Intersectionality represents an ideology of pure wickedness, racism, and subjugation. Under its basic ideology white people are on the brink of extinction. In Western countries where the white birthrate is collapsing and borders are open to nonwhite immigration, mainly Muslims, it is only a question of time before whites become a minority in their own countries. As the nonwhite immigrants do not wish to assimilate and integrate, Western civilization itself and all its cultural values are on the road to extinction.
Identity Politics, now institutionalized in Western universities and school systems, teaches that whites are to be guilty for victimizing non-whites and teaches nonwhites to hate whites for victimizing them. If the roles were reversed, if whites massacring blacks, the white media in the West would be shrill in its condemnation of whites. But if blacks massacring whites, it is even not news to publish. Moreover, if you say anything about it, you are labeled a “white supremacist” or “racist.” Black lives matter, but not white lives matters, or better all lives matters. Whites should be ashamed of themselves and must be subordinated.
On November 19, 2017 the European Union has declared itself “too white” and demands mass immigration to “remedy” that problem. The EU Commissioner for Migration, Dimitris Avrampoulos, wrote an editorial for Politico called, “Europe’s migrants are here to stay… We cannot and will never be able to stop migration… It is naïve to think that our societies will remain homogenous and migration-free… mass migration is a moral imperative… At the end of the day, we all need to be ready to accept migration, mobility, and diversity as the new norm and tailor our policies accordingly.” The mass third world Muslim migration must be the “new norm… neither walls nor policies will allow any part of the EU to remain homogeneous, Christian and Muslim migration-free.”
Despite Avrampoulos’s claims that Europe needs to shut up and accept their “new norm” and become less “homogenous,” it’s clear: Europe is losing its culture because of immigration, it has changed the fabric of Europe permanently. Many Europeans have other priorities. The EU’s stance on immigration conflicts with many of its member states, mainly Central European countries, like Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, which run away from the communist incisors and have not yet adhered to politically correctness, have elected right-wing leaders who have vowed to crack down on unrestricted immigration, no matter what the EU says. Hungary, in particular, has built a wall along its southern border – which also marks the southern boundary of the EU – to stop the flow of illegal immigrants from the Middle East.
For example, Soeren Kern claims, in February 2020 on Gatestone Institute that Greece’s Migrant Crisis has become a powder keg ready to explode.” In 2016, Greek authorities, with backing from the EU, introduced a so-called containment policy aimed at deterring migrants from crossing to Greece from Turkey. The policy requires migrants to remain on the islands until their asylum requests are processed. The asylum system has come to a standstill.
The containment policy has angered local residents, who complain that migrants are responsible for a spike in crime. “People have seen their properties destroyed, their sheep and goats have been slaughtered, their homes broken into. A few years back, when there were 5,000 migrants on the island, things seemed bad enough. Now there’s a sense that the situation has really got out of hand” (Nikos Trakellis, community leader in Moria, Lesbos). “I fear for the safety of our people, the residents of Lesbos. For the situation to change, many refugees have to be transferred to the mainland and new arrivals from Turkey must be stopped. If not, we are doomed.” (North Aegean Regional Governor Kostas Moutzouris). “Welcome in Greece are only those we choose. Those who are not welcome will be returned. We will permanently shut the door to illegal human traffickers, to those who want to enter even though they are not entitled to asylum” (Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis). This is a very small example of the European situation.
The very identity and ethnic awareness of whites are under assault. The Swedish national TV broadcaster, SVT, has produced a propaganda film under the guise of being a documentary which claims that Sweden was originally a country populated by blacks, and the new influx of Muslims is just returning Sweden to normality. When Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, offered to exempt Hungarian mothers of four children from taxation, the Swedish government minister, Annika Strandhall, reacted in aggressive reply to equate Orban’s call to the Nazi white supremacy. It was an offensive attack on feminism which had freed women from bearing children and given them independence. This reaction means that it is the independence of whites to go on extinction while Islam to win over and Muslim women to bring more children.
“Victim group” has become a hate crime. Decades ago Jean Raspail in his novel, The Camp of the Saints, described a French government and media that welcomed the Third World immigrants who overran France and extinguished the French nation. Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s nationalist party, stands for France, The French government wants to imprison her and forced her to take psychiatric observation. Unfortunately, suicidal France President, Macron, who has declared her of being “the betrayal of patriotism… Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism.” By putting “ourselves first . . . we erase our nation’s moral values.” These views are similar to Merkel’s Germany and in Britain.
Indeed, throughout the West there are so many poisonous voices raised against the West that it is perhaps too late to cure he situation and to bring Europe perhaps even the US back to normality. Rapes and gang mass rapes almost exclusively perpetrated by Muslims is pervasive all over Western Europe. The days are coming when raped women are to be accused of seducing male rappers. Even today, throughout Europe, especially in Germany and Scandinavia, there are pressures on the police and media not to report rapes of white women and other crimes committed by Muslim immigrants.
The origins and evolution of anti-whiteness or “White skin privilege,” gained a foothold in radical leftist’s circles in the 1960s, following Susan Sontag’s notorious formulation, that “the white race is the cancer of human history.” The left’s war on whiteness soared only after it resulted in takeover of American universities in the 1980s. Peggy McIntosh has brought the issue to the core in 1988 in her working paper, “White Privilege and Male Privilege.” With the academia “research” and the media megaphone, the left has set out to systematically demonize whiteness as a growth industry.
Walter Williams talks about university corruption and asks, have the diversity cultists completely taken over? He quotes Heather Mac Donald’s The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture. According to a UCLA scientist, “All across the country the big question now in STEM is: how can we promote more women and minorities by ‘changing’ the requirements we had previously set for graduate level study?” Mac Donald says, “Mathematical problem-solving is being deemphasized in favor of more qualitative group projects; the pace of undergraduate physics education is being slowed down so that no one gets left behind.”
On the same lines, New York City tries to “liberate” teachers from their “whiteness.” NYC schools training teaches to discriminate against white students. A new mandatory, $23 million “anti-bias” program is training New York City school teachers to discriminate against white children, no matter what. When The New York Post recently published remarks from one training session, in which the instructor defined ‘racial equality’ as favoring non-white students over white students, regardless of any other circumstances. The training teaches ‘replacement thinking’ and encourages educators to become ‘liberated’ from their ‘whiteness’.
In another session among NYC school superintendents, attendees were asked to discuss various life experiences that inspired them to fight for social justice. When a high-ranking school official, a white, Jewish man, described his family’s experience in the Holocaust and Nazi concentration camps, He was publicly chastised by his own colleagues. One woman saying “This is not about being Jewish! This is about black and brown boys of color only. You better check yourself.”
Diversity-crazed people ignore the fact that there are systemic differences in race and sex that influence various outcomes. Males outperform females at the highest levels of math; however, males are overrepresented at the lowest levels of math competence. In 2016, the number of males scoring above 700 on the math portion of the SAT was nearly twice as high as the number of females scoring above 700. There are 2.5 males in the U.S. in the top 0.01 percent of math ability for every female, according to the journal Intelligence (February 2018).
In terms of careers, females are more people-centered than males. That might explain why females make up 75 percent of workers in health care-related fields but only 14 percent of engineering workers and 25 percent of computer workers. Nearly 82 percent of medical residents in 2016 were women. Mac Donald asks sarcastically, “Is gynecology biased against males, or are females selecting where they want to work?”
“The Diversity Delusion” documents academic practices that fall just shy of lunacy at many universities. It clearly seen by the efforts to promote racial diversity. Renowned Berkeley philosophy professor John Searle, who sees affirmative action as a disaster, said, “They admitted people who could barely read.” Dr. Thomas Sowell and others have discussed this problem of mismatching students. Black and Hispanic students who might do well in a less competitive setting are recruited to highly competitive universities and become failures. Harvard, Yale, UCLA and many other universities, George Mason University and others promote separation in the name of diversity and inclusion. They have only black graduation ceremonies. Cal State Los Angeles, the University of Connecticut, UC Davis and UC Berkeley, among others, offer racially segregated housing for black students. Whites are excluded and diminished.
The left’s attack on whiteness has a single purpose: to convince whites that their whiteness unjustly confers symbolic and real privileges. The ultimate objective in stigmatizing whiteness is to intensify racial tension and also intends to destroy whites’ comfortable assumption that their skin color is “normal” through the slogan “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” On this line, The Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education describes Whiteness Studies as “a growing body of scholarship whose aim is to reveal the invisible structures that produce and reproduce white supremacy and privilege.” Jodi Linley, a white assistant professor at the University of Iowa, says that she aims to “dismantle whiteness” in her “curriculum, assignments and pedagogy,” in order to battle “white supremacy” and “white privilege.” In a “White Privilege” course taught by Portland State University Professor Rachel Sanders, students learn that “whiteness is the lynchpin of structures of racial meaning and racial inequality in the United States,” and that “to preserve whiteness is to preserve racial injustice.”
For Max Boot, “It has become impossible for me to deny the reality of discrimination, harassment, even violence that people of color and women continue to experience in modern-day America from a power structure that remains for the most part in the hands of straight, white males… Whether I realize it or not, I have benefitted from my skin color and my gender — and those of a different gender or sexuality or skin color have suffered because of it.”
As Jeff Hitchcock put it in 1998 at the Third National Conference on Whiteness, “There is no crime that whiteness has not committed against people of color…. We must blame whiteness for the continuing patterns today that deny the rights of those outside of whiteness and which damage and pervert the humanity of those of us within it.” At the University of Michigan, a group called “the Coalition against Anti-Blackness” maintains that in order to make campuses safe for blacks, the “scourge of whiteness” must be removed altogether. In an opinion piece in a Texas State University student newspaper, the University Star, student author Rudy Martinez writes that “whiteness in the United States” is a “construct used to perpetuate a system of racist power,” and that, “ontologically speaking, white death will mean liberation for all.”
University of Michigan training session used ‘Privileged Identity Exploration Model’ that aimed to help white employees deal with their “whiteness” so they could become better equipped to fight for social justice causes. Participants who took part in the “Conversations on Whiteness” were taught to “recognize the difficulties they face when talking about social justice issues related to their White identity, explore this discomfort, and devise ways to work through it.” The goal was to help participants in “unpacking Whiteness” to support students and staff with issues “related to identity and social justice.”
This racist approach was first introduced in 2007 by University of Iowa professor Sherry Watt, in a College Student Affairs Journal article. The model purports to be a method for understanding how people react to stimuli that alert them of the privilege they hold. The model is to be used by “facilitators” to “engage participants in discussions about diversity,” according to Watt. She states there are eight defenses people use to avoid recognizing their privilege. Examples of defenses include “denial,” where someone simply refuses to admit their privilege, and “minimization,” where someone trivializes the impact of their privilege.
The University of Michigan is holding trainings to help staff cope with “intersecting identities” and whiteness as an issue of shame. The American University at Washington DC hosted a training event designed to help staff understand their own identities. One of the workshops titled “Creating Inclusive Communities.” From defining “ally-ship” to “micro-aggression” to “intersectionality.” The conclusion: all individuals can show racism, but only whites are responsible for institutional racism. By definition, black people as a group are not accountable for racism.
Cal State San Marcos on November 30, 2017 introduced a “Whiteness Forum” and displayed 14 poster boards detailing different ways in which whiteness in America oppresses people of color and society. It was of annual forum that has taken place of Prof. Dreama Moon’s “Communication of Whiteness” course, about “reflecting on white privilege and racism.” The forum kicked off with two spoken poems performed by students in the class who expressed frustration with whiteness. A female African American student, called Africa “the greatest country in the world, where we all once originated.” At the same time she did not asked who brought her ancestors to America, what was the role of the Muslim slave-traders while she adores Islam as a religion of the colors? She continued: “I identify not with the equality of America, but with the ‘We the People.’” Another student’s poem offered: “Whiteness thrives on the hate of everyone. Realize we are all pawns in this chess game. Every day is a day to challenge whiteness.”
The Professor, who is white, encouraged to learn about “white supremacy… In our discussion of whiteness, we argue that practices of power in both the past and present have continuously reinforced white supremacy in the United States military through the use of policies, attitudes and unequal opportunities given to minorities… Students learn best when they actually do something as opposed to just hear something.” The syllabus seeks to examine “whiteness as a historical, social, political and ideological ‘invention’ with a long trajectory within the United States and in the world.” The syllabus defines whiteness “as a system of power based on racist ideology maintained discursively, institutionally, and materially.” Professor Dreama Moon said: “one thing you can do today is to begin to educate yourself about white supremacy and learn how to help eradicate it.”
At Pomona College, a forum was formed whose purpose is to help white students “own” their racism, “deconstruct” their Whiteness, and assist them in “dismantling White Supremacy.” An ad of the group reads “We’re all racist. We’re all micro-aggressive. We are all not only complicit in, but actively perpetuating white supremacy.” Students within the group must be “white people who believe white supremacy exists, whether [they] have owned that [they themselves] are racist or not… White students who do not believe in White supremacy are not welcome.”
The group’s Facebook page includes a quote from UC Berkeley professor Haney Lopez, whose specialty is racism in the US post-Civil Rights era: recognizing that white identity is a self-fashioned, hierarchical fantasy, whites should attempt to dismantle whiteness as it currently exists. Whites should renounce their privileged racial character, not simply out of guilt. Rather, they should dismantle the edifice of Whiteness because this mythological construct stands at the vortex of racial inequality in America.
Among the research guides available online from the University of San Francisco, there is the course meanwhile, is a “white privilege resource guide” that provides resources to help researchers deal with their various forms of privilege being white. The student newspaper at Evergreen State College has a section in its opinion pages described as “for people of color by people of color.” “This should be a place where we can be us without it being overshadowed by the dark cloud that is living under white supremacy and having to see things from a white perspective. This is why when we do cover these issues it will be in the context and from the perspective of POC and POC only.”
Portland Community College celebrates “Whiteness History Month.” According to PCC Dean of Student Instruction, Craig Collins, “whiteness” being the “academic” term developed in the mid-1990s, which examines the “social construct of whiteness…” It’s a “systemic organizational issue which affects everyone.” The slogans are: “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” “Hierarchy is white male perspective and it should be abolished.” “The ‘hierarchy conservators’ have had no choice but to move farther from the center [to right in order] to keep the political see-saw in balance.”
The anti-white distortion has come to a new peak in June 2020, when the city of Seattle summoned its white employees (white employees only) and essentially told them, “Your skin color is a crime.” In a truly extremist (and Orwellian) perversion of anti-racism training, the meeting was officially called, “Interrupting Internalized Racial Superiority and Whiteness.”
According to a public records detailed in the video by Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson, “White employees were told that their white qualities were offensive and unacceptable. Those qualities included perfectionism, objectivity and individualism.”They were further told to drop those qualities and undertake “the work of undoing your own whiteness.”
John Perazzo has published a pamphlet trying to unveil the colossal myth of “white privilege” and the deception and ignorance that underlies this worldview. The left has gain control on the main public means, including the media and the academia. One of these perspectives is the notion that white people are both the cause and the embodiment of virtually every societal ill afflicting the world. Until “whiteness” can be either stopped, banned or destroyed outright, “people of color” will continue to be discriminated and abused. All known inequalities are attributed by the Left to injustices orchestrated by white people. By relentlessly banging the drum of “white privilege,” the Left has effectively portrayed race and gender relations as little more than a constant battle between white oppressors and black victims.
Evidence of the left’s success in its war against whiteness can be seen in the book titled I Am So Sick of White Guys, which is a full-throated attack on white power. It can also be seen in the work of the Whiteness Project in which documentarian Whitney Dow interviews members of demographic groups ranging from millennials to white-collar workers who confront and express doubts about their whiteness. It is also read by the recent tweet by Drexel University professor, George Ciccariello-Maher, titled “All I Want for Christmas Is a White Genocide”; and in a poster campaign at the University of Wisconsin-Superior that shows images of white students with the slogan “Is White skin fair skin?”
In addition to the muddying of waters about one’s sex, race itself has become muddied. Senator Elizabeth Warren, a white European bizarre origin, has long claimed that she has Native American heritage. Warren’s recent effort to settle the issue through DNA analysis blew up in her face. She is only between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Native American. Moreover, now she compares white nationalism poses same threat against U.S. as ISIS and Al-Qaeda. “It’s going to take acknowledging what a terrible problem white nationalism is and how it is a threat to the safety and security of the United States,” Warren said. “In the same way that ISIS and Al-Qaeda terrorism pose a threat to the U.S., so does the rise of white nationalism.”
Rachel Dolezal, a professor of Africana studies at Eastern Washington University, was born Caucasian but chose to define herself as a black person, and she has a new legal name, Nkechi Amare Diallo, which means “gift of God” in Ibo. That is her new ultimate identity. Accordingly, it will be of no wonder that males, not only those who cannot meet the male requirement, but even “regular” to claim they are females.
Robert Stacy McCain takes us to the political-partisan realm and declares that the Democrats have a race problem and asks, is demonizing white people makes their campaign strategy for 2020? In contrast, in his speech in Poland on July 6, 2018, President Donald Trump declared: “The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive. Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?” This declaration was so courageous and true that it reflected reality.
However, a wicked criticism stemmed from gross ignorance, dishonesty and evil. Peter Beinart, an associate professor of journalism and political science at the City University of New York, has reacted: “Donald Trump referred 10 times to ‘the West’ and five times to ‘our civilization.’ His white nationalist supporters will understand exactly what he means. The West is a racial and religious term. To be considered Western, a country must be largely Christian and largely white… this is racism and Western-centrism…it shows the superiority of the white man.
Jeannie DeAngelis relates to the Left’s war against white males. She declares that for years now we are witnessing social and cultural wars led by the left-wing with the object to undermine the status and reputation of straight white conservative males. She equates the situation with Saul Alinsky’s textbook for Marxist street thugs, Rules for Radicals. To eradicate the white problem in America, they are being portrayed as misogynist, bigoted, homophobic, and violent. All American heroes of the past do not escaped retroactive ridicule from the left for their political identification and pale skin color. Today, even a male Supreme Court justice nominee, if he is Christian, white, and pro-life, can be falsely accused of rape by an unstable female activist, flayed alive, and condemned in the court of public opinion by virtue of race, gender, and ethnic heritage.
Taking Alinsky Rule #10, it recommends that social justice warriors “maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.” Therefore, to advance their agenda, leftists will continue to hammer away at white conservative males – both dead and alive – as well as attempt to establish a radical vision for our nation by undermining the reputation of any man who longs to see America made great again.
Unfortunately, this phenomenon has become so pervasive that is also part of the Christian church. One of the biggest, The United Church of Christ, has declared that “all whites are racists by all means.” It is the time the white man has to take responsibility and accuse himself by violating the minorities’ basic rights and violence against them.
Well, Peter Beinart and all those from the academia who twist the reality and fabricate the facts of history should learn the basics about “the West” compare to other civilizations. They are not only ignorant enough but wicked people who deliberately destroy generations of innocent students about the real facts. They should be encouraged to read Ibn Warraq book, Why the West is the Best. Or perhaps even better he should be thankful and grateful to learn Ibn Warraq’s newest and irrefutable book concerning the nature of Islam, The Islam in Islamic Terrorism: the Importance of Beliefs, Ideas, and Ideology. Yet, perhaps Beinart tries to compare Western technological-scientific-cultural achievements compare to other civilizations? There is also another angle: what about taking specific issues like democracy compare to other systems? What about comparing the many issues of tolerance and freedoms? What are the teachings of Islam compare to Judaism and Christianity? The treatment of women? The issue of slavery? The open liberal society?
Yes, the West is the best and the Judeo-Christian civilization is much superior to the others and should be taken as a model for imitation not destruction. And if Beinart is ashamed being white and belong to the Western civilization, perhaps he can try to run away from his color and to live in the wonderful desert of Islam, but still this has nothing to do to Western achievements that have brought humanity to thrive. The counter-reaction came perhaps by the following cynical saying: “A black kid asks his mother, ‘Mama, what is a Democracy?’ ‘Well, son, that’s when white folks go to work every day so we can get all our benefits, like free cell phones for each family member, rent subsidy, food stamps, WIC, free healthcare, utility subsidy, and so on.’ ‘But mama, don’t the white people get pissed off about that?’ ‘Sure they do, and that is called racism!” Now lunatic sick leftist whites blame with ugly generalization all whites being racists, and imperialists, and apartheidists.
Victor Davis Hanson relates to the fact that most estimates suggest that 80 to 90 percent of the immigrants coming to America are nonwhite. Why, then, if America is plagued by an incurable “white supremacy” and “white privilege,” would hundreds of thousands of nonwhite immigrants each year wish even rush to enter such a dreadful place? The answer to why America appears attractive to newcomers is obvious: what global elites say and what non-elites do are two quite different things.
Millions of immigrants would have avoided from entering the US had they believed America was a racist country dominated by overweening white privilege. Throughout history white supremacist societies, or any other supposedly racially defined nation, have not adopted de facto or de jure immigration policies that welcome immigrants who are 80-90 percent of a different race or ethnic background. The result is that more than 243 years after its independence, the US is also the world’s most racially, ethnically, and religiously diverse nation and unmatched in its efforts to promote equality.
In terms of politics, there is little evidence that white people vote primarily for white people. Barack Hussein Obama exceeded the white voter support of almost any prior Democratic candidate in the three decades. He was also a Muslim; what can we say about Islamophobia? Currently, Joe Biden polls are higher among black Democratic voters than does either Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) or Corey Booker (D-N.J.). Does this suggest white supremacy? Thousands of African-American male youths are murdered each year by other African-American young men in progressive cities, run by progressive governments, and usually amid strict gun-control laws, without charges that progressive politicians are racist and supremacist.
Moreover, all racist movements have leaders. America’s white majority has experienced such fringe racist demagogues who hoped to forge a common racial identity among enclaves of white Americans, i.e. David Duke’s Ku Klux Klan or George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party. Yet both men were fizzles who never succeeded in bringing huge groups to support them. This also the fate of the alt-rightist Richard Spencer, who has no real national following. In contrast, the well-known anti-Semites and unapologetic racists of our media age are provocateurs like Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, and Rev. Jerimiah Wright. In fact, black conservatives such as Clarence Thomas have been the subject of vicious racial attacks by so-called progressive liberals.
In a detailed documentary, in July 23, 2019, Andrew Harrod describes how NYU claims “Islamophobia” is in fact a “white Supremacy. According to its members, even the Supreme Court decisions are “exemplary of a nonredeemable, bigoted America… reflects a longer history of structural systems of oppression.” Others accuse that white Americans “have been socialized as white people, with messages from our families, teachers, media and society about whiteness under an umbrella of white supremacy, both subtle and overt.” Americans “live in a society where all people are racialized from the time we are born.”
Muslim Anti-Racism Collaborative (MuslimARC), has published an Anti-Racism guide for Muslims.” According to the guide, white socialization “results in not being able to fully recognize or understand how racism is perpetuated in society” and an “inability to see racism being complicit in by our silence.” White Americans actually “perpetuate racism when we take a ‘color blind’ approach.” “Anti-white racism does not exist, because racism by default is a system that benefits white people and harms People of Color.”
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) Legal and Policy Director, Abed Ayoub, cries out that the “Supreme Court is going to be a rubber stamp for upholding structural racism, structural Islamophobia and basically like a white supremacist agenda.” Ayoub reiterated the outrageous Holocaust trivializing slander that American border detention centers are “concentration camps.” At the same time he praised Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib for their Anti-Semitic declarations and called for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, defamed by him as an “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” state. This propaganda groups the Muslims in an intersectional rainbow coalition of oppressed minorities.
For Maha Hilal, DC Justice for Muslims Collective (DCJMC), Islamophobia “is maintained and perpetrated by white supremacy and bigotry.” DCJMC’s Guiding Principles, being a superficial Marxist claims, state that all forms of violence, such as capitalism, colonialism, poverty, racism, patriarchy, ableism, caste-based violence, Islamophobia, homophobia, and transphobia, create a world where white status-quo dehumanizes us as Muslims. Discriminatory immigration policies throughout American history have had the purpose to concentrate wealth and power among the white elites through cultivating an entrenched system of white supremacy, buttressed by capitalism and sexism, and shaped by ableism. Muslims are innocent victims of policies that are “symptomatic of a larger narrative that the U.S. national security apparatus is rooted in.” At the same time she has signed pro-BDS petition and has written that Israel promotes “Jewish and white supremacy.”
No American can emigrate to China or Japan and expect to find full equality, given the emphases in those places on race and appearance. Mexico’s constitution has in the past formalized questions of racial essence as a requisite for immigration, given immigrants would be judged “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress” and without upsetting “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” In most countries, there still remain at least informal gradations and castes predicated on superficial appearances.
The Gatestone institute, July 5, 2020, Giulio Meotti claims that slavery rampant in Africa, Middle East; the West wrongly accuses itself. He blames that for the intersectional activists, the US is the world’s biggest oppressor, not China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, or Iran. It is in fact a “Stalinism of communitarianism (sectarian politics) that makes itself into an indigenous victimization.” He quotes Ayaan Hirsi Ali, on June 9, 2020, saying: “What the media do not tell you is that America is the best place on the planet to be black, female, gay, trans or what have you. We have our problems and we need to address those. But our society and our systems are far from racist”. He also quotes Abnousse Shalmani, born in Tehran, now living in Paris, to Le Figaro, June 12, 2020: “The new anti-racism is racism disguised as humanism… It implies that every white person is bad… and that every black person is a victim.”
Meotti asserts that slavery still exists in many parts of Africa and Middle East, but the self-flagellating Western public is obsessively focused only on the Western past of African slavery rather than on real, ongoing slavery, which is alive and well. The public is amazingly unaware of the huge Islamic part of slavery. Slavery is still the order of the day in many Arab and Islamic countries, and slave markets are booming. For today’s slaves, there are no demonstrations in the streets, no international political pressure, and virtually no articles in the media. The mob rage is indeed an anti-racism that biting its tail to turn into racism.
A group of 12 writers who fled dictatorships for democracies, eight of them came from the Islamic world, put their names to a statement in the French magazine Charlie Hebdo warning against Islamic “totalitarianism:””After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new global totalitarian threat: Islamism. They still suffer death threats and abuses. Other demand that it is high time for the United States to stop funding the United Nations. The United Nations is being used to perpetuate injustice, not stop it.
Meotti brings Andrew Sullivan on Intelligencer:”‘Intersectionality’ is the latest academic craze sweeping the American academy. On the surface, it is a recent neo-Marxist theory that argues that social oppression does not simply apply to single categories of identity — such as race, gender, sexual orientation, class, etc. — but to all of them in an interlocking system of hierarchy and power.”
He also quotes Hirsi Ali, writing in The Wall Street Journal:”When I hear it said that the U.S. is defined above all by racism, when I see books such as Robin DiAngelo’s ‘White Fragility’ top the bestseller list, when I read of educators and journalists being fired for daring to question the orthodoxies of Black Lives Matter, then I feel obliged to speak up… America looks different if you grew up, as I did, in Africa and the Middle East”.
The Algerian writer Kamel Daoud indicted this hypocrisy. “There is an instinct for death in the air of the total revolution. The West is guilty by definition, we find ourselves not in a demand for change but, little by little, in [a demand for] destruction, the restoration of a barbarity of revenge.” This is an “anti-Western Soviet-style trials. It is forbidden to say that the West is also the place to which we flee when we want to escape the injustice of our country of origin, dictatorship, war, hunger, or simply boredom. It is fashionable to say that the West is guilty of everything. With the great announcement of antiracism, the Inquisition returns.”
On July 4, 2020, Dave Rybarczyk wrote about The Myth of ‘White Guilt’. Everywhere he finds debates and seminars concerning with the social situation in the US. What was striking was the level of guilt among the participants. Their opinion is now to blame the collective. They assert that since racial oppression still exists and can no longer be attributed to individual actions, then the institutions and invisible cultural influences must be the new source of racism. No one is racist, but the collective is racist. These individuals are also predisposed to intolerance toward those who do not share their guilt. They are accused by “hate speech.”
He mentions Drexel University professor George Ciccariello-Maher tweeted (2016, deleted):”All I Want for Christmas is White Genocide: “decades of research on how race and gender function in our society” and convinced that his words “were neither provocative in tone nor controversial in content.” However, he inadvertently reveals the shallowness and fallaciousness of Critical Theory and its body of research. It is appalling that genocide can be an outcome of what we once knew as “scholarly study.”it shows no concern whatsoever for the plight of disadvantaged blacks. This is a statement of hateful agitation. It expresses the typical goal of the academy today, and of “Black Lives Matter,” and of fraudulent perspectives such as “white fragility,” ultimately to discredit and delegitimize “whiteness” altogether. This is in itself the most unadulterated form of racism.
Indeed, the blame is on the universities. They teach us amorphous (and guilt-inducing) concepts such as “white privilege” and “institutional oppression” and “covert racism” and “micro-aggression.” They base this on “social identity,” an inherently divisive construct. However, prescriptions such as these are not solutions. They are the problem. By focusing on the superficial, the academic community has critically failed to discover the actual root causes of the issues we face, and consequently has failed utterly to address them.
Moreover, they have no actual remedial value. If every vestige of “white racism” and “white supremacy” were eliminated tomorrow, it would not restore black fatherhood, reduce the black abortion rate, improve the black graduation rate, the black teen homicide rate, and blunt the gangster culture. In academia, activism and empathy entirely overshadow detached empirical research. We sadly suffer a dreadful dearth of objective research in pursuit of the root causes of poverty, violence, racial differences and cultural degeneration – with simple honesty.
Rybarczyk claims that university researchers operate comfortably within the protection of “political correctness,” and so are free to engage in bias masquerading as knowledge. They are able to make claims that are shielded from both criticism and rigorous falsifiability – the bedrock foundations of proper scientific study.
He quote the 1965 assertion of Herbert Marcuse concerning the political right: “[T]he restoration of freedom of thought may necessitate new and rigid restrictions on teachings and practices in the educational institutions which, by their very methods and concepts, serve to enclose the mind within the established universe of discourse and behavior — thereby precluding a priori a rational evaluation of the alternatives.”Yet, this attitude is now totally applied to the left. It is the distilled Marxist model.
The tragedy of the dominant politically-correct culture is that none of its work actually reaches the disadvantaged. Instead, it prevents actual, effective remediation of oppressive conditions and failed situations. It forbids even the mention of valid alternatives.It may serve the purpose of increasing white guilt, but it does nothing to improve the lot of the disadvantaged.
For Rybarczyk the solution is clear: topple the Ivory Tower, permanently. Our educators will not self-correct. They have thwarted genuine progress for quite long enough. They have worked their socialdamage and we see the results in the streets. We are reaping what they have sown.It should be clear that none of this is to minimize the predicament of truly disadvantaged individuals and communities. This is solely an indictment of a corrupt ideology and its practitioners and victims.
Anatomy of right-wing populism
Twenty-five years ago, Fareed Zakaria introduced the concept of illiberal democracy: he revealed how some legitimately elected governments undermine liberal democratic principles by eroding the rule of law and the protection of fundamental freedoms. He predicted that this new form of regime would significantly damage the status of our democracies if not appropriately challenged. After almost two decades, the 2014 speech of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán marked the official birth of illiberal democracy in modern Europe, with a discourse that echoes the 1997 article. Except that it is the exact opposite of what Zakaria hoped to hear.
Orbán’s rhetoric and attitude are supported and endorsed by several populist leaders across Europe and beyond. What the Hungarian PM represents is the result of a long democratic recession that Larry Diamond estimated to start in the early 2000s in continents such as Asia and Africa. It appears that it is now the turn of Europe, as we can deduct from the rising popularity of multiple anti-establishment and nationalist parties across the continent. Despite populism not being exclusively a right-wing phenomenon, most of its support in the EU is represented by radical right parties that are often Eurosceptic.
This aspect is also confirmed by the outcome of the last European Parliament election in 2019. The results indicate a nationalist trend and a shift from the centre-right to the far-right within the populist vote: the relative populist electoral strength was highest in two European parliament groups, namely Identity and Democracy (ID) (including Salvini’s League and Le Pen’s National Rally) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) (including Brothers of Italy and Law and Justice in Poland), which are both very critical of the union and formed exclusively by right-wing (or even far-right in some cases) populist and nationalist parties. These two groups, albeit not achieving the brilliant results they were expecting, have won 135 seats in the European Parliament, and their main parties happened to be very strong nationally. Considering that the historic European People’s Party (EPP) and the Socialist and Democrats (S&D) have lost 65 seats combined from the previous election, it is not a bad outcome overall for right-wing populism.
In 2017, Bridgewater’s populism index in developed countries revealed that this phenomenon was at its highest rate since 1930s. In addition, the think tank Timbro estimated that more than a quarter of European electors vote for authoritarian populist parties, with Poland and Hungary among the four countries with most support. Political scientist Cas Mudde observed instead that the average support for these political forces is the highest since 1940s, with over 20% since 2010. Slightly different estimations are calculated but nevertheless this shows to what extent have these parties grown in recent years. One might consider these factors as alarming, since many scholars claim the expansion of populism and nationalism could eventually topple liberal democracies and favour authoritarian regimes, as already occurred in history.
What do we mean by right-wing populism?
First and foremost, before getting into the details of right-wing populism, an overall definition and brief explanation of populism must be provided. Mudde defines populism as an “an ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite’”. Populists also believe that all members of the ‘pure’ group have the same aims and abide by the same principles, hence they do not accept a pluralist society consisting of diverse needs and concerns. Some of them also claim that this perceived faction of ‘the people’ comprises only of one ethnicity, class and religion.
Populist parties no longer seek out compromise and consensus through tolerant and democratic practices, but instead try to overthrow what they believe is a corrupt and broken system. In this way they undermine democratic institutions such as courtrooms and media, while attacking any aspect of society that opposes the common will of ‘the people’. They also refuse the search for a balance between the needs of the majority and the minority, as they claim that disregarding the interests of the majority is a violation of democracy, thus supporting “a form of democratic extremism or, better said, of illiberal democracy”.
Moreover, the cult of the leader is crucial in the populist world. This may sound obvious because a charismatic figure is always needed in politics in order to move masses and influence opinions, regardless of the political party. However, populist leaders declare they embody the will of the people and often appeal to the worst instincts of the population, manipulating fears and anxiety to increase their support. As politics is not only made of rational thinking, but also emotions and sentiments, they interpretate fear and desperation with (sometimes false) claims and simplistic solutions to contrast complex issues.
Populist groups are usually considered ‘catch-all’ movements, meaning that they follow the popular support rather than choosing a specific side. However, it could be discussed that this wide definition of populism is reductive. In fact, French economist Thomas Piketty deems it as a generalisation and refrains from using this word since there is a variety within that group: any party criticizing the current establishment is labelled as ‘populist’ without differentiating the diverse forms of this phenomenon. For instance, right-wing populists are usually hostile to immigration and minority rights, whereas left-wing populists are often culturally inclusive.
It could be further discussed that the argument about the people versus the elite tends to be overused as we have cases in which the political system is widely corrupt, and thus brings to legitimate concern and popular discontent to demand for more transparency and equality, such as in Greece, Spain and Italy. The movements that have emerged in these countries (Syriza, Podemos and 5 Star Movement respectively) showed a different approach to politics in comparison to prominent right-wing populist parties, as they have not undermined or taken over democratic institutions when elected to govern their respective countries.
Nonetheless, the majority of European populist parties have right-wing tendencies. This type of nationalist populism (also defined as ‘national populism’ by British academics Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin) is mainly based on xenophobic and protectionist sentiments, in addition to be against the neo-liberal establishment. Right-wing populist parties tend to regard nationality as a rigid and unmodifiable homogenous identity (mistakenly connected only to ethnicity), and they are therefore against any form of pluralism, whether it is based on culture or sexual orientation. Although some national populists consider themselves patriots defending their sovereignty, it could be argued otherwise. Italian scholar Maurizio Viroli observes in his book that the terms ‘nationalism’ and ‘patriotism’ are often misused: while the former mostly reflects a protectionist and isolationist approach (rather than sovereignty), the latter is also based on the respect of other cultures.
Furthermore, most right-wing populist parties are willing to live in a democratic context, but they are against the liberal values of present-day democracies, such as media freedom and minority rights. As a matter of fact, they believe they represent the true nature of democracy, which focuses on the needs and interests of the majority that felt excluded and neglected by the ‘corrupt elite’ in recent years. Nevertheless, by emphasising the importance of the majority at all costs, they end up discriminating who is not part of ‘the people’, hence appearing to be a regressive and undemocratic response to a legitimate concern.
What are the causes of the global rise of populism?
Political scientists Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris suggest that the rise of populism is mainly due to economic inequality, which was partly caused by phenomena such as globalisation and austerity. The shift from the industrial age to what Piketty describes as a “globalised era of hypercapitalism and digital technology” has created high levels of inequity around the world. Piketty also argues that the concentration of wealth is disproportionate because the ratio of economic growth is lower than the so-called ‘return on invested capital’, hence much of the resources end up in the hands of a microscopic part of the population. Indeed, the latest Credit Suisse report indicates a great disparity in the world, with 1.1% of the population owning almost half of the global wealth (45.8%), and the bottom 55% of the population possessing only 1.3% of the total resources.
While globalisation had its own advantages (such as giving work to millions of people in emerging economies), it has also displaced many low skilled jobs and produced economic stagnation in developed countries. This has resulted in an ever-increasing wealth gap; this disparity, in turn, has created underserved communities who began to distrust the global system. Already twenty years ago economist Joseph Stiglitz (in his book Globalization and Its Discontents) warned us that rising inequality would pave the way for the rise of anti-establishment parties, such as nationalists and populists.
The 2008 financial crash further deepened the economic gap: the main consequences of the so-called ‘Great Recession’ have been high levels of unemployment, growing inequality and impoverishment of the working and lower middle classes. Moreover, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, the austerity policies implemented by the European Union, including tax raises and spending cuts, exacerbated the situation. The austere measures were in fact not combined with effective social protection systems, hence degrading the conditions of workers as well. This circumstance thus led the EU into an identity crisis, which we are still experiencing today with the rise of several Eurosceptic parties.
Some might discuss that this is connected to the decline of liberal democracy, as the European Union is mainly based on liberal values. Mudde observes that the crisis of democracy results from the failure of the liberal establishment in the political system, and not from several external challengers trying to undermine it. In fact, he also claims that “contemporary populism is an illiberal democratic response to undemocratic liberalism”. The fact that the liberal system could be or become undemocratic is not unrealistic as it sounds, especially if we consider that in history liberalism was not always applied in democratic contexts, such as in many European countries in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The democratic crisis was also caused by the deterioration of traditional parties that lost touch with the lower middle and working classes, which have stopped trusting a system that has sold them false promises and has not met their needs. As a matter of fact, the level of trust towards parties across the EU has been in a declining trend in the last decade (just over 20% in 2019). This is also demonstrated by factors such as lower electoral turnout and decreasing participation in political activities, but also by the growing interest towards non-traditional parties. This aspect is critical because once you cease to identify in a political movement, you automatically find refuge in national identity, ideology or religion.
Furthermore, the advent of right-wing populism has cultural determinants as well: the 2015 migration crisis has indeed displaced millions of asylum seekers and economic migrants, many of which coming from Muslim countries. Their religion is a key aspect because right-wing populists have increasingly exhibited xenophobic attitudes towards Islam, which is seen as a civilisational threat, particularly after 9/11 and the rise of ISIS. Whereas there is no justification for such discriminatory behaviours, raising a question about EU’s handling of the migrant crisis may be a legitimate concern. According to Article 79 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the union “shall develop a common immigration policy aimed at ensuring, at all stages, the efficient management of migration flows”. It could be discussed whether some member states have not put enough effort and resources to cooperate and find a common solution, but it is also true that the EU could have anticipated the crisis by implementing appropriate immigration controls and reception systems. In fact, Mudde acknowledges that migration policies were often “undemocratic in spirit”, meaning that they were not the outcome of collective discussions and decisions taken together with the population. Hence, right-wing populist parties have exploited this crisis to criticize the EU with improbable scapegoats: for instance, describing migration from Africa and the Middle-East as an invasion or claiming that NGOs and liberal institutions are plotting for an ‘ethnic replacement’ of the European people.
As a result, right-wing populists (or at least most of them) reject liberal democratic values rather than democracy in its entirety: those values that are entrenched in the EU and other international institutions. However, the populist response does not seem to respect EU fundamental goals and values, nor basic democratic principles. The main issue is the approach used to criticize the liberal system. Populist movements tend to appeal to the fears and anxieties of the voters to attack the elites, which are perceived as always corrupt and distant from the population. This cannot be accepted as a fair argument, because, as we cannot generalise that all populists are fascists or xenophobic, then we cannot assert that the so-called elite is all corrupt either. As a result, neither the growing populist sentiment nor the liberal establishment are to be completely eradicated, but rather challenged and improved through collective discussions and decisions.
Moreover, the rise of right-wing populism is not the consequence of a single issue, but it is driven by a combination of mutually reinforcing economic and cultural aspects (from unemployment and wealth inequality to racism and xenophobia). These factors are the result of a series of events that affected our society in the last decades, such as globalisation, the Great Recession, the 2015 migrant crisis and the decline of traditional political parties. It would be thus too simple to only blame the vulnerabilities of the liberal establishment or the opportunism of populist leaders, as both approaches have had negative repercussions on the public.
On the one hand, populists have gained popularity due to genuine issues that liberal institutions have failed to deal with. On the other hand, they have also promoted ‘culturally exclusive’ behaviours (racism, xenophobia etc.) through demagogy and propaganda, often accompanied by the spread of disinformation. Nonetheless, the liberal system has perhaps not effectively dealt with crucial challenges and has showed weaknesses that exacerbated the socio-economic crisis we are witnessing, hence allowing right-wing populist parties to flourish. The more the people have felt left behind by the system, the more they have found refuge in national identity and intolerant ideologies. Therefore, the first step to take in order to explain and fight populism would be to bear responsibility for the inequal policies implemented through the years that have left many communities marginalised and prone to vote for anti-establishment parties. A card that does not seem to have been played well (or at all), since right-wing populist parties are increasingly on the rise in many countries around the world.
Education needs a transformation. The same holds true with how we monitor our commitments
Education is the key to unlock our development challenges. Yet, millions of children and young people are left behind, unable to fulfil their potential and prepare themselves for the future. In many countries, the pandemic has struck off the modest gains of the past 20 years for the generation most affected by school closures, with long-term consequences. This week, the Transforming Education Summit comes to an end. The world’s education leaders have gathered over the last few days in New York, invited by the UN Secretary-General as part of Our Common Agenda, to debate solutions to put education back on the right track.
The Summit has come at a time when, according to UNESCO’s latest figures, there are an estimated 244 million children and young people across the world still deprived of any form of formal schooling. Over 600 million children and adolescents are either not completing basic education or do not acquire basic skills that would help them prepare for the future. With only seven years to go until the deadline to reach SDG 4, the global education goal, they are lacking the support to access a high-quality and fulfilling education. Compounding the problem is the fact that governments in the poorer countries appear to be cutting their education budgets.
The Transforming Education Summit marks a key moment. But as leaders declare their determination to improve education in their countries, we must review how to translate these words into the concrete targets, so that these promises do not ring empty, and how to monitor progress towards them. While the Summit has debated solutions to make schools safe, healthy, connected and green, countries should express the level of their ambition through national targets for each of these commitments to spur action from now to 2030.
The issues rising to the surface during the discussions and consultation around the summit are all critical. One in six children live in areas impacted by conflict that also destroys their education opportunities. Schools are being bombed and children and teachers are killed daily. Only last year, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution on the protection of education in conflict zones. But more must be done to protect the education of affected children and young people.
The compound effects of COVID-19, a war in Europe that disrupted grain production and exports, rising inflation and a looming economic recession, mean that the world is edging closer towards a food crisis. When schools closed their doors with little to no notice due to the pandemic, millions of students were cut off not only from their education, but also from one of their principal food sources. An estimated 39 billion school meals have been missed since April 2020. It is not only children’s physical development that was impacted. Without food, children simply do not have the energy to concentrate, and their education outcomes are therefore significantly worse.
Another, equally significant impact of the pandemic was bringing learning from classroom to home. Laptops, computers, and iPads replaced pencils, erasers and pens as back-to-school essentials– for the lucky few: because this shift was reliant on all children having access to the technology required to learn from home. Unfortunately, with two-thirds of 3–17-year-olds unable to access the internet at home, this was far from the case. These children were left behind in systems whose efforts to catch up with the times simply failed them. As with many crises, this also predominantly affected children in disadvantaged homes and communities. The pandemic shed light on the foundations of education systems, which fuel exclusion and inequality.
Finally, with almost two billion people affected by floods, droughts and storms every year, these devastatingly real consequences that climate change is unleashing on our planet are already being felt, though not equally by all. Climate change disproportionately impacts the most vulnerable and marginalized communities in the Global South, whose education opportunities are also poorer, further compromising their ability to adapt. At the same time, education systems in the Global North and in countries contributing most to global warming are yet to demonstrate how their schools will serve their climate change mitigation efforts.
Agreeing to the actions is one step, monitoring them is crucial to provide accountability and drive ambition. UNESCO has started a process where each country sets their own realistic ‘benchmarks’ in the road to achieving SDG 4. About 90% of countries have heeded this call and established national targets which they reasonably believe can be reached by 2030, in the hopes that this will accelerate progress. We encourage countries to also set national targets for 2025 and 2030 against each of the global initiatives to be tabled at the Summit. These will represent the transformation countries want to see.
The follow-up mechanism after the Summit, based on national target setting, will be critical to convert leaders’ statements into improved education results for children and youth, as this call for action implores countries to do. The solutions to be agreed at the Summit must be appropriately monitored if we are to come out of this global education emergency.
Our Case for Investment in Education is Our Case for Humanity
As world leaders gather at this year’s UN General Assembly and work to make good on commitments outlined at the Secretary-General’s Transforming Education Summit, we are calling on all of them to put education – especially for the 222 million crisis-impacted children that are in need of urgent education support – at the top of the international agenda.
Investing in education means investing in humanity. It means investing in a peaceful and prosperous future. It means investing in human rights and our global promise to deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, especially our goal of quality education for all (SDG4).
From a 50,000-foot perspective, investing in education means investing in strong nations and in resilient economies for generations to come.
Our case for investment is our case for building peace where there is war, prosperity where there is poverty, and hope where there is despair. Our case for investment is our case for realizing 222 Million Dreams for the children and youth impacted by conflict, climate change, forced displacement and other protracted crises.
From our very human vantage point, this support is ensuring refugee girls like Bchiote and Janat Ara are able to go to school to develop to their full potentials and become productive contributors to their society. ECW works through a holistic, whole-of-child approach. It’s not just about books and classrooms – because all too often education goes beyond learning in crises: education is also lifesaving and life-sustaining. This is why ECW interventions embrace a broad spectrum of support, ranging from providing safe and protective learning spaces to mental health and psycho-social support; from providing school feeding to helping build disaster preparedness in the face of the climate crisis.
Addressing the Education Crisis
Today we have a perfect storm of a global education crisis coinciding with a global funding crisis. The solution is to scale-up funding to education. From there, all else can be achieved. Without education, all else is elusive – whether it is human rights or the sustainable development goals. It all starts with an education.
It’s hard to believe that even today, education in emergencies and protracted crises only accounts for approximately 2% to 4% of global humanitarian funding. And while we have seen a noticeable positive trend in commitments, funding appeals have skyrocketed to more than US$2.9 billion in 2021, compared to US$1.4 billion in 2020. The value of 222 million children and youth enduring conflicts, climate disasters and forced displacement is priceless and never too costly. They are our investment in humanity – theirs and our own.
The world is getting hotter, more crowded, more violent and more inhumane by the minute. By investing in education, we are removing the dark veil of inaction and inequality that has stripped millions of the world’s most vulnerable children and adolescents of their basic human rights.
Most concerning, we seem to be back-sliding on our commitments to ensure quality education for all. When ECW was formed in 2016, approximately 75 million crisis-impacted children were in need of educational support. Recent analysis indicates that number has nearly tripled to 222 million today, including 78 million who are out of school entirely.
The COVID-19 pandemic has only deepened the global learning crisis. In 2020 and 2021, 147 million children missed over half of in-person instruction, and as many as 24 million learners may never return to school, according to the United Nations.
As we grapple with war in Ukraine, the spectre of famine across much of the Sahel, armed conflicts, massive displacement and the truly apocalyptic impacts of the climate crisis, we are faced with tough choices in aligning humanitarian, development and private sector funding.
As a crosscutter that delivers returns far beyond the classroom, education has a tremendous return on investment.
For every dollar spent on education we receive $2.80 in return. And the World Bank estimates that “limited educational opportunities for girls and barriers to completing 12 years of education cost countries between $15 trillion and $30 trillion dollars in lost lifetime productivity and earnings.”
We must take a transformational approach in our delivery of this support.
One-off responses are no longer enough. Working in silos is no longer viable. Now it is about speed and quality. It is about crisis-sensitive development approaches to education. With US$1.5 billion, ECW can provide 20 million children with holistic education supports. This doesn’t just mean building schools, it means taking a holistic approach and bringing all partners together to providing protection and psychosocial services, gender equality, teacher training, learning materials, school feeding programmes, tests and exams showing advanced learning outcomes, early childhood education and an array of supports that provides whole-of-child solutions to a whole-of-society problem.
Through its leadership of the G7, Germany has stepped up to put education first in its humanitarian spending, with over €300 million in funding to ECW and significant contributions to our partners across the globe.
This support has solidified ECW’s position as a model for UN reform. To date, we have mobilized close US$1.1 billion through our donors, allowing us to reach 7 million children in just five years of operation, and more than 30 million through our COVID-19 responses.
The private sector is joining in. The LEGO Foundation recently announced significant new funding to Education Cannot Wait and other key education initiatives.
Others must stand and be counted. In the 21st Century we stand at a crossroads. We have choices to make.
Do we invest in the young generation or do we ignore their most fundamental right to be educated? Do we invest in the 222 million children and adolescents whose only hope left is that of an education, or do we leave them behind?
The choice we make will determine the future for generations to come. Let us make the right choice. Fund education. Invest in humanity.
Europe’s former imperial countries are now desperate U.S. colonies
India is no longer a colony of the UK, but Germany and other European countries have become — now quite...
Solar PV Employs More Women Than Any Renewables
Solar photovoltaic (PV) has emerged to be the leading employer in the renewable energy sector, both in global number of...
Human Development Index 2021–22 and India
The goal of the HDI is to provide a comprehensive assessment of a country’s development based on the individuals and...
Iraq and the ‘Blind Gordian Knot’
After its occupation by the United States in 2003, Iraq fell into the double trap of the United States and...
AUKUS One-Year Anniversary, Indonesia’s Response During NPT Review Conference
The dilemma experienced by Indonesia in responding to the arms race in the region reaps many concerns. Australia announced plans...
Helsinki Spirit Revisited
“DIPLOMACY IS AN ART”. “Bring young people to play leadership roles”.-H.E. Mr. Lamberto Zannier As part of the Geneva Lecture...
Competition in 5G Communication Network and the Future of Warfare
The present era is experiencing a shift from 4G (4th Generation) to 5G (5th Generation) networked communication. This shift will...
Energy3 days ago
U.S. Government Likely Perpetrated Biggest-Ever Catastrophic Global-Warming Event
Russia3 days ago
The Road Ahead: Dissecting Russia’s Economic Diplomacy With Africa
Defense3 days ago
India overreacted to the US $450 million deal with Pakistan
Southeast Asia4 days ago
Muslim piety in Southeast Asia mirrors increased religious traditionalism in the Middle East
Defense4 days ago
Military Aspects of Russia’s Stance in the Arctic
Defense3 days ago
Why Parties to Russia Ukraine War Prolonging it?
Science & Technology2 days ago
The Development of Artificial Intelligence in China: Talent creation and comparison with U.S.
Tech News4 days ago
Crypto Sustainability Coalition to Investigate Potential of Web3 Technologies in Fighting Climate Change