="6354477" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Narendra-Modi">Narendra Modi</keyword> in this humongous, yet the tremendously flawed vision is how divided as a nation we are today. Even as most of ‘honest’ India stands in serpentine queues, the fact to marvel at is they’re ready to bear this, all for the sake of the nation! <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/Demonitization-hitting-Jewellery-and-Fashion-hard/articleshow/55479794.cms">The reality however is, it’s only jingoism at work. And the truth about jingoism is that it works best on people who aren’t sufficiently educated or literate and 70% of India’s population, </a>residing in tier 2 and 3 cities and its villages have been at the forefront of bearing the brunt of the lack of any decent educational facilities. 
 Well, what’s happening right now stinks of elitism and how deep-rooted inequality is all the way through to the highest corridors of the society. How else can one explain a salaried person having not one penny of cash in pocket, living life effortlessly cashless supporting <keyword id="6354642" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Modi">Modi</keyword>’s bravado and the cries of pain of a mother in rural India who can’t withdraw enough money every day to pay for her child’s treatment at a private hospital , which refuses to accept the old <keyword id="6378917" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Currency">currency</keyword>! The sate of public healthcare, we are all aware of, however! 
 So careless is this government of its helpless, the poor in rural India, ironically comprising 70% of its population that it has already remarked and categorized the death of over 47 people directly in concern with <keyword id="6362150" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="demonetization">demonetization</keyword> as ‘temporary hardships’ to ‘honest citizens’. 
 
<a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/Exclusive-Jio-is-starting-home-delivery-for-its-SIM-cards/articleshow/55498612.cms">ALSO READ: Exclusive: Jio is starting home delivery for its SIM cards</a> 
 
What was the government thinking when it stifled 84% of the cash out of an economy that has 78% of all its transactions purely based on cash? The big sharks with black money weren’t storing that at home, it were the small traders, whose business models are entirely cash-based that had tones of cash stored at home. These would comprise people in the Agriculture sector, transport sector and all of the daily-wage labor market. 90% of all of India’s job market is cash based and to stifle it off most of its cash is to bring the functioning of one of the fastest growing world economies to a grinding halt. 
​ 
If these conditions were to prevail, essentials like vegetables and milk will stop getting transported across cities, hitting inflation, work in sectors like agriculture and construction have already been severely impacted and there are fears of much worse happening

The impact of Demonetization: United we never stood, divided
we have been dragged into the gutter

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Retired Marine Corps Gen. and former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has largely kept quiet on the Trump administration since he resigned in late 2018, except for a scathing op-ed in June.</li><li>Washington Post reporter <keyword id="279584" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Bob-Woodward">Bob Woodward</keyword>'s book "<keyword id="253165" type="ENTERTAINMENT" weightage="60" keywordseo="Rage">Rage</keyword>" offers new insight into Mattis' views of President <keyword id="6354484" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Donald-Trump">Donald Trump</keyword> and his presidency through <keyword id="35170" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="quotes">quotes</keyword> from him and those attributed to him by colleagues.</li><li>Mattis' reported remarks paint a picture of a president who is unfit for the office and detrimental to American interests.</li></ul>Retired Marine Corps Gen. Jim Mattis, who served as President Donald Trump's defense secretary before resigning, has largely kept his thoughts on the commander-in-chief to himself, but Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward's book "Rage" offers new insight into his views of the president and this administration.The quotes, which came from Mattis or were attributed to him by his colleagues who spoke to Woodward, paint a picture of a man troubled by an immoral and misinformed president who he sees contributing to the deterioration and decline of America.These are some of the most revealing quotes from Mattis on Trump and his presidency in Woodward's book:<ul><li>On dealing with Trump, Mattis said: ""I was often trying to impose reason over impulse. And you see where I wasn't able to, because the tweets would get out there."</li><li>On the president's morality, Mattis reportedly said: "The president has no moral compass." (Former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats is said to have agreed, saying: "To him, a lie is not a lie. It's just what he thinks. He doesn't know the difference between the truth and a lie.")</li><li>On receiving orders from Trump, he said: "I never cared much for what Trump said. I ran the Department of Defense. I kept him informed in my private meetings. I wouldn't do it in public, because he would have to play a role then. But I didn't get any guidance from him, generally, other than an occasional tweet."</li><li>In response to Trump's weakening of alliances, Mattis said: "What we're doing is we're actually showing how to destroy America. That's what we're showing them. How to isolate us from all of our allies. How to take us down. And it's working very well. We are declaring war on one another inside America. It's actually working against us right now."</li><li>On a president being tough and keeping the peace, Mattis said: "Not with the current occupant. He doesn't understand. He has no mental framework for these things. He hasn't read."</li><li>On Trump's go-it-alone strategy and dismissal of alliances, Mattis said: "It was indefensible. It was jingoism. It was a misguided form of nationalism. It was not patriotism."</li><li>On Trump's lasting impact on the country, Mattis said: "This degradation of the American experiment is real. This is tangible. Truth is no longer governing the White House statements. Nobody believes—even people who believe in him somehow believe in him without believing what he says."</li><li>On his decision to resign, Mattis said: "I was basically directed to do something that I thought went beyond stupid to felony stupid, strategically jeopardizing our place in the world and everything else, that's when I quit."</li></ul><h2>'You're going to have to get the next secretary of defense to lose to ISIS'</h2>Mattis <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mattis-resigns-as-secretary-of-defense-2018-12">resigned as secretary of defense in December 2018</a>, writing in his resignation letter that his views were not "aligned" with the president. The <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mattis-final-straw-trump-pulling-troops-out-of-syria-2018-12">final straw for Mattis was the president's decision</a> to prematurely declare victory over ISIS, withdraw US troops from Syria, and leave the Kurds who'd done the bulk of the ground fighting to fend for themselves.Mattis advised the president against taking such action, but Trump would not be persuaded. When he resigned, Mattis reportedly told the president: "You're going to have to get the next secretary of defense to lose to ISIS. I'm not going to do it."After he left the Department of Defense, the president publicly criticized Mattis, but the retired general refused to speak out against the president.He told The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg last October that "if you leave an administration, you owe some silence." He added that "there is a period in which I owe my silence. It's not eternal. It's not going to be forever."While Mattis held his tongue publicly, he privately discussed the need to speak out, to take action, Woodward reports in "Rage.""Maybe at some point we're going to have to stand up and speak out. There may be a time when we have to take collective action," he told former DNI director Coats. "He's dangerous. He's unfit," Mattis reportedly said.Coats, Woodward writes, was hesitant, pointing out that other former military leaders had done the same and accomplished nothing. "I don't know," Mattis said. "But, we can't let the country keep going" on this course.Mattis did <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mattis-unloads-on-trump-for-dividing-america-in-blistering-statement-2020-6">finally speak out against the president and the administration in an op-ed</a> after Trump forcefully cleared Lafayette Park in Washington, DC of protesters for a photo op at a nearby church in June."Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us," Mattis wrote."We are," he continued, "witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership."

'Dangerous,' 'unfit,' and 'felony stupid': The most revealing quotes from Jim Mattis on Trump's presidency in Bob Woodward's bombshell book

<div type="image" title="joe biden" height="1762" width="3524" msid="75439314" hostid="261"></div><ul class="summary-list"><li dir="ltr">President <keyword id="6354484" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Donald-Trump">Donald Trump</keyword> has ramped up pressure on and tensions with <keyword id="41896" type="COUNTRY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Iran">Iran</keyword> throughout his time in office.</li><li dir="ltr">As Democrats rally around presumptive presidential nominee and former Vice President <keyword id="99719" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Joe-Biden">Joe Biden</keyword>, they should break with the misguided policy pushed by Trump and by some Democrats that harms Iranians and US interests.</li><li dir="ltr">Yasmine Taeb is a senior policy counsel at <keyword id="1529987" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Demand-Progress">Demand Progress</keyword> and Sina Toossi is a senior research analyst at the <keyword id="516608" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="National-Iranian-American-Council">National Iranian American Council</keyword>.</li><li dir="ltr"><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/?hprecirc-bullet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories</a>.</li></ul>As Democrats coalesce around presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden, they should seek to secure US interests abroad in a way that better bolsters human rights and minimizes the risk of war.The case of Iran today is emblematic of a misguided policy that harms both the Iranian people and US interests. The coronavirus crisis has made clear the cruelty of the Trump administration's approach to Iran. This was highlighted in a recent <a href="https://www.niacouncil.org/news/iran-faces-likely-second-wave-of-covid-infections/?emci=f5142bcb-367f-ea11-a94c-00155d03b1e8&amp;emdi=ea000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001&amp;ceid=#anchor2#anchor2" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a> by Iranian pro-democracy activists, who called on President Trump to lift draconian US sanctions on Iran amid the outbreak.The signatories of the letter, which included former political prisoners and women's rights advocates, proclaimed: "It is abundantly clear that the siege and economic sanctions on Iran have affected the healthcare and basic daily needs of the people" and that this "is inhibiting the country's ability to respond to the current pandemic and is doubling the suffering of our people."However, the Trump administration has <a href="https://nationalinterest.org/blog/skeptics/moderate-democrats-break-ranks-over-coronavirus-aid-iran-143932" target="_blank" rel="noopener">refused</a> to ease sanctions. Secretary of State Pompeo <a href="https://twitter.com/StateDept/status/1248404074472656896?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claims</a> the administration wants "good things for the Iranian people" but that the coronavirus crisis "is no reason to try and infuse cash to the Iranian regime."This narrative has been opposed by traditional US allies like<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/18/uk-presses-us-to-ease-iran-sanctions-to-help-fight-coronavirus" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> the UK</a>, as well as<a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/24/un-coronavirus-cuba-iran-venezuela-north-korea-zimbabwe-sanctions-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> the UN</a> and senior<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/06/former-world-officials-call-on-us-to-ease-iran-sanctions-to-fight-covid-19" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> former US officials</a>. What is needed now is economic reprieve that eases the suffering of the Iranian people and creates a path to vitally needed diplomacy.<div type="image" title="iran coronavirus" height="1000" width="1500" msid="75439315" hostid="261"></div>Democrats for their part have largely united in calling on the Trump administration to take concrete steps to permit aid to reach Iran, which US sanctions <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/10/29/iran-sanctions-threatening-health" target="_blank" rel="noopener">obstruct</a> despite exemptions for humanitarian trade existing on paper.However, while some progressive and moderate Democrats have signed a <a href="https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-ocasio-cortez-omar-lead-lawmakers-in-calling-for-lifting-us-sanctions-as-iran-reels-from-coronavirus" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a> calling for broad relief during the pandemic, other more hawkish congressmen such as Sens. <a href="https://www.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-events/press/menendez-and-engel-propose-policies-for-addressing-covid-19-in-iran" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bob Menendez</a> (D-New Jersey) and <a href="http://dearcolleague.us/2020/04/deadline-today-clarifying-iran-sanctions-guidance-2/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Chris Coons</a> (D-Delaware) have adopted a narrower approach and echo some of the administration's talking points on Iran.Ensuring humanitarian aid gets to Iran is a no-brainer and should be the bare minimum ask of all Democrats. However, the coronavirus outbreak underscores the need not just to help innocent Iranians against the virus, but to rethink current US policy toward Iran and other countries bearing the brunt of US pressure.Vice President Biden and his team played a leading role in negotiating the landmark 2015 nuclear deal. Trump reneged on the accord in May 2018 in favor of a so-called maximum pressure policy that has only produced setbacks for US and humanitarian interests.Since the administration abrogated the multilateral nuclear accord in May 2018, US-Iran tensions have skyrocketed as oil tankers have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/13/world/middleeast/oil-tanker-attack-gulf-oman.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">attacked</a> in the Persian Gulf, missiles have been <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/pictureshow/2020/01/14/796219386/the-aftermath-of-irans-missile-attack-on-an-iraqi-base-housing-u-s-troops" target="_blank" rel="noopener">launched</a> at bases hosting US troops, and the US has edged closer to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/world/middleeast/trump-iran-iraq-coronavirus-militas.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">large-scale</a> military action in Iraq. Humanitarian relief at this juncture could offer Trump an opportunity to extricate the US from the simmering crisis with Iran.Democrats must not play into Trump's jingoism on Iran. Statements such as the <a href="https://www.menendez.senate.gov/news-and-events/press/menendez-and-engel-propose-policies-for-addressing-covid-19-in-iran" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one</a> from Menendez serve to validate more than rebuke the administration's warmongering policies. Democrats must be outspoken in supporting peace, diplomacy, and human rights with respect to Iran and beyond.<div type="image" title="FILE PHOTO: Iranian women wear protective masks to prevent contracting coronavirus, as they walk in the street in Tehran, Iran February 25, 2020. WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Nazanin Tabatabaee via REUTERS " height="3456" width="5184" msid="75439318" hostid="261"></div>Sanctions relief in the service of advancing diplomacy is essential to supporting human rights. The coronavirus crisis makes this clearer than ever. If a country like Iran does not have the resources to adequately confront the disease, the pandemic will continue to take lives and spread to local US allies and potentially <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/world/iran-coronavirus-sanctions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">US military personnel</a> in the region.Moreover, to paraphrase President<a href="https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/american-university-19630610" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> John F. Kennedy</a>, is peace too not a matter of human rights? A US policy that is starting a war simply does not empower the Iranian people. The academic literature also makes<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/06/iran-sanctions-nuclear/562043/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> clear</a> that sanctions wither away the potential for peaceful democratic change.As far as US policy toward Iran is concerned, increasing room for political dissent and civil society in the country should start with removing barriers to improving the standard of living of the Iranian people.In their letter calling for a respite from US sanctions, the Iranian pro-democracy activists stated: "Without a doubt, during this very difficult situation, the U.S. can put itself alongside the Iranian people, who are the real friends of the American people."Indeed, many Iranians have long yearned for a better relationship with the United States. The US should not let them down.Yasmine Taeb is a senior policy counsel at Demand Progress. She tweets @YasmineTaeb. Sina Toossi is a senior research analyst at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). He tweets @SinaToossi.Read the original article on <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-shows-democrats-should-change-from-trump-approach-on-iran-2020-4">Business Insider</a>

Coronavirus makes clear that Biden should overhaul the hardline approach Trump and some Democrats take on Iran

The Eastern Michigan Eagles will take on Ball State in a college football game on Tuesday night that maybe, just maybe will be overshadowed by the election. In honor of the big day, Eastern Michigan plans to wear special, <a href="http://www.emueagles.com/news/2016/11/3/football-emu-to-ring-in-election-night-with-patriotic-helmet-design.aspx">patriotic election-themed helmets.</a> They feature the names of all 44 U.S. President, a stars-and-striped "E" on each side, and - best of all - a nose bumper that includes the word "VOTE" with the "E" in traditional EMU lettering. They helmets not only look good aesthetically, they're also a good reminder that sports, politics, and patriotism can in fact mix in a healthy, positive way. Usually it results in varying degrees of jingoism, but not here. Voting is an incredible privilege afforded to Americans, and one that EMU is celebrating. Good on them. <h3>Take a look: </h3><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">via EMU</div></div></div><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">via EMU</div></div></div><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">via EMU</div></div></div><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">via EMU</div></div></div> <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/cubs-world-series-108-history-change-baseball-2016-11">How much the world has changed since the Cubs last won the World Series 108 years ago</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="c4eGk4NzE6OSPmJMVx01W6UUs1LfTiFx" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

College football team will wear awesome patriotic helmets urging people to vote on election day

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image"></div></div></div><ul class="summary-list"><li>House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday expressed solidarity with pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong who waved American flags and sang the US national anthem.&#xa0;</li><li>"We see you waving the American flag, and we hear you singing our national anthem," McCarthy wrote on social media. "America stands for freedom. America stands with Hong Kong."</li><li>But some foreign policy experts were critical of McCarthy's approach, arguing that tying the protesters to the US plays into the Chinese government's false claims that the US is behind the movement.&#xa0;</li><li>Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told INSIDER McCarthy's comments are "inaccurate and damaging."&#xa0;</li><li>The Chinese government has accused the US of aiding the protesters, which the regime is targeting with an aggressive disinformation and propaganda campaign.</li><li><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/">Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories</a>.</li></ul>House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday expressed solidarity with pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong who appeared to wave American flags and sing the US national anthem, but some experts say McCarthy's comments could harm the protesters' cause.&#xa0;"To the thousands of young people in Hong Kong who are speaking UP for human rights and speaking OUT against the Communist Party of China: we see you waving the American flag, and we hear you singing our national anthem," McCarthy <a href="https://twitter.com/GOPLeader/status/1161402162733187072">wrote on social media</a>. "America stands for freedom. America stands with Hong Kong."McCarthy was likely referring to footage that appears to show pro-democracy protesters singing the American national anthem while waving American flags in the streets of Hong Kong. The viral clip was shared on Twitter by Chrystal Neria, a singer, model and Trump campaign adviser who goes by Kaya Jones.&#xa0;Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, called McCarthy's comments "inaccurate and damaging" because it "feeds paranoia in Beijing" that the US is behind the protests.&#xa0;"The protest movement doesn't have anything to do with the US - it's all about the relationship between Hong Kong and China," Kennedy told INSIDER.&#xa0;He said the footage of protesters waving American flags and singing the anthem was "not a reflection of the protest movement, either in its origination, the dynamics, the motivations for it, the source of its strength or longevity."&#xa0;The Chinese government has accused the US of aiding the protesters, which the regime is targeting with an aggressive <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/world/asia/hong-kong-protests-china.html">disinformation</a> and propaganda campaign. And CCTV has <a href="https://www.whatsonweibo.com/how-the-hong-kong-protests-are-discussed-on-chinese-social-media/">reportedly</a> promoted a "What Is America Up To?" hashtag on Chinese social media.&#xa0;&#xa0;"Some senior U.S. politicians and diplomatic officials met and engaged with anti-China rabble-rousers in Hong Kong, criticized China unreasonably, propped up violent and illegal activities, and undermined Hong Kong's prosperity and stability," a spokesman for China's Foreign Ministry, Hua Chunying, said in a statement on the ministry's website.Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/hong-kong-protests-us-government-travel-advisory-2019-8?r=US&amp;IR=T">The US government is warning citizens against traveling to Hong Kong amid protests and 'violent clashes'</a>Jorge Guajardo, a former Mexican ambassador to China, <a href="https://twitter.com/jorge_guajardo/status/1161453679586816001">called</a> McCarthy's tweet "the most irresponsible statement imaginable."&#xa0;He added, "It puts every protester in danger of being labeled a foreign agent by the Chinese government."&#xa0;And Washington Post foreign affairs columnist Ishaan Tharoor <a href="https://twitter.com/ishaantharoor/status/1161454431575138304">tweeted</a> that the conservative lawmaker's comments were "frankly, stupid.""Beijing literally wants everyone to believe these protests are US-manufactured. They are not," Tharoor wrote. "But for an elected US official to lend credence to that idea for the sake of jingoism is quite something."&#xa0;A spokesman for McCarthy didn't immediately respond to INSIDER's request for comment.&#xa0;Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has stopped short of expressing support for the protesters or criticizing the Chinese government in recent days.&#xa0;"The Hong Kong thing is a very tough situation. Very tough," Trump told reporters on Tuesday. "We'll see what happens. But I'm sure it'll work out ... I hope it works out for everybody, including China. I hope it works out peacefully. I hope nobody gets hurt. I hope nobody gets killed."The US State Department struck a different tone in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/us/politics/hong-kong-trump.html">a statement</a> this week describing the US's "support for freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly in Hong Kong."&#xa0;<div></div>

A Republican leader spoke out in support of the pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong, but some say he's actually hurting the cause

<ul><li>The Pulwama terror attack may set back any possibility of peace talks between India and Pakistan. </li><li>Indian government’s policy towards Pakistan has been inconsistent so far. </li><li>The sting of the Indian rhetoric against Pakistan has been more consistent on Twitter than at the level of the government. </li><li>However, neither India’s spurts of aggression nor its periodic pacifism have changed Pakistan’s patronage for terror groups. </li></ul>Forty five paramilitary soldiers lost their lives in Pulwama, Kashmir on Thursday in a terror attack, which Prime Minister Narendra Modi called ‘dastardly’, and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley promised an ‘<a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pulwama-attack-on-crpf-in-kashmir-condemned-by-pm-modi/articleshow/67997003.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">unforgettable lesson</a>’ for the perpetrators. “A befitting reply will be given to the perpetrators of the heinous attack and their patrons,” the Indian prime minister <a href="https://twitter.com/narendramodi/status/1096293506048380928" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">said</a> on Friday. The Indian government is blaming Pakistan-- Islamabad has <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/jaish-e-mohammad-from-pakistan-kills-45-indian-soldiers-but-government-denies-link/articleshow/68003080.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">denied</a> any links-- for enabling the terrorists behind the deadly attacks in Kashmir. India has <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india-revokes-most-favoured-nation-status-to-pakistan-after-pulwama-attack/articleshow/68004958.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">revoked</a> the most favoured nation status-- which offers beneficial trade terms-- given to Pakistan in the wake of the attacks in Pulwama. However, aside from the reactionary outbursts soon after such attacks in the recent past, India’s policy, towards its troublesome neighbour on the West, has appeared incoherent and inconsistent. A similar attack in Uri, Kashmir in 2016 led to the ‘<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/30/world/asia/kashmir-india-pakistan.html">surgical strikes</a>’ by the Indian army across the Line of Control, in Pakistan-occupied- Kashmir, in September 2016. The move helped establish Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi as a strongman who would wait and watch as Pakistan used ‘terrorists’ as a state tool of aggression against India. This was<a href="https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/2016-surgical-strike-was-not-indias-first-here-are-the-previous-ones/313158"> not the first</a> such attack by the Indian army, but it was definitely the most publicised one. The propaganda was so effective that the wave of appreciation for Modi’s courage swept over the<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-41896865"> ill-conceived demonetisation</a> initiative that brought the country’s economy to a grinding halt. It even won the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) key state elections, which followed soon after. The surgical strikes even inspired a movie, Uri, two years later, in January 2018. The slick blockbuster sparked widespread jingoism in India and the BJP milked it well for political gains. The many flip-flops The man who, before becoming prime minister, asserted that the Indian government should respond in the same ‘language’ – that of violence – as the one that Pakistan uses, turned very cordial soon after he was elected. Modi got accolades for his statesmanship when he<a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/Sharif-other-Saarc-heads-invited-for-Modi-swearing-in/articleshow/35452933.cms"> invited</a> Pakistan’s head of state Nawaz Sharif for the swearing in ceremony in May 2014. Three months later, Modi<a href="https://www.dawn.com/news/1126123"> cancelled</a> the scheduled foreign-secretary level talks citing a meeting between the Pakistani high commissioner to India and the Kashmiri separatist Hurriyat group. The next flip flop happened in December 2014, when Modi<a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/pm-modi-lands-in-lahore-on-a-surprise-visit-meets-pak-pm-nawaz-sharif/"> flew impromptu</a> to Lahore to dine at Sharif’s home when the latter’s daughter was getting wedded, and hope floated that the rapport between the two leaders may calm the tensions between the two nations fighting over shared borders for nearly seven decades now. However, within ten days of the famed meeting of the two leaders, terrorists from the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad attacked a military base in Pathankot, Punjab killing 7 Indian soldiers and one civilian. The conversations between the two governments stopped and Modi’s poise turned icy. What followed was a rise in cross-border firings as well as a marked-up call to global allies to ‘<a href="https://www.ft.com/content/bb7592de-82e3-11e6-8897-2359a58ac7a5">isolate</a>’ Pakistan in international forums. That was 2016 and 2017. In November 2018, the two countries agreed to build a cross-border<a href="https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-pak-to-build-corridor-for-sikh-pilgrims-to-visit-iconic-gurdwara/story-HV7Zgu8jh1VSDMNNqwbmCL.html"> corridor</a> that would allow Sikhs to visit a holy shrine, which is devoted to the religion’s founder Guru Nanak, situated in Pakistan. Less than a month before the hand shakes on the Kartapur corridor, representatives from the two countries had a heated exchange at the<a href="https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/an-india-pakistan-showdown-at-the-united-nations-73rd-general-assembly/"> United Nations</a> General Assembly. Cut to the new year, and Modi was a lot more considerate in his answer to the question on his stance towards Pakistan. “It will be a huge mistake to believe that Pakistan will mend its ways after a war. It will take a lot of time for Pakistan to mend its ways,” the Indian prime minister said in an<a href="https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/pakistan-would-take-a-lot-of-time-to-mend-its-ways-narendra-modi/article25881945.ece"> interview</a> on January 1. Weeks after the stately view on Pakistan, Modi today, after the latest attack, <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/pulwama-terror-attack-live-updates-several-crpf-personnel-martyred-in-jammu-and-kashmirs-pulwama-district/liveblog/67994460.cms">said</a> that the Indian security forces have been ‘given full freedom’. India is a lot more polarised today on many issues, none more common than nationalism. The idea of patriotism and the plight of Indian soldiers facing the enemy at the western border have been contentious issues among the country’s citizens—both on social media and in personal interactions—and the credit goes to the BJP for making the debate ubiquitous. However, in hindsight, the sting of the Indian rhetoric against Pakistan has been more consistent on Twitter than at the level of the government. Neither India’s aggression nor its pacifist attitude has had any impact on Pakistan’s approach. Ceasefire violations have increased six fold between 2015 and 2018, according to a government<a href="https://scroll.in/article/888719/data-check-already-more-ceasefire-violations-along-line-of-control-this-year-than-all-of-2017"> data</a> released in July 2018. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india-revokes-most-favoured-nation-status-to-pakistan-after-pulwama-attack/articleshow/68004958.cms">India revokes Most Favoured Nation status to Pakistan after Pulwama attack</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/terror-attack-in-kashmir-condemned-by-several-countries/articleshow/68003200.cms">US, Russia, France among countries to condemn terror attack in Kashmir</a>

Indian government is raging at Pakistan again—here's a look at its policy so far

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Jeff Spicer/Getty ImagesKate Hoey MP.</div></div></div><ul><li>Labour Brexiteer Kate Hoey says leaving the European Union is a "great opportunity" for the left.</li><li>Writing for Business Insider, the MP for Vauxhall urges her Labour colleagues to ditch the "inward-looking, protectionist" EU and become a "truly internationalist party" again.</li><li>Hoey criticises Jeremy Corbyn's "puzzling" decision to commit to a post-Brexit customs union with the EU.</li><li>A hard Brexit will make Britain more effective in tackling poverty worldwide, Hoey argues.</li></ul> LONDON -In last year's general election, the Labour Party manifesto stated in plain language: "Labour accepts the referendum result." Standing on this pro-Brexit programme, Labour achieved its highest vote share since 2001 and its biggest swing since 1945.A majority of the seats that Labour won from the Conservatives were in <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/02/22/brexit-was-a-vote-for-national-control-and-against-immigration-labour-must-fully-embrace-it/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/02/22/brexit-was-a-vote-for-national-control-and-against-immigration-labour-must-fully-embrace-it/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1523111937801000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFtPZcKkjOiod6HyaoFuhQCCsJepQ">constituencies that are estimated to have voted Leave</a>. For those of us who have long believed that "ever closer union" with the European Union has pulled Labour even further apart from our core voters, this result was a vindication.As we move into the next stage of the Brexit negotiations, the Labour Party must understand that Brexit is not a disaster for the British left. It is a great opportunity.To take full advantage of this opportunity, Labour MPs must rediscover the spirit of Clement Attlee. Attlee opposed the UK joining the Common Market, which he viewed as an inward-looking, protectionist club. Like Attlee, Labour MPs should embrace a UK that takes a strong stand in world affairs, working with the Commonwealth and our friends around the world to further social justice. It means becoming a truly internationalist party again.The 2017 Labour manifesto was true to this spirit. The manifesto pledged: "We will build a close co-operative future relationship with the EU, not as members but as partners." This is why it is so puzzling that the Labour leadership recently caved to pressure from the ardent Remainers and argued for some kind of customs union with the European Union.Staying in a customs union would mean the UK's trade policy is set by an external organisation, the EU, and with the UK having little or no influence. This would run counter to the 2017 manifesto because we would not be "partners" of the EU; we would be a vassal state, as Labour's Shadow Trade Secretary <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/24/leaving-eu-single-market-customs-union-brexit-britain-europe" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/24/leaving-eu-single-market-customs-union-brexit-britain-europe&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1523111937801000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHFISzODilWTcOzsyxUolxAqdqwmQ">Barry Gardiner</a> warned.Not even the EFTA countries, such as Norway, Iceland, or Switzerland, are in a customs union with the EU. They realise the absurdity in contracting out their trade policy to an external organisation.Staying in a customs union with the EU would be a huge missed opportunity for a future Labour government. Whilst inside a customs union, we cannot use trade policy to achieve wider goals of social and international development.Some of the most vocal opponents of the United Kingdom joining the Common Market in the first place came from the international development community. In 1970, Action for World Development - founded by Oxfam and Christian Aid - published a pamphlet entitled The White Tribes of Europe, which argued: "the present policies of the EEC are largely indifferent to the problems of world poverty and world development."Two pioneering female Labour MPs - Barbara Castle and Judith Hart - opposed Common Market membership on the grounds that European protectionism enriched Europe at the expense of the global poor. Barbara Castle lamented during the 1975 referendum, "the largest and poorest countries… are left out of this circle of privilege because their membership will not suit the trading interests of the European bloc… This isn't the language of internationalism…It is euro-jingoism."Since the vote to leave in 2016, numerous countries around the world have excitedly welcomed the prospects of the United Kingdom being free to strike its own trade deals. In the post-Mugabe era, even Zimbabwe's new President has welcomed Brexit as an <a href="http://www.thezimbabwemail.com/zimbabwe/mnangagwa-eyes-commonwealth-amid-brexit-opportunity/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=http://www.thezimbabwemail.com/zimbabwe/mnangagwa-eyes-commonwealth-amid-brexit-opportunity/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1523111937801000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHY8_Kh7yGbZiNP1lClrCgWeV29XA">'opportunity'</a> to repair links with the UK. <div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Jeff J Mitchell / Getty Images</div></div></div>A future Labour government, outside of the customs union, could pursue more humanitarian trade policies. We could use trade policy as a way of advancing development, rather than exploiting vulnerable economies. Jeremy Corbyn is an internationalist who has long been a champion for the poor in <a href="http://www.brasilwire.com/jeremy-corbyn/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=http://www.brasilwire.com/jeremy-corbyn/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1523111937801000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHpf5g2ez6VzLNaMFYXg-nX5pssQw">Latin America </a>and <a href="https://mg.co.za/article/2017-06-15-00-why-corbyn-got-the-african-and-youth-vote" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=https://mg.co.za/article/2017-06-15-00-why-corbyn-got-the-african-and-youth-vote&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1523111937801000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGYd-nE20CH1ZJio6WJV-KgQpnOHg">Africa</a>. So there is no logic in him deciding the UK should stay in some kind of <a href="https://capx.co/how-the-eu-starves-africa-into-submission/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=https://capx.co/how-the-eu-starves-africa-into-submission/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1523111937801000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHoZeXca5H_g7t50WOdyLTSvRpBMg">protectionist club</a> that has devastated the economies of some of the poorest countries in the world, especially in Africa.In the 1960s, as a member of the House of Lords, Clement Attlee, delivered a vociferous argument about why Labour should not join the European Common Market. He told Parliament: "The idea of an integrated Europe is historically looking backward, and not forward…by all means, let us get the greatest possible agreement between the various continents, but I am afraid that if we join the Common Market we shall be joining not an outward-looking organisation, but an inward-looking organisation."It is by the spirit of Attlee that Labour should move forward. We must get out of the protectionist EU customs union and into the world! Labour needs to lead the way.Kate Hoey is the Labour MP for Vauxhall and co-chair of Labour Leave.This column does not necessarily reflect the <keyword id="6356002" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="opinion">opinion</keyword> of Business Insider. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/remove-apps-facebook-privacy-issue-data-tip-fix-2017-11">How to stop your Facebook friends from giving away your data</a></h3> <div> </div> </div>

'We must get out of the protectionist EU and into the world' - Kate Hoey writes for Business Insider

<div class="KonaFilter image-container float_right"><div class="image">REUTERS/Vasily FedosenkoA man holds a Russian flag on the roof of the naval headquarters in Sevastopol, March 19, 2014.</div></div>FIREWORKS, concerts, uplifting speeches and patriotic euphoria: the Kremlin is celebrating the annexation of Crimea as though Russia had won the second world war (again) rather than grabbing a piece of land from a smaller and weaker neighbour. The public seems intoxicated by victory in a war that was begun, conducted and won largely through propaganda.
Russians have been subjected to an intense, aggressive and blunt disinformation campaign in which they were bombarded by images of violence, chaos and fascism in Ukraine, sinister plotting by the West and evidence of Russia's strength and nobility in response. The Russian media have always shaped reality as much as they have reflected it. But in the seizure of Crimea, television played as much of a leading role as the army. Russian television, widely watched in Crimea, bolstered the loyalty of the local population while justifying the Kremlin's actions at home.
The propaganda campaign has seen several stages since the protests on Kiev's Maidan began, says Lev Gudkov, head of the Levada Centre, an independent pollster. It portrayed Maidan as a conspiracy by the West. It showed the protesters as nationalists, fascists and anti-Semites who had staged a putsch, posing great danger to Russian-speakers. It faked stories of Ukrainian refugees fleeing to Russia (using footage of a border crossing between Ukraine and Poland). The case for taking Crimea, to defend the Russian population from an imagined threat, morphed into Russia's reclaiming historic lands. Addressing a crowd in Red Square, Vladimir Putin boomed: "After a long, hard and exhausting voyage, Crimea and Sevastopol are returning to their harbour, to their native shores, to their home port, to Russia!"
Nobody knows how long Mr Putin has been working on the idea of this homecoming (some say since the 2008 war in Georgia), but the appointment of Dmitry Kiselev as the face of Russian propaganda in December last year marks the moment when he began to execute it. Mr Kiselev's anti-Western and homophobic rhetoric made him a marginal figure a few years ago. But as the new head of RIA-Novosti, the state news agency, and an anchor on the state news channel, he has become one of Mr Putin's key weapons (and is now subject to European Union sanctions).
Russia's disinformation offensive differs from its Soviet forebear in both style and intensity. Soviet propagandists had none of Mr Kiselev's exaltation, sarcasm and theatricality. They spoke in grave, deliberate tones, drawing on the party's lifelong wisdom and experience. The new propaganda, exemplified by Mr Kiselev, seeks to agitate and mobilise the audience, to stir hatred and fear. Wearing a tight suit, he paces up and down, gesticulating and accentuating his words, then drilling them home with a sadistic smile. It is close in style to Orwell's two minutes' hate, stretched to more than 30.
The propaganda machine is fuelled by a "cocktail of chauvinism, patriotism and imperialism", says one journalist. It plays on deep feelings among the Russian public: post-imperial nostalgia for the Soviet Union, an inferiority complex towards the West, and a longing for self-justification.
The coverage relies on the scale of lies and the elimination of other sources of information, says one senior editor. When Ukraine suspended the broadcasts of Russian state TV channels, substituting the liberal Dozhd channel that had been cut off by cable providers in Russia, it was accused by the Kremlin of suppressing free speech. In Russia the state-controlled media creates an illusion of uniformity of thought. Many are scared to voice their opinions not because they may be punished, but because they may be isolated. Any dissenter is described by Mr Putin as a "fifth columnist" and a "national traitor".
On March 24th the Kremlin made an example of Andrei Zubov, a Russian historian, who was among the first to draw parallels between Russia's occupation of Crimea and the annexation of Austria and Sudetenland territories in 1938-39. He was fired from his teaching position at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, patronised by the foreign ministry. Mr Zubov's articles and interviews, the institute said, "contradict Russia's foreign policy and inflict careless, irresponsible criticism on the actions of the state, thus causing damage to the teaching and educational process." In an article in Vedomosti on March 1st, Mr Zubov had cited a speech by Hitler that was strikingly similar to the rhetoric used by Mr Putin when he addressed the nation about the annexation of Crimea. As Vedomosti commented in an editorial, the sacking merely confirms the accuracy of Mr Zubov's parallels.
Russia's annexation of Crimea has lifted Mr Putin's approval rating to 80%, up from 65% in January. The number of people wishing to see him re-elected has risen from 32% to 46%, according to Levada, the highest figure since the 2008 Georgian war. The question is how long such ratings will last. Trumpeting Russia's moral superiority, the Kremlin is preparing ordinary Russians for an economic downturn that it will no doubt blame on America. Yet Mr Gudkov argues that, although most Russians support Mr Putin's actions, they are not prepared to take responsibility or bear significant costs in lives or money. "Televisionwatching does not imply participation," says Mr Gudkov. That gives some hope that Russia may not go farther into eastern Ukraine.
Yet patriotic hysteria and jingoism may have reached such levels that any de-escalation by Mr Putin would seem like a defeat. The danger is that he starts to believe his own propaganda and pursues its logic towards renewed confrontation. Ominously, the Kremlin appears to believe that Western sanctions so far leave it room for further adventurism.
Click <a href="https://subscriptions.economist.com/nwcd">here</a> to subscribe to The Economist

A New Propaganda War Underpins The Kremlin's Clash With The West

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">Business Insider IGNITION 2015David Brancaccio (L) interviews Sony Pictures CEO Michael Lynton (R) at Business Insider's IGNITION 2015 conference.</div></div></div>Michael Lynton has been CEO of Sony Pictures for a decade, overseeing the production of hit movies like "American Hustle," "The Social Network," and the James Bond franchise. He has 21 different record labels under his management, including Sony and Epic. And he led the company through last year's major cyber attack. Lynton was a featured speaker at <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/event/ignition-2015">Business Insider's Ignition Conference</a> earlier this month. He was interviewed by David Brancaccio of American Public Media's radio program, "Marketplace." The following has been edited for clarity and length.DB: Welcome to the man whose studio is behind the latest James Bond film, "Spectre," which I think brought in $200 million in its first weekend. Congratulations.ML: Thank you.DB: Speaking of espionage and skulduggery, I have to ask about the Sony hack. The anniversary, if I can call it that, is about a year ago. Right? Just before Thanksgiving.ML: Not an anniversary I like to celebrate.DB: Yes, I know. The Obama administration blamed it on North Korea. Before we get, Michael, to the enduring lessons of that incident for you and your company, give us a sense of some of the lessons we can draw - all of us who are in business - from what happened to you.ML: You know I've talked to a lot of people who are currently running companies and they always ask that question. And I think the focus on trying to bolster your cybersecurity is a good idea. But ultimately that's not the solution.I think actually one of the key things you need to do is know who to call when it happens. Because if it is a sovereign nation, which is what we're told it was in our case, calling the local police department doesn't do you a lot of good. So you better have a contact, as we did, through Nicole Seligman, who's the president of Sony Corporation of America, in the FBI or in the Department of Justice or Homeland Security.DB: Are there some boys at Fort Meade that have a hotline or something?ML: I'm sure there are. But you need to know who to call. The FBI was spectacular, and DOJ was great, and they were on the scene within a day and that was what was critical to the whole thing.DB: So know who to call. What about knowing what to write in an email?ML: Well, I think that's the other lesson. We've become as a culture, and everybody would say this, over-reliant on email. And it's particularly true if you are in a multinational company and you're dealing with multiple time zones and a lot of people on the road all the time. But inevitably there are a lot of things that should be kept to a phone conversation, particularly when it's sensitive, that people are now randomly putting into emails that probably don't make sense.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image">Samantha Lee</div></div></div>DB: There's changing email behavior. But what about changing what you actually do? Is there any of that at Sony, given what happened?ML: Yes. I think people are a little bit more moderate in the way they are expressing themselves generally. But you know inevitably you get back to business as usual and I'm sure people start saying things probably they shouldn't. It is the entertainment business.DB: One of the many features of that whole sorry incident was how you eventually released the movie that may have been the catalyst for some of this. It was supposed to go to theaters, but it didn't in the end. Tell us about what you learned from that non-traditional release of "The Interview."ML: So, unfortunately, I'm not sure that it really is a good test case. When the decision was made, or rather made for us, that we couldn't get the movie released nationally in theaters, we decided that we better get it out somehow. We called all sorts of platforms to release it and ultimately Google and Microsoft came forward. We released it at a very cheap price relative to what you would normally do in a national release. We released it on the day we promised we would release it, which was on the Wednesday following. We released it nationally but there was almost no advertising to tell people how we were going to do it. And as great as Google and Microsoft are, they're not the go-to sites for feature movies. I think a lot of people saw the movie or bought the movie just out of patriotism. So we did learn that you can get to a very big number in a very short time even with all those obstacles in place. So it does suggest that there is something there.DB: Beyond the hack and beyond that particular movie, you are wrestling with this all the time. I know you're a big fan of the theatrical release. There is something about buying a big box of raisinettes and sitting there in a darkened room focusing on something. That's rare in American life. But then there are the digital streams that are competing. So what is some of your current thinking on theatrical versus some of the other ways to get video out?ML: Our studio is a big believer, as you say, in the theatrical experience. There are a lot of reasons for it. There's the actual aesthetic or the experience of sitting in a dark theater, particularly for big movies or comedies, where you want to see them with an audience. The business model also works incredibly well for us. You know you get lots of bites at the apple with theatrical and the other windows that come after it. There's always going to be a question - and I think it's an ongoing issue both here in the United States and outside of the United States - as to whether or not you shrink the window, whether you move one window in front of another window. You can see stuff going on right now in the Russian market, for example, where the window's down at 30 days, which we would never do here. DB: Thirty days between theatrical release and you can get it some other way? ML: Yes, because piracy was so high that we figured OK, fine, the only way to combat that would be to immediately release the movie a month later on DVD. In France it's mandated that it can't come out by law until six months after theatrical release. DB: That's the law?ML: That's the law. You're also not allowed to advertise movies on television there, by law, so you're restricted on a lot of levels. You can get it out there other ways.DB: That's amazing.ML: You know there's always the possibility in the future that something else might happen, but for the time being, I think we like the windowing the way that it's structured today.DB: An interesting coincidence happened to me last night. When I got home and my wife was watching Cary Fukunaga's "Beasts of No Nation," the movie about child soldiers in Africa, on Netflix. Netflix is the producer of that movie. Does that worry you, Netflix as movie producer?ML: No. I think it's yes and no. The no is, the more the merrier. I think it's a great idea to have another platform out there that's making movies and giving an outlet for people. Yes, in the particular instance of this movie, because this specialty business depends on creating movies at the right price and having a specific kind of marketing and publicity schedule. Obviously if Netflix is competing in this instance at higher pricing going to the producers than what the average studio would do, it creates a problem for our specialty divisions. We'll see how this plays out over time.DB: That was a Jeff Skoll Participant Media thing. It's really moving, but it's not going to be a blockbuster, wide-release film. So help us understand this term of art that you probably deal with a lot, OTT, over-the-top content. ML: Right so OTT is basically what you get with Hulu or Netflix, which is you receive it over the internet as opposed to over your typical cable subscription or satellite subscription.DB: You do this yourself with Crackle.ML: We have Crackle, which is an OTT service, which is advertising supported. It's where we put originals on, a lot of originals, and we also put a lot of movies that Sony and other studios have produced in the past as well as television shows.DB: Crackle has "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee," the Seinfeld series. It's got "The Art of More" with Dennis Quaid, which is an original. Now when you sign up it's free, so can you make money off this?ML: Yes, absolutely you can make money off it. You know it's back a little bit to the old broadcasting model, although I would argue the audience is much more specific than the old broadcasting model. But it doesn't right now benefit from two revenue streams; it only comes out of advertising. But as long as you keep your costs in line and you get a large enough audience, I think you can make good money on it. And we're broadening it out. You know we're now in 21 countries. So the broader the audience, obviously, the better chance you have of making money.DB: There's a little piece of Crackle that caught my attention. Early this year you launched on Crackle I think something called "always on." And that has one simple feature that is different from, let's say, Netflix. It's like old-style TV. Somebody somewhere else, a programmer, decided what's on. And if you're interested in tuning in for something, you have to come at the right time or just see what's there.ML: For some people in this world of infinite choice, it's nice to have somebody else make the choice for you, and have somebody else curate for you. You see it in radio and certainly we see it in how popular that part of the service is.DB: Sociologists study this. It's called the paradox of choice. Sometimes you can be paralyzed by it. I know in my household you go to Netflix and sometimes you just spend your evening pawing through possibilities.ML: And what we also see - in this particular in the generation that has everything available to them at all times - is that they tend to not see a lot of stuff, particularly stuff that's older, because they always say to themselves, "Oh, I'll get to that at some point." Whereas you know when I was growing up, certainly you had to see "Wizard of Oz" when it was broadcast on television or you had to see a certain movie when it was in the theater. So there was an urgency to it. The minute you take that urgency away and you give continuous choice, I think people are actually in some instances less likely to see a lot of stuff. DB: So you see some young film aficionados who get a little blank when you say "Citizen Kane?"ML: Not just "Citizen Kane," I mean stuff that goes right up and through the '70s and '80s. When you say "Five Easy Pieces" or even if you were to say "Raging Bull," they can list a lot of movies post 1995, but when it comes to pre-1995 or pre-1990 you find that all of a sudden you're asking questions and they say, "well I meant to get to that but haven't quite gotten into it yet."DB: So let's talk about global reach and the work you're doing at Sony. I mean you're everywhere. I just saw the other day that "Mad About You" from the '90s, there's a version that's just been licensed to China. I wouldn't have thought that would work across borders, but you do a lot of that.ML: Yes, we've had [that kind of international] business now for almost 20 years. It was first in Latin America and then we have a very big business in Russia with American situation comedies. We did "The Nanny," we did "Raymond," we've done "Married with Children," all of them in Russia, with huge success, using local actors.The first few series, the first few episodes of the first few seasons are translations of the original. But after that they actually go forward and they become so popular in the case some of these series they write originals and go forward. You know, who would have thought "The Nanny" would translate to a Russian audience, but it does. It was hugely, hugely popular in its day. And so that's why we're trying it in China now.DB: Let's talk about the global economy. China isn't growing as quickly as it did. Maybe Europe has bottomed out and could be improving. What are you seeing? Because we have the US economy, which seems to be on a different track. What are you seeing from your global operations?ML: Actually we are seeing huge growth. It's sometimes masked by the strength of the dollar. So you're sort of swimming upstream because we report in dollars. But when you look particularly at things like the movie business in China where they're adding, I don't know, 6, 7, 8 screens a day and will quickly overtake the United States in terms of domestic box office. When you look at the demand for American drama television series in particular around the world for television networks all over the place we see that's the area of growth for us, even in Europe where, as you say, it's sort of bottoming out. But barring certain markets, obviously Brazil is having its difficulties at the moment, it's definitely it's a good time for American entertainment.DB: So you report in dollars.ML: And then it gets translated back into yen but in the first instance in dollars, yes.DB: Do you think the global nature of a lot of your business changes the product in some sense? I remember seeing the original TV show "Mission Impossible" on several different television stations on trips through Africa. There's little dialogue in "Mission Impossible" the TV show. There's very little to translate and so it lent itself to international distribution. One imagines that movie scripts and perhaps TV shows are aware of that and that may change in some way.ML: You know I get asked this question a lot when interacting with, not directly with the State Department, but parts of the US government that are concerned about public diplomacy. They are under the impression, as was the case back in the '60s and '70s, that American movies are in large part what inform people abroad about democracy and American culture. I would argue that's not the case anymore. Particularly with the big blockbuster movies that we try and get out all over the world. We try and sprinkle the movies with casts that are international. We try and actually pull back a little bit on the American jingoism. I do think of the two, probably television is more attuned to public diplomacy right now than film. Because actually when you are making an American television show you don't have those things in mind. The stakes aren't as big. So if you cancel it overseas it's not the end of the world. And a movie you definitely want to be able to have the world wide market right out of the gate.DB: Norman Lear with those legendary shows on American television that had social content for an American audience, that's a very different animal.ML: Right. I grew up in the Netherlands, and between "M*A*S*H" and "All in the Family," that was how I learned about the United States, for sure.DB: But it's quite different now, you think?ML: I think it's pretty different, yes.DB: There's a lot of talk about super-duper digital TV screens. Ultra digital 4K. Do you have any content for those TV shows?ML: We do. We make a lot of it actually. So it's worth getting the television set. I don't mean to be hawking TV sets for Sony, and others. But it looks fantastic. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/jim-cramer-bad-moment-jon-stewart-revenge-show-up-cnbc-mad-money-2015-12">JIM CRAMER: 'YOU SHOW UP AND THAT'S THE REVENGE'</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="dub2JmeToAuIb6s6LVlTsmOe6FIdXLlt" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

You Searched For "Jingoism" and got 12 results

Hyper-nationalism behind India’s fake news menace: Report

Prabhjote Gill

India's crackdown on Chinese firms, apps getting 'increasingly unhinged', as per China's Global Times

IANS

For the love of America, stop playing the national anthem before sporting events

Anthony L. Fisher

The impact of Demonetization: United we never stood, divided we have been dragged into the gutter

Debdatta Das

'Dangerous,' 'unfit,' and 'felony stupid': The most revealing quotes from Jim Mattis on Trump's presidency in Bob Woodward's bombshell book

Ryan Pickrell,John Haltiwanger

Coronavirus makes clear that Biden should overhaul the hardline approach Trump and some Democrats take on Iran

Yasmine Taeb and Sina Toossi

College football team will wear awesome patriotic helmets urging people to vote on election day

Emmett Knowlton

A Republican leader spoke out in support of the pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong, but some say he's actually hurting the cause

Eliza Relman

Indian government is raging at Pakistan again—here's a look at its policy so far

Sriram Iyer

'We must get out of the protectionist EU and into the world' - Kate Hoey writes for Business Insider

Kate Hoey

A New Propaganda War Underpins The Kremlin's Clash With The West

The Economist

Sony CEO Michael Lynton on surviving the 2014 hack, making money in an evolving world, and why 'The Nanny' is a hit in Russia

Business Insider

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides