#need to do proposal for [major national conference] | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

justinspoliticalcorner · 17 days ago

Text

Ron Filipkowski at Medias+:

Imagine every week, somewhere in America, there is an event featuring nationally prominent Democratic elected officials, TV personalities, celebrities, artists, state and local officials, candidates, podcasters, journalists, and social media influencers. A one-day or weekend event, sponsored and hosted by different organizations, each with their own group of speakers, in different states, all year round. That is what the Republican Party has had in place for a decade to recruit, build, inspire, organize and motivate their base. The Democrats have MSNBC. Since I have attended, watched and covered these events on the Right for years now, I am often asked why the Right has embraced these so enthusiastically while the Left has virtually nothing equivalent. My theory always was that Republicans enjoy doing things in groups and Democrats are more individualistic. But every time I would mention that while speaking to a group of activists, their response was always the same - 'I would go to something like that!

Democrats do some of this in the final few months of major election campaigns, but it is nothing like the network that the Right has created. Sure, we have all made fun of these events. Many of the speakers at right-wing conferences are nutty conspiracy theorists, christian nationalists, charlatans and grifters, and people who attend them can be fairly culty, but they are effective. While Democrats laugh at them or criticize them for what is taking place, they are doing nothing of their own to counter it. Let's say, in a few months after the mourning period is over for 2024, a major conference was announced in a major city of a swing state that featured Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, Wes Moore, Andy Beshear, Eric Swalwell, Jared Moskowitz, Jasmine Crockett, AOC, along with a few celebrities of the entertainment industry, TV news commentators, journalists, podcasters and social media influencers. Would you go if that was in your state?

Although the formats vary, most of these conferences on the Right play out a similar way using the CPAC / Turning Point USA model pioneered by Matt Schlapp and Charlie Kirk. Early on they feature panels of 3-4 speakers discussing a specific topic for 30-60 minutes, taking questions from the audience. Then speakers begin with local officials, then podcasters/influencers, then TV hosts, then celebrities, then the headliner politicians being featured. They talk about what is on their mind, what they think people need to do, propose new ideas and vision. Panel topics for one of these conferences on the Left could be: Why Are We Losing Men under 40? Why are Latino Voters Disillusioned With Democrats? How Can We Talk About Abortion in a Way That Doesn't Alienate Christians? Democrats Need to Articulate a Border Policy, What Should It Look Like? Trans Athletes and Competitive Sports. I'm sure we each could think of many more. And the panelists could be chosen who are experts in these areas, but also have diversity of thought on them.

[...] These conferences need to be a safe space where orthodoxies and conventional wisdom can be challenged and debated. People can disagree, argue their points passionately, hash things out, and still part as friends. Those kinds of debates happen on the Right, not so much on the Left where people have great ideas, new approaches, different perspectives, but are afraid to share them for fear of being shouted down, scorned, ostracized, or tagged with a odious label.

The Right invests in these conferences and events. Spends millions of dollars on them on advertising, venues and speaker's fees. But over time they have been so well attended, with attendees buying tickets and advertisers and sponsors lining up, that they now turn a healthy profit for the people who run them. While you don't have to pay for an elected official or candidate who just wants face time with activists, speakers lower down the food chain need their travel paid for and modest fees for their time. People don't even have to attend in person anymore. These events are all livestreamed on X, Instagram, Facebook Live, Rumble, YouTube, and get lots of coverage from Fox, Newsmax, Real America's Voice, Right Side Broadcasting and other right-wing channels. Hundreds of thousands of people on the Right watch these conferences from home and on their phones, week after week after week

In addition to providing a forum to hash out ideas and policy, these conferences also provide amazing organizing and networking opportunities. Podcasters and social media influencers gain new viewers, listeners and followers so they can continue to maintain the messaging every week long after the conference is over on their own platforms. They can meet each other, help each other, and start to coordinate their efforts. Politicians and celebrities can meet these influencers and grass roots activists in attendance, get to know them, exchange emails or phone numbers. These conferences, rallies and events are how the Right has built a powerful network of activists all over the country. They meet each other, get to know each other, coordinate, and help each other. New email and donor lists are compiled. New voters are registered or brought into the party. People are convinced to switch parties, get off the fence, or become more active.

[...] With that said, the main point of this article is that we can't look for cable news channels to be our thought leaders or the vehicle for grass roots organizing. They don't exist for that purpose. That is not their mission. Their mission is to entertain, while hopefully also informing, while achieving ratings to bring in ad dollars. But the problem is, too many Democrats are camped out in front of MSNBC as their central organizing instrument. We need to wake up, and we need to do it now. I am certain that we have better ideas, are more sane and rational, less narcissistic, less conspiratorial, less grifty, and care about other people more. Don't get me wrong, we have plenty of issues, characters, grifters and BlueAnon conspiracy theorists - but not nearly as many and it is more of a bug than a feature, unlike MAGA.

Ron Filipkowski wrote a solid piece in Meidas+ that the left needs to get their game together and have their versions of CPAC and TPUSA’s summits, though Netroots Nation is the closest equivalent.

See also:

For a Case Trope

Fake Relationship / For a Case Part 2

For a Case Pt 3

Fake Relationship / For a Case Pt. 4

Fake Relationship / For a Case Pt. 5

Fake Relationship / For a Case Pt. 6

Married For a Case / Fake Husbands

Johnlock on Holidays for a Case

Ambiguous Relationships

Deck the Halls by itsalwaysyou_jw (T, 31,018 w., 24 Ch. || Advent Fic / Multiple One-Shots, Assorted Tags) – One Johnlock ficlet for every day leading up to Christmas. Who is ready for pining, first kisses, established Johnlock, and everything in between? This collection of stand-alone ficlets will have it all.

The Case of the Vanishing Pants by SwissMiss (E, 44,025 w., 6 Ch. || Five and Ones, Post-TRF, Case Fic, UST, Homophobia, Friends to Lovers, Pining John, Showering Together, Couple for a Case, Sherlock’s Bum, Fantasies, Jealous Sherlock) – Five times John and Sherlock lost their pants in the course of a case.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse by SilentAuror (E, 50,635 w., 1 Ch. || Post-S4/S4 Divergence, Case Fic, For a Case / Reverse Fake-Relationship, Conferences, Marriage Equality, Travelling / New York, Pride, Homophobia, Bottomlock, Marriage Proposal, John POV, Sexuality, Love Confessions, Emotional Love Making, Public Hand Jobs, Blow Jobs, Passionate Kissing, Needy/Clingy Sherlock, Virgin Sherlock, Touching / Hand Holding, Bed Sharing, Little Spoon Sherlock, Intense Orgasms) – John and Sherlock go to New York to attend a conference run by the National Defence of Traditional Marriage Coalition in order to investigate the potential bombing of the annual Manhattan Pride parade. As the conference unfolds, John finds himself repulsed by the toxic ideology being presented, which becomes relevent to his own unacknowledged issues and his friendship with Sherlock...

Isosceles by SilentAuror (E, 56,609 w., 7 Ch. || Post-S4, POV John, Original Male Character / Sherlock Dates Another Man, Love Triangle, Jealous John, Virgin Sherlock, Sexual Coaching, Angst, Romance, Domesticity, Unrequited Feelings, Miscommunication, First Kiss/Time, For a Case, Friends With Benefits, Bottomlock, Love Confessions, Spooning) – After solving a case for a major celebrity, Sherlock gets himself asked out. When John asks, he discovers that Sherlock has no intention of going, at least not until John agrees to coach him through whatever he might need to know for his date...

You Might Just as Well Be Blind by ArwaMachine (E, 56,625 w., 12 Ch. || Fake Relationship, For a Case, Bed Sharing, Platonic Cuddling, Jealous Sherlock, Oblivious John, BAMF Hudders, Fluff and Angst, Frottage, Anal Sex, Happy Ending, Case Fic, Flirting, Pining John, POV John, Toplock, Possessive Sherlock, First Kiss/Time, Infidelity) – When a serial killer starts targeting couples, Sherlock and John must do what they have to do in order to get to the bottom of things. Unfortunately, John already has a girlfriend. Surely pretending to be in a relationship with Sherlock won't pose any problems with his relationship, will it?

MARKED FOR LATER / TO READ

What Every Step Is For by Anyawen (G, 2,921 w., 1 Ch. || Five and One, Bedsharing, Injury, Illness, Cold, Lack of Beds, Fake Relationship, Fluff) – Five times bedsharing occurred due to circumstance, and one time it happened by invitation.

A Contest of Wills by JanecShannon (T, 3,155 w., 1 Ch. || Fake Relationship, Turner’s Married Ones, Cuddling and Snuggling, Sexual Humour) – Mrs. Turner's married ones decided to renew thier vows. The problem? John shares a wall with their bedroom and they are being very... enthusiastic... about the reawakening of thier passion. Sherlock decides to give them a taste of thier own medicine.

I meant to say always by OnceSherlock (T, 8,808 w., 1 Ch. || Fake Relationship, Parentlock, First Kiss, Friends to Lovers, Unresolved Romantic Tension, POV John, Protective Parents) – Rosie made sure that Sherlock was listening before whispering into John’s ear. “I wished for you and Papa to be married.”

Just to Make Sure by addicted2hugh (E, 12,343 w., 1 Ch. || TBB Canon Divergence, Fake Relationship, Friends to Lovers, Pining Idiots, First Kiss/Time, POV John, Secrets, Fluff and Smut) – What if John hadn't given up dreaming so easily after Sherlock announced himself married to his work? What if he had admitted to himself that he's into him? And what if, when Sebastian Wilkes bullied Sherlock in front of him, he had stood up for his friend instead of letting him down? Part 1 of Just to Make Sure

Life's Uneven Kilter by theslovenlyfool (T, 14,877 w., 4 Ch. || Canon Divergence S3, BAMF John, Secretly Married, Camp Gay Sherlock, Dancing, John is a Good Actor, Fake Relationship, Mycroft Plays a Role) – "According to Sherlock, the game began on September 21, 2005 at precisely 10:37:04 am. John complained that, with that logic, the game had actually begun on January 7, 2000, at around 1:30 am. But for Sherlock, games are only fun when others are willing to play. What is a game without an adversary, after all? And what is a proper dash across London without a partner? Now, Sherlock thought as he assessed the doctor with the unforgivable cane, the game is on."

Open your eyes by softlock (NR, 16,032 w., 14 Ch. || Post-TRF / Pre-TSo3, Fake/Pretend Relationship, Mutual Pining, Fluff and Angst, Domestic Fluff, Bed Sharing, Homophobic Language, Anatomy, Medical Procedures, POV John, Slow Burn, Past Rape/Non-Con, Past Torture, Scars, First Kiss, Slow Burn, Happy Ending) – John and Sherlock enter a fake relationship for a case. Will these idiots realize they don't need to act anymore?

Of Dinner and Desires by IneffableHusbands95 & KittieHill (E, 16,663 w., 5 Ch. || Fake Relationship, Established Mystrade, Powerful Mycroft, Bisexual John, Gay Sherlock, Sexual Tension, Drama, Jealous Sherlock, Confused John, Sad Wanking, Masturbation, Banter, Big Brother Mycroft, Possessive Sherlock, Anal Sex, Virgin Sherlock, PWP, Blow Jobs, Shower Sex, Marriage Proposal) – Mycroft bared his teeth and glared before softening. “Surprisingly, I do have better things to do than watch you drink yourself into a self-pitying stupor.” He looked like he might get up and walk out, but he inhaled, fixed his collar and then ordered a gin and tonic from the bar staff who looked at the strange man but scurried off to fix his drink immediately. “We need to discuss your attraction to my brother.”

House of Light by AlgySwinburne (E, 17,149 w., 3 Ch. || Post-S4, Fake Relationship, Holmes Family, POV Sherlock, Friends to Lovers, Past Viclock, Implied / Referenced Homophobia, No Rosie) – For god’s sake,” Sherlock blusters, “John and I are--” “Happy. So very happy,” John cuts in loudly. He gives Sherlock a resounding slap on the back, jerking Sherlock forward. “In fact, we couldn’t be happier, did I already say that? The two of us. Sherlock and I, that is. Because we’re together--in a relationship--as you so astutely noticed before we could break the news. So. Yes. Thank you, Mrs Holmes.”

Couples Retreat by Madam_Fandom (E, 18,717 w., 10 Ch. || Fake Relationship, Undercover Couple, Case Fic, Angst, Kidnapping, Fake Marriage, Cross Dressing) – Couples are turning up missing at a very high class couples retreat; and the only way to get to the bottom of it is for John and Sherlock to go under cover as a couple.

The One Where Sherlock Doesn’t Ruin John’s Holiday by nutmeag83 (T, 18,898 w., 11 Ch. || Pre-TRF / S2 Timeline, Friends to Lovers, Cruise Ships, Vacation / Holidays, Fake Relationship, For Science, Bed Sharing, Cuddling/Snuggling, Mutual Pining, John POV, Minor Case Fic, Cooking, Dancing, Drunk Shenanigans) – John wins a cruise vacation for two and brings Sherlock along. But when it turns out to be a couples cruise, they have to pretend to be a couple themselves (for science). How many pretend kisses will it take before they can’t deny their feelings any longer?

Mistletoe and Misdemeanours by Robottko (T, 20,738 w., 12 Ch. || Coffee Shop AU || Christmas, Fake Relationship, Coffee Shops, Victor Trevor, First Kiss, Holmes Family, Enemies to Friends to Lovers, Family Drama, Kidnapping) – When Victor Trevor backs out of the Holmes family Christmas at the last minute, Sherlock panics because he has no way to impress his parents. Thankfully there is a handsome army doctor with nowhere to go in his coffee shop, though it would be more helpful if he were a bit more willing.

I Feel Like I Don't Even Know Him! by MutedSilence (NR, 26,108 w., 25 Ch. || Alternate First Meeting || Fake Relationship, Developing Relationship, Implied/Referenced Suicide, Couple’s Counselling, Paternal Greg, Protective Mycroft, Implied/Referenced Drug Use, For a Case) – John is leaving therapy Sherlock needs to get into the office of a couples counsellor. A frantic Sherlock bumps into John as he's making his way out. John - with nothing better to do - agrees to pretend to be a stranger's boyfriend for the afternoon. Beats going home.

Mountebank by Odamaki (M, 26,514 w., 2 Ch. || Fake Relationship/Dating/Marriage, For A Case, Jealous John, Suits, House Party, Crack, Trapped, UST, Dancing, Idiots in Love, Confessions, Friends to Lovers) – “I am calm,” John snaps, leaning on the door to glare out at the dark streets around them. Sherlock’s not said where they’re going; all he knows is they came off the ring road to the west of London and have vanished somewhere into the depths of Berkshire. All he knows is that he’s been trussed up in a suit that wasn’t hired from anywhere and if brought new would edge up into the triple figure margins. “Be calmer,” Sherlock advises, with a trace of irony. “We’re going to a party.” Part 29 of the The Sherlexicon

Ten Years by toyhto (M, 28,610 w., 5 Ch. || Post S4/TFP, Fake Relationship, UST, Getting Together, Love Confessions, First Kiss/Time, Virgin Sherlock, Parentlock) – A friend tells Rosie Watson that her parents aren't together for real, because they don't kiss. But we do, John says.

L'amour Toujours by stopthat (M, 31,408 w., 26 Ch. || Post-TRF, Fake Relationship for a Case, Sherlock POV, Angst and Feels, Pining, Codependency, John is a Mess, Hurt/Comfort, No Mary, Declarations of Love, Church/Religion, Homophobia/Hate Crimes, Internalized Homophobia, Summer Camp, Awkward Conversations, Misunderstanding, Hand Holding, Slow Burn, Idiots in Love, Friends to Lovers, First Kiss, Therapy/Talking) – There's a wolf amongst the sheep at Wisteria Lutheran Church. Sherlock and John must go undercover—as two men in love—to find out who has been mercilessly executing the church's queer community. As with everything else involving John Watson, it's not nearly as straightforward as Sherlock had hoped it would be. [TRANSLATION: Français]

The Case of the Dancing Cameras by Kr_Nl (E, 54,091+ w., 10/11 Ch. || WiP || Post S4, Dancing Men Adaptation, Case Fic, Angst, Slow Burn, Massage, UST/URT, Homoerotic Literature, Angst, Slow Burn, Fake Relationship, Scars, Humping, Masturbation, Flirting, Almost Kiss, Pining Sherlock) – The case in which John gets to be a massage therapist for a case and Sherlock gets to be massaged against his will (not really). Taking liberties with The Adventure of the Dancing Men of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Or the case in which John discovers Sherlock turns himself on with homoerotic literature.

The Burning of Carnation Petals by HOverSeas (T, 61,066 w., 19 Ch. || Alternate Universe || Fake Relationship, Slow Burn, Mutual Pining, Sherlock / Victor, Unaddressed Trauma, Weddings, Funerals, Flowers, Friends to Lovers, Happy Ending) – John is a crematorium technician and he has a lot of relationship issues. Sherlock is a florist and mostly has one relationship issue. They are friends, but will have to pose as boyfriends as a way of avoiding the problem they are trying to solve.

The Assistant by delightful_fear (M, 65,247 w., 15 Ch. || Alternate First Meeting, Fake Relationship, London, New York, Slow Burn, Los Angeles) – Back from Afghanistan, John is not doing well. He takes the job of the live-in assistant to a famous author, Sherlock Holmes, while he writes his latest book. He can handle six months with a moody author while he figures out what the next chapter of his life will be, can't he?

Roommates are for little people by alexxphoenix42 (E, 69,042 w., 14 Ch. || Teen/Unilock || Forced to Share a Bed, Pining, Hurt/Comfort, Fake Relationship, Sherlock is a Prick, Drinking, Inadvertent Drug Use, Family Wedding, Footballer John / Ballet Dancer Sherlock, Frottage, Slow Burn, Mild Dub Con, Cuddling While Sleeping, Slight Homophobia, Posh Boy, Dirty Dancing, Endearments, Nosy FAmily, Bathing Together, Mild Angst, UST/RST, Enemies to Friends to Lovers, Fluff) – John was looking forward to seeing his friends back at uni, but a new year brings new complications, not the least of which is a dorm room with only one bed, and a stroppy roommate with an utterly spectacular arse. God, John doesn't need the headache.

79 notes · View notes

rabbitcruiser · 6 months ago

Text

International Tea Day

While everyone loves a cup of tea, many of the workers and producers of that tea face poor conditions and pay. Help raise awareness and keep tea fair.

The tea industry provides millions of people around the world with cups of tea in the morning. One of the biggest producers of tea, India, recognizes the importance of tea in its communities and as a commodity for commerce.

However, much of the working conditions for those within the tea industry still need much improvement. If you think this holiday was about drinking tea, well think again! International Tea Day is all about the tea workers and bringing civil rights into action. Let’s see how this holiday came to pass.

Do you love a good cup of tea? While International Tea Day can certainly involve paying homage to tea, we should pay homage to those working in the tea industry. The best way to do this is by helping to raise awareness regarding their working conditions so they can be improved.

History of International Tea Day

The International Tea Day campaign was launched in 2005 by the trade unions, small tea growers and civil society organizations in Asia and Africa to address the issues of living wages for workers and fair prices for small tea producers.

The International Tea Conference in New Delhi came out with an International Declaration on the rights of workers and small growers to help regulate uneven competition, land ownership, safety regulations, rights of women, social security and living wages. Another organization, The Tea Board of India, proposed International Tea Day in hopes of it becoming an official holiday to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.

This was proposed by chairman Santosh Kumar Sarangi in 2015. According to the chairman, the proposal of India was supported by countries such as Canada, the United States, European Union, Sri Lanka, China, Japan, Kenya, and Malawi. While the holiday doesn’t have official status, the goal of this holiday is to recognize the vulnerable situations that tea producers in India have with current living conditions and worker-related policies.

The day also focuses on deliberating on urgent issues such as residues, climate change, technology and trends on production and consumption in the tea industry. To observe this day, over 150 representatives from tea organizations gather and conduct a seminar to discuss the pervading problems the tea industry has as well as problems faced within their own country.

International Tea Day Timeline

2737 BC Tea is discovered as a beverage

Legend has it that Chinese Emperor Shen Nung is sitting beneath a tea tree while a servant boiled water for drinking. Some leaves fall into the cup and begin the practice of drinking what is now called “tea”.

1610 Tea comes to Europe

It is believed that the Dutch were the first to bring tea to Europe, just a few years prior to the introduction of coffee by Venetians.

1773 The Boston Tea Party occurs

With the intention of revolting against the high taxes levied by the British government without providing any voice, residents of Massachusetts throw tea into the Boston Harbor. “No taxation without representation” is the major complaint.

2004 International Tea Day is created

At the World Social Forum, International Tea Day is conceived and then celebrated the following years in New Delhi and Sri Lanka, then later in other tea-producing places like Nepal, Viet Nam, Bangladesh and others.

2019 United Nations adopts International Tea Day

After some years of advocating for its observance, International Tea Day is adopted by the United Nations General Assembly at the suggestion of the FAO Intergovernmental Group on Tea.

How to Celebrate International Tea Day

If you’re a lover of tea, then do some research about some of your favorite companies. Try looking up tea brands that support fair trade, and possibly switch to those brands to make a difference in the way you buy products such as tea. Use the hashtag #internationalteaday to help recognize it as an official holiday and educate others about the tea industry if you’re interested.

You could also use International Tea Day to try a variety of tea you have never had before. Matcha, for example, is highly popular as of late. You need to shop with care, though! The first thing you need to take a look at is how the Matcha has been produced and sourced.

You need to ensure that all veins and stalks have been removed so that there is not any bitterness and only the finest leaves should be used. Secondly, the color of the matcha powder is a significant factor. The greener the color is, the better. This is because the leaves are forced to overproduce chlorophyll because Matcha is shade-grown, which causes the vibrant green shade.

If the Matcha is yellow or brown in color, this is a sign that the leaves have not been properly shaded or that branches and stalks have been included. The price is the third factor to consider. Like most things, if you want quality, you can expect to pay a little bit more.

If something seems too good to be true, the chances are that it is. The feel of Matcha is also important. It should be a fine powder that is very silky. Last but not least, the taste is obviously a crucial attribute when it comes to quality. It should have a clean and naturally sweet taste.

Why not make some delicious baked green tea treats on International Tea Day and have a bake sale to raise money and awareness regarding working conditions in the tea industry? Green tea recipes are available in their abundance. People are actively searching for different ways to enjoy green tea. While green tea is delicious when simply mixed with hot water, there is nothing wrong with switching it up from time to time, especially on International Tea Day!

An easy and delicious recipe is Matcha Meringue Kisses. To make this you will need Matcha, sugar, egg whites, and powdered sugar. Begin by sifting together the Matcha and the powder sugar, and then whip the egg whites until they have soft peaks. Gradually add the sugar and whip until stiff peaks. Gently fold the Matcha into this mixture and then transfer to a pastry bag. Pipe the mixture into small kisses onto a baking tray and then bake for around an hour.

Or, why not make Green Tea Donuts? For this, you need green tea, honey, melted butter, milk, egg, salt, baking powder, sugar, and cake flour. You whisk the green tea, salt, baking powder, sugar, and flour. Add the honey, melted butter, milk, and egg, and then whisk. Use a pastry bag to pipe the batter into the mould. Then, simply bake the donuts for eight minutes. You can make your own glaze to go on the top – chocolate goes well!

Other delicious baked treats to try include green tea muffins, brownies and shortbread!

International Tea Day FAQs

What is International Tea Day?

Created to celebrate and pay tribute to the countries that produce tea to supply to the world, starting in India and moving to other places like Sri Lanka, Malawi, Uganda, Bangladesh, Vietnam and more.

When was International Tea Day first celebrated?

International Tea Day first got its start in 2004 when it was celebrated in New Delhi. It grew over the years and by 2019 the day was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly.

How to celebrate International Tea Day?

A great way to observe this day is by learning a bit more about the nations who produce tea for the world. Also, don’t forget to order a cup of fair trade tea for one, or take a friend out to enjoy a cuppa together.

What is the theme of International Tea Day?

The theme for this day devoted to tea producers changes each year, but some of the past themes have included themes such as Tea and Fair Trade or Harnessing Benefits for All from Field to Cup.

When is International Tea Day celebrated?

Taking place on May 21 of each year, International Tea Day originally took place on December 15 from 2005 when it was often only celebrated by tea-producing countries. It changed to May 21 when the UN adopted the day.

Source

2 notes · View notes

catsconflictscopicsandchamomile · 8 months ago

Text

"this project could easily get a research grant, you already have way more to propose/pitch than the vast majority of students who pitch this stuff. I'll get some contacts for you by monday, this could be a steady paycheck"

"these are really interesting questions, give them the time you need, KEEP WORKING ON THEM, these will get you into the big national conference next year, and last through your masters. no, I mean like, they're not just "cool", these are of serious academic value"

"I've never seen anyone else ask this in this way before, except maybe one woman in the 1920s. here's her name. these are things that its really good for you to ask"

"No, I really love how you use "Mearcstapa" as a species name- it interplays very well with the text and the things you're exploring. keep doing it, I like that a lot"

...my dudes, my brothers in academia, my Old English prof, and my former TA/head of Old English club

I only "came up with" ANY of these questions/words by rotating Dean Winchester in my head like a vector image 24/7

I'm more confused than anything that these questions make BASIC SENSE, let alone have "serious academic value worthy of long-term/lifelong study"

IM TALKING ABOUT *DEAN* WHAT THE *FUCK*

#old english #academia #collegeblr #new level of impostor syndrome achieved: Whatever This Is #medieval studies #supernatural #dean winchester #HELP LMAO WHATS GOING ON #the further I push my studies into “no legit I'm just writing fanfic here” the more ppl are like “YOUR WORK IS VALUED AND DEEPLY INTERESTIN #NO.#MY WORK IS BECAUSE I WANT TO LICK JENSEN ACKLES' FRECKLES. GO AWAY COLLEGE PEOPLE IM A FCKING SPN FANGIRL

2 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 1 year ago

Text

The next test of whether top U.S. adversaries can erode its role as the leading global superpower will come in the form of a major diplomatic confab in South Africa.

Next week, leaders of the so-called BRICS group—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—will convene in Johannesburg for a major summit, where Moscow and Beijing aim to solidify a counterbalance to the Western-led international system. Both Russia and China are keen to breathe new life into the BRICS bloc to show the world that there are alternatives to the patchwork U.S.-led alliances and institutions that have dominated global affairs for decades.

There’s clearly a growing appetite among other countries for an alternative to the U.S.-led system: Some 40 countries, from Argentina to Saudi Arabia to Kazakhstan, have voiced interest in joining BRICS, while more than 67 world leaders and dignitaries were invited to next week’s summit.

“The global south will be watching next week’s BRICS summit closely in the hopes that the rising grouping of global and middle powers makes some progress in filling the considerable gaps left by America’s shoddy global governance,” said Sarang Shidore, director of the global south program at the Quincy Institute think tank. Even as emerging-market economies reel from the shocks of the pandemic and Russia’s war in Ukraine, Washington has offered little support, instead pursuing an aggressive campaign of interest rate hikes that has exacerbated economic turmoil around the world.

Next week’s summit harkens back to the days of the Bandung Conference, where 29 governments from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East assembled during the Cold War and laid the groundwork for the nonaligned movement. Like then, BRICS serves as an alternative, if inchoate, effort to push back against the hegemon of the day—albeit one that has been complicated by China’s and Russia’s membership.

“BRICS has tapped into a demand that wasn’t being met elsewhere,” said Rebecca Ray, a senior researcher at the Boston University Global Development Policy Center, who noted that countries that aren’t even applying for membership are attending the summit in Johannesburg. “The question is: What do they want their role to be in responding to that?”

There’s no clear answer yet. And experts don’t expect one to emerge from the upcoming summit, with few details yet released on the agenda or real deliverables. Complicating the matter is the fact that BRICS countries have vastly disparate national interests, and vague proposals to expand the bloc’s membership and economic influence seem poised to stumble out of the gate.

India and China are at loggerheads; South Africa is caught between a diplomatic rock and a hard place over its ties to Russia amid the war in Ukraine; and Brazil has done little to stick its neck out for Russia, despite its historically nonaligned foreign policy. All BRICS countries, even China, face economic headwinds that make any future plans to challenge the U.S.-led Group of 7’s spot at the top of the global economy more pipe dream than reality.

The grouping is currently in a “sweet spot, where it’s fulfilling its role, it helps members constrain the United States to some extent, [and] it strengthens ties between the BRICS,” said Oliver Stuenkel, a professor at the School of International Relations at Brazil’s Fundação Getulio Vargas. “But I think if there’s more ambitious projects, then it will inevitably strain this grouping and expose the divergences.”

For Russia, the BRICS summit is an opportunity to demonstrate that it no longer needs the West following Western efforts to isolate Moscow on the world stage in the wake of its bloody war in Ukraine. But that opportunity comes with an awkward footnote: Russian President Vladimir Putin is no longer attending in person as he has a warrant out for his arrest over war crimes in Ukraine from the International Criminal Court (ICC). South Africa, as a member of the ICC, would have been legally obligated to honor the arrest warrant.

China, meanwhile, is keen to position itself as the de facto leader of the global south and the friend of choice to countries worldwide that feel they have been undervalued or left behind by Washington and its most powerful and wealthy allies in Europe and Asia. Beijing has long pushed for the grouping’s enlargement, even though its ambitions have sparked pushback from other BRICS members.

“China is the only country that is not concerned at all about diluting the prestige of BRICS” by expanding it to more countries, Stuenkel said. “For China, I think it really makes sense to expand so that the BRICS can become an element in a more China-centric order—a Chinese-led system of different structures like the One Belt, One Road; the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank; [and the] BRICS bank,” he said, referring to China’s leading global infrastructure investment program, the Chinese-backed multilateral lender, and the nascent New Development Bank established by BRICS countries just under a decade ago.

Yet Beijing has had a harder time getting the other BRICS members on board, further underscoring their competing visions of the group’s future. The idea of expansion has worried India and Brazil in particular, both of which have taken pride in the group’s exclusivity and fear that an open door will diminish its prestige.

“Brazil is very proud of its BRICS membership,” Stuenkel said. “If you’re part of a very exclusive club, it makes sense that you don’t want to see the club becoming open to everyone.”

One major proposal some leaders have floated ahead of the summit is developing a BRICS common currency to hedge against the U.S. dollar, although it is not on the summit’s agenda and experts are highly skeptical of the plan. Economist Jim O’Neill, who first coined the BRICS term in 2001, blasted the idea of a BRICS currency as “ridiculous” and “absurd” earlier this week.

“The idea that five countries with very divergent interests and trajectories can somehow form a coherent enough union to expand its membership and stand up this hare-brained idea of a BRICS currency seems really far-fetched to me,” said J. Peter Pham, a former U.S. diplomatic envoy to African regions during the Trump administration. “I don’t expect anything of substance to come out of this summit, unless you consider the lack of substance as itself politically substantive.”

Still, even without a common currency, Beijing has capitalized on the BRICS grouping to boost its long-standing bid to internationalize the renminbi and slash its dependence on the dollar. In the run-up to the BRICS summit, a growing number of countries, including Brazil and Argentina, have used the renminbi in trade to cope with a shortage of dollars and curry favor with Beijing. These efforts are set to continue long after Johannesburg, with BRICS countries expected to deliberate how to ramp up the use of local currencies in trade at the summit. They are also set to discuss a potential common payments system and committee focused on a joint currency—although experts don’t expect any challenges to the existing global financial architecture.

Talk of a BRICS common currency is “really a reflection of a desire among some segments of the world to have some counterweight to the U.S., the U.S. economy, the dollar,” said Daniel McDowell, an expert in international political economy at Syracuse University. But “I think most of this is just in fantasy land, because I don’t see any world in which it is really going to emerge in the way some people might hope.”

4 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 2 years ago

Photo

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

April 17, 2023 (Monday)

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

APR 18, 2023

House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) was in New York City today, trying to calm jitters among investors by explaining to members of the New York Stock Exchange that the Republicans will not allow the government to default on its debts even as he insisted that the Republican Party must use the debt ceiling to enact legislative policies it can’t win through normal political negotiations.

The debt ceiling is an artificial limit to how much the Treasury can borrow to pay existing obligations to which Congress has already committed. It has nothing to do with future spending, which is hammered out in budget negotiations.

But McCarthy has not offered a budget proposal because the Republican conference cannot agree on one. Yesterday, for example, McCarthy floated the idea of cuts to food assistance for millions of low-income Americans, which Senate Republicans want no part of. Unlike House members, many of whom represent such gerrymandered districts they feel insulated from any backlash to extreme proposals, Senators run at-large. For them, cutting food support while backing tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations would be politically dangerous.

Instead, McCarthy is trying to use the threat of national default to extract the cuts extremist members of his conference want. The Biden administration has made it clear that it will not negotiate over paying the nation’s bills, especially since about a quarter of the debt was accumulated under former president Trump, $2 trillion of it thanks to tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. In those years, Congress raised the debt ceiling three times. Biden presented his own long, detailed budget, full of his own priorities, as a start to negotiations in March, and he says he is eager to sit down and hammer out the budget once McCarthy produces his own plan. McCarthy is trying to deflect from his inability to do that but is confusing the issue, suggesting that he has the right to negotiate instead over whether or not to pay our bills.

Since defaulting, or even approaching default, would devastate both the U.S. and the global economy, not even all Republicans back McCarthy’s threats. When Sara Eisen of CNBC asked McCarthy if he had the support of his party for what he is proposing, McCarthy answered, “I think I have the support of America,” and that he would “get the party behind it.”

Meanwhile, when asked about a potential default, Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, told Tony Romm of the Washington Post, “It will be financial chaos…. Our fiscal problems will be meaningfully worse.… Our geopolitical standing in the world will be undermined.”

Today, McCarthy offered to kick the can down the road by a year, raising the debt ceiling so long as the Democrats agree to cuts that he described only vaguely. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) rejected this idea out of hand, saying: “If Speaker McCarthy continues in this direction, we are headed to default.” Schumer reiterated that the Democrats will be happy to negotiate with McCarthy over the budget when he can produce a detailed plan that can get the 218 votes it needs to pass the House. He noted that McCarthy’s vague proposals are “a recycled pile of the same things he’s been saying for months, none of which has moved the ball forward an inch.”

In part, McCarthy’s problem is that many of the members of his conference are in the majority for the first time. They are discovering that it is much easier to say no when opponents are in charge than it is to hammer coalitions together to advance realistic legislation. In the New York Times today, editorial board member Michelle Cottle called many of the current House Republicans “chaos monkeys” but noted that it is McCarthy’s fault that he gave them so much power by promising things he can’t deliver—like refusing to hike the debt ceiling without cuts—and by putting them at the head of important committees.

Ohio representative Jim Jordan, for example, sits at the head of the Judiciary Committee, as well as the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, and his investigations so far have not produced the results he promised the Republican base. As Jesse Watters of the Fox News Channel put it last month: “Make me feel better, guys. Tell me this is going somewhere. Can I throw someone in prison? Can someone go to jail? Can someone get fined?”

Instead, Democrats on the committees have met Jordan’s wild rapid-fire accusations with facts that show the difference between unchallenged myth-making on right-wing media and actual governance. Today, at Jordan’s insistence, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing in New York City, a venue Jordan suggested was chosen to highlight how the policies of Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg had exacerbated violent crime, although in reality, Jordan’s attacks on Bragg for investigating former president Trump started even before Trump’s indictment in that jurisdiction.

Jordan set out to argue that Bragg was neglecting violent crime in New York City only to have Democrats point out that New York City is “not only safer than most large cities in America, it is safer than most cities of any size, and on a per capita basis, New York City is safer than most of the states of the members sitting...on the majority side,” as Jim Kessler, the co-founder and senior vice president for policy for Third Way, explained. Indeed, in 2020, Ohio’s murder rate was higher than the rate in New York City. Representative David Cicilline (D-RI) asked Jordan if the hearing could be moved to Ohio.

If one part of McCarthy’s problem is his extremist colleagues, another is that his argument is out of date. In what Catie Edmondson and Jim Tankersley of the New York Times called “a speech that was sprinkled with misleading statements and erroneous assertions,” McCarthy told the Wall Street executives, “We’re seeing in real time the effects of reckless government spending: record inflation and the hardship it causes….”

In reality, the inflation that plagued the U.S. as it reopened from the worst days of the Covid-19 pandemic has slowed dramatically, making it clear that the policies of the Biden administration are working. As Jennifer Rubin noted yesterday in the Washington Post, the annual inflation rate for producers is 2.7%—the lowest rate in more than two years—while consumer price increases are at their lowest point since May 2021: 5%. Gasoline prices have dropped 17.4% since the high prices that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The overall declines mark nine months of slowing inflation.

At the same time, labor force participation is at record high levels and unemployment is at a 50-year low of 3.5%. Black unemployment, which stands at 5%, has never been lower. Real incomes—that is, incomes after inflation is factored in—have risen 7% for those making $35,000 a year or less and 1.3% across the whole economy. Meanwhile, the deficit has dropped more than $1.7 trillion in two years.

The successes of Biden’s policies would seem worth considering in negotiations, but as Sarah Longwell noted in Bulwark+ today, the Republican Party has abandoned normal democratic politics. She notes that it is a mistake to look at the Trump years as a wild period from which the party will return to normality. Instead, she notes, “You have to think of Trump’s election as year zero” because “Republican voters say they don’t want any part of a Republican party that looks anything like it did before 2016.”

Trump’s administration was a culmination of forty years of Republican attempts to get rid of taxes and regulations by insisting that anyone calling for business regulation and a basic social safety net was a socialist who wanted to redistribute tax dollars from hardworking white men to minorities and women. But the racism, sexism, and religion in that formula used to be the quieter undertones of the call for small government. Now, though, the party is openly embracing the replacement of democracy with a strong government that would make white Christian nationalism the law of the land.

In illustration of that position, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who has used the government to impose a Christian agenda on his state, today continued his crusade against the Walt Disney Company. A year ago, angry that then–chief executive officer Bob Chapek opposed his measure limiting discussion of gender identity in public school classrooms, DeSantis tried to take control of the company’s special self-governing district through a new board. Shortly before the takeover, Disney CEO Bob Iger outfoxed DeSantis by legally changing the terms of the agreement under which it has operated for decades, limiting the power of the board in perpetuity.

After Trump officials mocked him for being beaten by Mickey Mouse, DeSantis today suggested he is determined to use the power of the government to force Disney, a private company, to bend to his authority. He threatened to build a rival amusement park or a state prison on land next to Disney’s Florida park.

Disney promptly responded by advertising a “first-ever Disneyland After Dark” LGBTQIA+ themed event night at its California Disneyland resort, and former Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele tweeted: “When families stop visiting & Disney’s $75.2B economic impact & $5.8B tax revenues drop; its 75K employees face layoffs & 463K jobs are also imperiled what would your analytics say caused that to happen? WTF, Dumbo.”

—

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #Debt Ceiling #Disney #DeSantis #Christian Nationalism #white Supremacy #white supremacist #McCarthy #clown car #NYSE #Horsey #House GOP clown show

7 notes · View notes

dumbestthingiveeverheard · 1 year ago

Text

Dumbest Thing I've Ever Heard: 7/18/2023

Third Place: J.D. Vance

While talking on Fox News about the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Vance said the following:

The United States has the largest military budget in the world and is so overblown that at one point in 2016 CIA backed groups in Syria were fighting with Pentagon backed groups in the same country, but suddenly--as soon as it becomes time to defend a small democratic country against a large imperial force--we run out of money.

The same interview saw him saying this:

I don't even feel like I need to add commentary, Aaron Rupar did it for me.

Second place: Jesse Watters of Fox News

Speaking on The Five last night, Jesse said the following about the recent heatwaves all across the country:

The left rushing to blame global warming for that dangerous heatwave gripping the nation and the world right now.

Next you'll tell me they blame bullets when somebody dies of a bullet wound. In case any of you are curious, Jesse did not explain how this was unrelated to climate change--instead he and his buddies decided to just spend the next five minutes mocking some activists in Germany who glued their hands to airports to protest climate change. Maybe if the protesters stormed the German Parliament The Five would have had more respect for them.

Winner: Marjorie Taylor Greene

I'm just going to quote from Kiel James Patrick's recent Press Conference:

Over the weekend, the Congresswoman, Majority Leader Taylor Greene, criticized Bidenomics as being in line with FDR's creation of Social Security, and Lyndon Johnson's creation of Medicare. She also bizarrely attacked Bidenomics because it's reducing poverty in rural areas. We agree with her all around, all around on this. We are opposed to rural poverty, and the President is committed to protect Medicare and committed to protect Social Security, as you heard from him over and over again over the past several months. Now, to be fair, we are aware of her misgivings about Medicare and Social Security because she's a member of the Republican Study Committee, which recently, again, proposed cutting those very benefits. But this is the first time that we are aware of being attacked for trying to reduce rural poverty, although we probably should have seen that coming since Majority Leader Taylor Greene or Marjorie Taylor Greene is also trying to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act, policies that are responsible for high-paying manufacturing jobs coming back to her own district. Now, President Biden looks forward to visiting her district, as you've heard him say many times before, to highlight those good-paying jobs and the differences that they are making in the lives of real people on the ground.

Marjorie Taylor Greene, you've said the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

#jd vance #jesse watters #marjorie taylor greene

4 notes · View notes

atleastimnotcalledrock · 1 year ago

Text

At the Labour conference on October 10th, Keir Starmer, leader of the opposition (the Labour party) was covered in glitter by a protester saying 'True democracy is citizen led. Politics needs an update. We demand a people's House.'

So I did a bit of research on the protester and apparently he's affiliated with a group called People Demand Democracy who as the name suggests want to make the system more democratic.

According to their website, they are 'calling for a fair, proportional voting system for Westminster elections and a permanent, legally-binding national House of Citizens, selected by democratic lottery,' because 'we need a democratic alternative that gives the people of the UK a voice to deal with the major challenges of our time: rampant inequality, an escalating climate crisis, political corruption and on.' (https://www.peopledemanddemocracy.com/news)

Look I'm not saying that we shouldn't be looking for ways to make the system more democratic and representative but I think there are drawbacks to the solutions that they have proposed.

1: The introduction of proportional representation

The system currently used in the UK is the first past the post system in which each constituency (or area) votes for their MP who sits in the House of Commons, therefore they have a 'seat' in parliament. The party with the most 'seats' forms the government. The idea is a government will get a majority so it is easier to pass legislation.

The drawbacks of proportional representation is that it is less likely for parties to win an outright majority. In response two parties will form a coalition government so will have to work together. The problem with this is that frequently the two parties dont agree and so very little gets done. The last coalition government in the UK was between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in 2011.

Both systems have their flaws. Though proportional representation is undoubtedly more democratic I don't think that it will create the strongest government. At some point you have to sacrifice democracy for stability and where the current system just manages to toe the line, proportional representation can be considered a step to far. That's not to say it doesn't work in other countries but not for the UK

2: The introduction of a House of Citizens alongside the existing House of Commons and the House of Lords

I'll try and run though this quick

In House of Lords (red) sits 'experts' in their field as well as hereditary peers (some people think that practice is outdated). They scrutinise the government. Legislation must go though both houses before it can be passed.

House of Commons (green) contains the government (PM, ministers, shadow ministers) and all the other MPs. Here debates are held about bills, as well as Prime Minister Question time.

These houses make up the Houses of Parliament

The problem with a 'House if Citizens' is that it would be trying to do what the House of Commons is supposed to do. (I understand it doesn't always do what it should but stick with me)

The House of Commons is where the people, the commoners, are represented. If a House of Citizens was introduced to 'give the people of the UK a voice' it suggests that the House of Commons is not doing their task correctly. I'd assume that to make the House of Citizens truly representative of the people, stipulations would be added so that you could only be there depending on your income or job title perhaps.

If that were the case, there would create a larger class divide and more disolutionment with democracy seeing that the House of Citizens would focus on 'climate crisis' and 'political corruption'. Though these are both very important topics, they're not exactly the budget or international affairs. It suggests that the everyday person is only capable of managing the seemingly insignificant parts of politics, and that the important stuff needs to be left to the 'professionals' in the Commons.

I think that though it's good in theory the optics look bad. There would be room then for the House of Commons to take more control over public life because they, too, have been voted in but for the 'important' matters, and so 'must be more capable than the Citizens' because they're in the Commons.

I think thats a really cynical view for me to hold but I do believe that the solutions proposed by People Demand Democracy are too optimistic in places. I would like a committee to look into political corruption and for it to be taken more seriously though because recently there have been so many scandals we've all become desensitised to them.

We do need change in our political system.

The only question is: How?

#keir starmer #glitter #house of commons #People Demand Democracy #uk politics #government #british politics #labour party #Labour party conference

3 notes · View notes

llewelynpritch · 2 years ago

Text

President of Vanuatu, His Excellency Nikenike Vurobaravu, stood up in the UN General Assembly

STOCKHOLM+50 CONFERENCE CLOSES WITH FOSSIL FUEL PHASE OUT RECOMMENDATION

Vanuatu recently launched efforts to secure an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the human rights impacts of climate change 23 September 2022

Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty

‘I want to be upfront with you: we’ve never asked for donations for the Fossil Fuel Treaty campaign, but we have a huge opportunity over the coming months and need your support. Here’s why:

A year ago, a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty was just an idea.

Now, it’s a proposal formally supported by governments, presidents, and UN institutions. In recent months alone, we have secured endorsements from Vanuatu, Tuvalu, the European Parliament and the World Health Organisation.

At COP27 we even saw 85 countries call for the world to move away from all fossil fuels, but because the UN climate talks are a consensus-based process it was not possible for oil and gas to even be mentioned in the formal outcome. This has further strengthened the case for a new treaty explicitly addressing the threat of coal, oil and gas — a mechanism that wouldn’t require consensus between every major oil producer, and wouldn’t let 600+ fossil fuel lobbyists in the door.

In the coming months, we need to engage with many of these nation-states, encouraging them to join Vanuatu and Tuvalu in securing a negotiating mandate for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty. But to do this we need your help.

Click here to be one of the first individuals in the world to make a donation to the Fossil Fuel Treaty campaign.

Fossil fuels are fuelling war, threatening our health, and wreaking havoc with our climate. The production of coal, oil and gas is a paramount danger that demands governments to urgently work on a global solution commensurate with the scale of this crisis.

Our leaders have negotiated treaties to collectively manage and restrict dangerous products before – from landmines to nukes, to chemicals that were destroying the ozone.

Now we need the same level of international cooperation on a fast and fair transition away from fossil fuel production.

One thing that often gives me hope is that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was negotiated in just three years.

The writing is on the wall for the fossil fuel industry and markets, communities and countries are already beginning to transition. Now we need a treaty to fast-track these efforts and ensure that the global shift from fossil fuels is not just fast, but also fair.

Let’s build on this current momentum and work toward securing a negotiating mandate for a Fossil Fuel Treaty. Can you donate to help support our work at this critical moment?

I can’t quite believe how far we’ve come, and I’m excited to be on this journey together with thousands of people around the world who are calling for a Fossil Fuel Treaty. Between COP26 in the UK and COP27 in Egypt, we’ve built so much momentum. I can only imagine where this bold proposal will be in another year’s time.’

With hope,

Tzeporah Berman

Chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative

29 November 2022

LINK

https://lnkd.in/e6J_2Q4A FOSSIL FUEL NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY ‘I want to be upfront with you: we’ve never asked for donations for the Fossil Fuel Treaty campaign, but we have a huge opportunity over the coming months and need your support. Here’s why:’ from Tzeporah Berman, Chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative 29 November 2022 #opportunity

#opportunity #fossilfuelnonproliferationtreaty #rapidlyphaseoutfossilfuels #rapidlycutatmosphercigreenhaousegasemissions #turnbacktheclock

2 notes · View notes

warningsine · 5 months ago

Text

NEW YORK (AP) — The entertainment giant Paramount will merge with Skydance, closing out a decades-long run by the Redstone family in Hollywood and injecting desperately needed cash into a legacy studio that has struggled to adapt to a shifting entertainment landscape.

It also signals the rise of a new power player, David Ellison, the founder of Skydance and son of billionaire Larry Ellison, the founder of the software company Oracle.

Shari Redstone’s National Amusements has owned more than three-quarters of Paramount’s Class A voting shares through the estate of her late father, Sumner Redstone. She had battled to maintain control of the company that owns CBS, which is behind blockbuster films such as “Top Gun” and “The Godfather.”

Just weeks after turning down a similar agreement with Skydance, however, Redstone agreed to a deal on terms that had not changed much.

“Given the changes in the industry, we want to fortify Paramount for the future while ensuring that content remains king,” said Redstone, who is chair of Paramount Global.

The new combined company is valued at around $28 billion. In connection with the proposed transaction, which is expected to close in September 2025 pending regulatory approval, a consortium led by the Ellison family and RedBird Capital will be investing $8 billion.

Skydance, based in Santa Monica, California, has helped produce some major Paramount hits in recent years, including Tom Cruise films like “Top Gun: Maverick” and installments of the “Mission Impossible” series.

Skydance was founded in 2010 by David Ellison and it quickly formed a production partnership with Paramount that same year. If the deal is approved, Ellison will become chairman and chief executive officer of what’s being called New Paramount.

Ellison outlined the vision for New Paramount on a conference call about the transaction Monday. In addition to doubling down on core competencies, notably with a “creative first” approach, he stressed that the company needs to transition into a “tech hybrid” to stay competitive in today’s evolving media landscape.

“You’ve watched some incredibly powerful technology companies move into the ... media space and do so very successfully,” Ellison said. He added that it was “essential” for New Paramount to chart a similar course going forward.

That includes plans to “rebuild” the Paramount+ streaming service, Ellison noted — pointing to wider goals to expand direct-to-consumer business, such as increasing engagement time on the platform and reducing user churn. He also said that the company aims to transition to more cloud-based production and continue the use of generative artificial intelligence to boost efficiency.

Executives also outlined further restructuring plans for New Paramount on Monday’s conference call, with chairman of RedBird Sports and Media Jeff Shell noting that they had identified some $2 billion in cost efficiencies and synergies that they’ll “attempt to deliver pretty rapidly.”

Shell and others addressed the declining growth of linear TV. Flagship linear brands will continue to represent a big chunk of the company’s operations, but learning how to run this portion of business differently will be key, he said.

The on-again, off-again merger arrives at tumultuous time for Paramount, which has struggled to find its footing for years and its cable business has been hemorrhaging. In an annual shareholder meeting in early June, the company also laid out a restructuring plan that included major cost cuts.

Leadership at Paramount was also volatile earlier this year after its CEO Bob Bakish, following a number of disputes with Redstone, was replaced with an “office of the C.E.O,” run by three executives. Four company directors were also replaced.

Paramount is one of Hollywood’s oldest studios, dating back its founding in 1914 as a distributor. Throughout its rich history, Paramount has had a hand in releasing films — from “Sunset Boulevard” and “The Godfather,” to “Raiders of the Lost Ark” and “Titanic.”

The studio also distributed several early Marvel Cinematic Universe films, including “Iron Man” and “Thor,” before the Disney acquisition. In addition to “Mission: Impossible” and “Top Gun,” Paramount’s current franchises include “Transformers,” “Star Trek” and “Jackass.”

While Paramount has not topped the annual domestic box office charts for over a decade, the wild box office success of “Top Gun: Maverick” in 2022 (nearly $1.5 billion worldwide) was an important boon to both movie theaters and the industry’s pandemic recovery.

Still, its theatrical output has declined somewhat in recent years. Last year it released only eight new movies and came in fifth place for overall box office at around $2 billion — behind Universal (24 films), Disney (17 films), Warner Bros. and Sony.

This year the release calendar is similarly modest, especially with the absence of “Mission: Impossible 8,” which was pushed to 2025 amid the strikes. The studio has had some successes, with “Bob Marley: One Love” and “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and still to come is Ridley Scott’s “Gladiator” sequel.

The National Association of Theatre Owners, a trade organization that represents over 35,000 screens in the U.S., said in a statement Monday that it plans to look closely at the details of the merger with an eye towards whether it will produce more or less theatrical releases.

“We are encouraged by the commitment that David Ellison and the Skydance Media team have shown to theatrical exhibition in the past,” said Michael O’Leary, president and CEO of the National Association of Theatre Owners. “A merger that results in fewer movies being produced will not only hurt consumers and result in less revenue, but negatively impact people who work in all sectors of this great industry – creative, distribution and exhibition.”

Sumner Redstone used National Amusements, his family’s movie theater chain, to build a vast media empire that included CBS and Viacom, which have merged and separated a number of times over the years. Most recently, the companies re-joined forces in 2019, undoing the split consummated in 2006. The company, ViacomCBS, changed its name to Paramount Global in 2022.

Under Sumner Redstone’s leadership, Viacom became one of the nation’s media titans, home to pay TV channels MTV and Comedy Central and movie studio Paramount Pictures.

It is a company with a rich history, as well as a deep bank of media assets, and Skydance wasn’t the only one to gun for Paramount in recent months — Apollo Global Management and Sony Pictures also made competing offers.

Late last year, Warner Bros. Discovery also made headlines for exploring a potential merger with Paramount. But by February, Warner had reportedly halted those talks.

#business #economy #Paramount Global #Skydance Media

0 notes

arpov-blog-blog · 10 months ago

Text

Republicans have for years called on President Joe Biden to address the crisis on the border, insisting that the elevated flow of migrants is an urgent national security threat and calling for legislation to address it. But with an agreement in sight after four months of negotiations, many in the GOP now say that Congress doesn’t need to pass new legislation and that Biden ought to simply take executive action to fix it. Some have openly admitted they don’t want to give Biden a victory ahead of the November presidential election by letting him take off the table an issue on which he rates poorly among the electorate.

The deal would reportedly require the U.S. to close the border if a seven-day average of illegal crossings reaches or climbs past 5,000 encounters. It would also speed up the asylum process, which has long suffered from a lack of resources and an overwhelmed immigration court system.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) called out opponents of the bill for rejecting proposals to toughen border enforcement that her party had insisted on from the beginning, though few in the GOP seem to be listening.

“It was the Republicans, I will remind you, that told the Democrats months ago that if you want to try to get your Ukraine funding, you’re going to have to take up the border issue,” Murkowski said. “This is what we asked for... let’s take up what we asked for.”

The growing opposition within the GOP has frustrated Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who has for months been engaged in painstaking talks to craft the measure alongside Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.).

Lankford, who is well-liked on both sides of the aisle, said he has had conversations individually with each GOP senator and leadership in the House in an attempt to correct “misinformation” and “internet rumors” about its provisions. Trump allies have alleged all sorts of things without viewing the bill, including that it provides “amnesty” to undocumented immigrants, a dirty word on the right.

“I feel like the guy standing in the middle of a field in a thunderstorm holding up a metal stick,” Lankford said Thursday, according to PunchBowl News.

“For any of my colleagues that want to do this, go do the work on it,” he added. “But don’t just do a press conference. Actually sit down with the other side and figure out what we can actually resolve.”

The bill will need at least 10 Republican votes to overcome a filibuster on the Senate floor. But it will likely need even more GOP support ― a majority of the Senate Republican Conference ― in order to have a chance of swaying the large opposition in the House."

0 notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 2 months ago

Text

Igor Bobic at HuffPost:

WASHINGTON ― Last month, GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump surprised almost everybody in the nation’s capital by floating a plan to require insurance companies to pay for the costs of in vitro fertilization for women who need it. On Tuesday, Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would do just that. It’s the second time in recent months that the GOP has filibustered the Right to IVF Act, Democratic legislation that, in addition to ensuring insurance coverage for such treatments, would also enshrine into federal law a right for individuals to receive IVF treatment as well as for doctors to provide it.

The vote fell largely along party lines, 51 to 44, short of the 60 votes the bill would’ve needed to advance. “Republicans want people to think they support IVF because they know how unpopular that position is. They want to keep their true agenda hidden from the public,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned during a press conference on the steps of the Capitol. He was flanked by his Democratic colleagues, who held up large photos of families who have used IVF. Democrats initially forced a vote on the bill in June after a ruling earlier this year by the Alabama Supreme Court that declared that frozen embryos can be considered children. IVF providers in the state responded by ceasing to offer services for fear of being held legally liable if embryos were destroyed. The GOP state legislature later passed a bill extending liability protections for IVF providers.

Republicans have insisted since then that they support IVF ― even if some in their evangelical base are opposed to the treatment ― as they seek to appeal to women voters ahead of November’s elections. “We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment,” Trump said in August when asked about IVF. “We’re going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.” Republicans have long opposed insurance mandates (spending years railing against the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, for example), and few in Congress expressed an interest in the former president’s suggestion. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a Trump ally, said flat out he wouldn’t support it, while others voiced concerns about the cost of such a proposal.

Republicans, many of whom claim to support IVF protections, voted to block the Right To IVF bill from advancing on the Senate floor.

The only two GOPers who did vote in favor were Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.

This vote is why Republicans cannot be trusted to deal with IVF in a serious manner.