#should i go for the foundation of western culture or the foundation of internet culture?

[wifegideonnav]

[wrotelovelytears]

Pluto might be in Aquarius

But that's only half the story.

Now I'm not one to believe only the planets inspire change in people but the environment they live in, their disposition and their current state of being impacts them just as much. Astrology without the consideration of culture and context is just astronomy. It has the body but not the soul.

I start with that because of all the current global happenings. I understand the importance of spiritual and religious practices, and they don't exist in a bubble of their own. It is highly related to the cultural movements and ethnic practices of a region. If we are going to be honest religions/spirituality would not exist with out those cultural foundations. Literally there would be nothing if ethnic and cultural differences didn't play a role.

Hoodoo wouldn't exist if African Americans didn't. The Greek Pantheon wouldn't be a thing if the ancient Greeks didn't interact with the Egyptians, Nubians and Macedonians. And it should be very well known the Romans stole their whole flow and rebranded. The same Romans who took Christianity and set the foundation for the many versions we see today.

I say all that because I've noticed a lack of connecting between the social/political climate, traditions and belief systems. We can't pretend that Vedic astrology isn't an actual part of Hinduism because it wouldn't exist if Hinduism wasn't here. And Hinduism is the result of two very different populations interacting with one getting colonized and pushed south and the other needing a system/ belief to justify it. We can't pretend that tropical astrology isn't a more Eurocentric method because the signs, planets and their meanings are not the same outside of Western/Eurocentric ideology. In fact it's heavily based off of Roman and Greek interpretations, the base of Western Society as a whole.

I'm not going to pretend that Pluto moving into Aquarius is the only reason why we suddenly "see" more social changes, more standoffish behavior, more coldness to our fellow human. All Aquarius is doing is putting it on the internet. It sent a tweet out and we all saw it. These issues aren't a magical happening, they are the result of centuries of bs pilling up. Of cultures merging in ways that weren't possible before modern technology. Of colonization. Imperialism. Chattel Slavery. The Arab Slave trade. Ethnic cleansings.

People weren't passive before the shift into Aquarius, people were ignoring it. It's really easy to do when you have no personal reason to care, in fact it's probably something all humans can relate to on one topic or another. Trust me I was heavily into activism spaces a decade ago, everything being talked about in media now was talking about then. It was talkes about when my parents were growing up in the 60s. My grandparents in the 20s/30s and so on. Aquarius just put it in our faces (again, and will continue to do so) and said "now what? ".

I want people to not just lean in to spiritual/religious practices because they are popular but to look into the actual meanings they have. I want people to understand that yes you can be spiritual/religious and your ethnic background does impact how you practice. I want people to understand these changes we see in France (they lost their standing in Africa, literally all their former colonies told it to cope, and that's leading to their collapse), South Korea (this is not the first, and sadly won't be the last time, power has been abused under the name of "anti communism", in fact ask South East Asians how they treated there and you'll see this was going to happen), the United States (a country founded on genocide and racism isn't going to magically be less of those because a Black woman got to run for office) etc aren't solely a shift in the Star positions.

I see people point out the French Revolution happened the last time Pluto was in Aquarius (but they also had lost all the land in the US and Haiti told them to fuck off, so it wasn't just not eating cake, it was the lack of slave labor to fund their empire). Or America getting it's freedom (Britain was getting close to abolishing chattel slavery (again free labor, people hate to lose their free labor), the Irish and Scottish were also giving the English a hard time, they had to pick between the people next door or the ones over the Ocean). At that time it was the lack of free labor that pushed those movements, yeah everyone didn't have slaves but they all benefited from that system.

So many astrologers say don't let the stars determine your life but literally turn around and do that. Astrology is a tool at the end of the day. That's it, because if someone doesn't believe in it that doesn't change what happens. Conformation bias would have us believe differently but that's just part of our nature to lean towards that which supports us, not questions us. It's a practice that spans the globe and millennia because we can all look up and see the same stars at night. Maybe not as bright because light pollution, not the same positions because stars go supernova and the solar system moves, but it's still up for everyone on the planet. It's something that regardless of where you go, there's some meaning to it, maybe not always spiritual but a reason nonetheless. And it's never the same, obviously or else this would be a very boring plane of existence, and there's overlap because humans gonna human no matter where we are.

I implore you to think on your upbringing. Think on your ethnic group(s). Think on your current country of residence. Think on what you were taught in school. Think on your family. Because that's what's impacting you. That's what makes you make the decisions you do. Not just Mars moving through your third house (this is just an example, if that's happening for you good for you or I hope it gets better idk) .

Pluto in Aquarius isn't bring change. It's humans and our individual motives that are and always have.

Aquarius is a sign that puts the spot light on things already in motion. It makes you think because if you don't you can't understand. It makes you detached because if you feel it too much you might get hurt. It makes you remember because this isn't the first, nor the last time it will happen. Aquarius is the personal motive made public part of human nature. The selfish desires that push for survival. The seeking of like mindedness. The drive for community, but only if it's the same as you. Aquarius is the when of the story.

[softness-and-shattering]

I have a hot take to throw out there. Apropos of nothing much in particular just a thought thats been stewing.

Cultural christianity, the idea that christianity is part of 'our' broadly 'Western' culture regardless of ones personal beliefs. Regardless of if one is a devout practising christian or a devout atheist or agnostic, many aspects of christianity are woven into your worldview and many aspects of your life. Modesty/purity culture, what you consider to be the blueprint of how religions work, how you view holidays and how often they should be and how theyre celebrated etc. etc.

My hot take is that those of us are who are actively not christian, such as myself, a Jew, we still have absorbed a lot of christianity in our cultural language. We are not immune to cultural christianity.

I can tell you a lot offhand about Xmas and how its celebrated, I will always know what date it is. I know about the christian holy books. And some about easter and I know some foundational biblr stories and christian ethics that arent from Tanach.

We translate words to christian terms. A rabbi and a cohen are very different but both are 'priests'. We call womens yeshivas 'seminary' most of the time - midrasha is catching on, sure, but why did we ever go with seminary?

Somewhere along the line we picked up purity culture. Not tahara, I mean sex tabboo. Tznius is maybe barely deoraita, the minutia is certainly not deoraita but we are *obsessed* with inches of cloth this way and that way, inches of hair, we dont do sex ed for teens even though Rashi, intended for five year olds, talks about periods and theres plenty of sex in Tanach, why is that tabboo? When did we pick that up? Why dont we give even a quartrr thay attention to tzedakah which is deoraita, for one example. (This ones a particular pet peeve of mine, if you couldnt tell).

We too are living in a christian hegemony, and we arent unaffected. We are less affected than people without a different culture to compare and contrast with, to be another perspective on the universe and our place in it. But we arent unaffected.

Again this isnt apropos of anything, its not a side of an argument happening elsewhere, not that I know of anyway. Just a thought.

Id like responses actually, just be mindful of staying in your lane and your personal experience please. Some of this is intra-community, but Im also curious how other people with non-christian culture relate to the like, one foot in the door willingly or not. Kiiind of like how english internet culture is USAmerican dominated regardless of where people are from bc yall are the majority.

And please be nice and respectful. This is the internet and I am asking this of you in my corber of it here.

[kaukio]

iNBetween2Worlds.

sometimes i wish i could really feel the authenticity of being ethiopian in a foreign country. i don't know if that makes sense but i'll try- its a feeling i never truly grasped here. in about 5 years of living in the u.s., i've never felt more distant from my own culture. meeting other diasporas here often feels surreal as well...its like an echo of what should be real but isn't. it's been hard to connect in a place where so much has been diluted or twisted. shoutout to those good few i met who are trying to fight getting westernized. i know it can get difficult.

having spent my childhood summers in Ethiopia and living there for over 2 consecutive years without going to school and no internet connection, it's a major shock to see the differences in the same culture across diff places. for an ex: the Ethio Orthodox churches in america is split by politics & ethnicities...something that didn't exist in the same way back home- hell even in kuwait. we weren't allowed a place of worship there so Abas had to host their church services in basements of peoples home. and the way many habeshas here have made their entire identity abt being habesha but haven't even visited once is alien to me. i haven't met anyone like that anywhere except in america, which makes sense lol. it's a disconnect that feels so dystopian.

and then there are those who mindlessly support the ethio government, ignoring it's wrongdoings simply bc its "where they're from" whole time being born and raised here. i'm sorry but ethnic pride should never fuel ethnic cleansing. if u truly love ur heritage, u should be opposing injustice, not supporting it or being silent. these examples are what made me step away from getting too involved...the dissonance is too much.

right now, all i want is to return. to live off this land again and feel the rhythm of the life i once knew. this time around, with a purpose in mind. i've always thought that maybe i was drifting away from my culture, but what i'm really doing is waiting to reconnect w whats real. it's hard to say but everything feels like it's built on a foundation that no longer makes sense. i envy those who can still find a connection to their culture outside of their homeland, but for me, it's clear that i can't. i would do anything to go back to addis and heal my connection. only then would i feel whole again and not feel like i'm living in someone else's version of reality.

[rouiettes]

raya and the ugliest fucking dragon i've ever seen holy fuck who the hell thought to give a dragon fuckiNG EYEBROWS WHY WHY—

aka the musings of a filo non-binary bisexual who feels victimized by the dragon designs of this fucking movie supposedly centred around THE LAST DRAGON???? MAYBE THEY SHOULD HAVE STAYED STONE GDI WHAT THE FUCK SERIOUSLY WHY DO THE DRAGONS LOOK LIKE THAT

let's get one thing straight.

none of the characters in this movie. rest assured. not a single straight person was in this movie. trust me.

raya and the last dragon had all the foundations of a good movie

IT COULD HAVE BEEN SO GREAT

BUT IT WASNT

AND HERE'S WHY

(in my humble opinion okay pls dont come for me)

a disney movie with sea culture at its heart and soul, i was so hyped to finally watch this movie

(not as hyped as i could have been tho bc let's be honest DISNEY DID SHIT WITH RAYA'S MARKETING)

(AND PERHAPS FOR GOOD REASON LOL I SWEAR I DONT HATE THIS MOVIE OKAY)

you had the amazing score, the amazing concepts for plot and characters, the solid solid worldbuilding???

if you just told me about how raya's setting and premise, i'd probably be "wow this movie sound like the whole package"

and then i'll actually watch the movie and have just as much trust issue as raya did :/

but i digress

A DISNEY MOVIE WITH SEA CULTURE AT ITS HEART AND SOUL

do you know how diverse sea culture is??? VERY

and one thing i was very happy to see was how raya handled it

it was by no means perfect but

the subtle shows of culture in the way the characters acted, and the environment of the movie was just CHEF'S KISS

not only that but the ideas the movie had in terms of its world and the people in it felt genuine, it felt alive

a dragon that isn't the typical fire-breathing lizard

characters who look like they could easily be my neighbours or children i've played with

instead of pandering to this movie felt like an actual homage to sea cultures

and for good reason bc seeing all those familiar names rolling in the credits had me feeling some type of way :")

also that fucking soundtrack gave me chills throughout my watch of the movie

okay now that we've got the things i actually like about the movie, let's talk about what i don't like

if there's one word i could use to describe disney's raya it would be: rushed

like i said in the beginning, all the groundwork for an astounding disney movie were already there

but all of it just goes to waste bc the plot and it's characters feel so Unfinished

the movie felt like a bullet-point presentation of the story

WHICH IS SO FUCKING DISAPPOINTING BC THE CHARACTERS SEEMED SO INTERESTING but all we got were shadows of what they could have been

cardboard cutouts of the archetypes they filled

i'm not asking for a bottomless well of depth, but i at least wanted more for the cast than just: angry misunderstood princess, angry misunderstood princess with an undercut, that one dancing kid from moana but with more spice, boss baby, and the mountain

and i get that they had to sacrifice some of their depth to keep the run time of the movie short but you have got to be better than this disney

i hate to compare but it felt like this movie tried to go beyond what moana gave us, and shot so far that it ended up back to where it started, and then stumbled back a few steps

AND IM NOT EVEN SAYING A DRAGON MOVIE WITH A BIG CAST IS IMPOSSIBLE

BC IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE

HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON DID IT THREE TIMES

and you'd think the plot for one of the few disney movies with a non-western setting would have more than just a macguffin considering how batshit sea folk tales can be

but you'd think wrong folks.

GENUINELY IT FELT LIKE THEY WERE ATTEMPTING SOMETHING BUT WERE SHORT OF BRINGING IT TO FRUITION

sure moana had a macguffin too with the heart of te fiti, but the heart itself wasn't the heart of the movie

it was the journey of moana and maui

it was that BEAUTIFUL TWIST WITH TE KA AND TE FITI

ALL DELIVERED WITH A NATURAL FINESSE THAT HAD YOU ON THE EDGE OF YOUR SEAT

YOU WERE ALONG FOR THE RIDE OF THE STORY INSTEAD OF QUESTIONING EVERYTHING THAT WAS GOING ON LIKE I WAS

maybe this was just me but like, i felt so bad for the friend who watched this movie with me bc all i could go on and on was how the plot felt like it was getting in the way of itself

why didn't the different kingdoms (??) kept the gem in rotation or smth, when did they decide that heart would keep it and then get mad at heart for keeping it????

why didn't awkwafina dragon just show herself to the kingdoms bc everyone seems to be in agreement that dragons good right? that they would be the key to getting rid of the druun right??? SO THEY'D ALL AT LEAST HEAR HER OUT OR SMTH RIGHT????????

and yes raya has trust issues but it seems to only spring up at the most convenient times plot-wise, we didn't really see her learn to trust other people again OTHER THAN THE TIMES WHERE SISU WOULD HAMFISTEDLY SHOVE IT DOWN OUR THROATS THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE GOOD SOMETIMES RAYA

we see it with boun, but then she just trusts noi, her monkeys, and tong THE GUY WHO STRUNG THEM UP AND WAS THREATENING TO TORTURE THEM????????

i'm gonna be honest and say that if it weren't for namaari i'd have absconded the moment sisu came on screen

as far as i'm considered the actual plot of the movie is just the entire sword fight scene between her and raya

and finally

we get to the part i will be erasing from my brain for my own mental well-being

WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT DRAGON DESIGN

WHY OH WHY TH  E FUCK DOES SISU SOUND AND LOOK LIKE THAT

my friend said they looked like the ponies from mlp in 3d AND NOW I CAN NEVER UNSEE IT

THEY HAVE EYEBROWS THEY HAVE HUMAN FACES

HUMAN FACES ON MAJESTIC DRAGON BODIES

THE INTERNET HAS COLLECTIVELY DECIDED THAT SISU IS BASICALLY FURRY ELSA

every time we got a sisu close up i lost 5 years to my life

disney i am suing for damages

if you want me to drop the charges i demand raya 2: electric boogaloo but it’s just raya and namaari enemies to friends to lovers ark

and also for them to never say dragon nerds ever again

AGAIN. HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON GAVE US BEAUTIFUL DRAGON DESIGNS. HELL IF YOU WANTED MORE EASTERN LOOKING DRAGONS FUCKING SPIRITED AWAY??? HAKU??????????

AND YKNOW WHAT. SISU WOULDN'T EVEN LOOK THAT HORRIFIC IF THE MOVIE WAS IN 2D

im not the first person to be side-eying disney's decision to keep pumping out these 3d movies but like.

no amount of added dimensions could ever make that dragon design okay

and there so many more points i could go off on to show how this movie was rushed

how the other dragons, and even sisu's siblings whom she had been missing for the entire movie DIDNT MAKE A SINGLE SOUND???? NOT EVEN A FUCKING GROWL DISNEY???? DID YOU EVEN TRY WITH THE DRAGONS AT ALL??? THE SUPPOSED CENTRE OF THIS MOVIE'S PLOT?????????

HOW THE CHIEFS OF THE OTHER KINGDOMS WERE BASICALLY PLOT DEVICES????

THAT ONE CHIEF'S SKELETON WAS MORE INTERESTING THAN ANY OF THEM COMBINED ALIVE

kudos to that one granny chief though

u can never have enough bad ass old ladies

AND GOD THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ANY OF THE CHARACTERS JUST FELT SO FORCED

ALONG WITH WHATEVER LESSON SISU WANTED TO IMPART ABOUT TRUST

LOVE THESE CHARACTERS THEY ARE FUNNY THEY ARE FRIENDS FOUND FAMILY

TRUST PEOPLE IF U WANT THEM TO TRUST U

TRUST PEOPLE OR ILL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL U

children aren't stupid disney. if you tell your story well enough, they'll pick up on the messages you want to give them. YOU DONT HAVE TO THRUST EVERYTHING IN OUR FACES

i was exhausted by the time i finished this movie

bc i really wanted to love it. i wanted to feel more for it than just: well, it's a movie :)

i dont hate this movie though like it's not even worth the energy for that

i think that ultimately, despite all my issues with it, this movie was a step in the right direction when it comes to having non-western stories being told by non-western people in big name productions

i'm glad raya and the last dragon exists

i just can't help but be dissapointed though bc this movie put so much effort into putting my people and culture at its forefront but at what cost???

good characters and story for a good setting and design????

does it have to be one or the other?????

DOES THE DRAGON HAVE TO HAVE EYEBROWS??????

[workersolidarity]

One thing that should unite the left more than ever is that we're all being fucked over capitalism in general. Especially if you live in a culture that is built on commodification and capitalism, and to break through the lies that we have told and try to do good by leftism is noble and it betters humanity the more leftism rises.

I would hope. But just like the early 1930's, were at a junction of history. Neoliberal Capitalism could easily degrade into more Nationalism and the continued rise of Fascism.

Or trend could go towards the Socialist Left.

The part that worries me is how the Ruling Class has such a brutally tight grip on Western culture. They've been so effective in their propaganda over the years that it's now acceptable to read Mein Kampf and try to "understand Hitler".

You walk into many public libraries and book stores and easily find a copy of Mein Kampf or an awfully generous biography of Goebbels.

But good luck trying to find a copy of Foundations of Leninism or Dialectical and Historical Materialism anywhere besides the internet.

Somehow the Bourgeoisie have convinced the public that, yeah, Fascism is bad, but it's okay to be a little Fascist-curious.

But Stalin, oh my Lord! Now that guy is completely and utterly unacceptable to read or try understanding! He's "worse than Hitler" and "killed more people in the Soviet Union than Hitler did in the Holocaust" are refrains I hear all the time.

Nevermind that the entire Anti-Stalin/Anti-Communism paradigm is based on out-and-out lies. Nevermind that a little Independent research debunks any and all claims of Stalin's supposed crimes. Doesn't matter!

Even among other Socialists you'll hear the same tired lies, most of which can be traced to Trotsky (somehow he's an acceptable Socialist but not Stalin), or from Krushchev's "Secret Speech", and some of the lies come directly out of fictional literature from the Cold War Era! Yet, even so-called "Leftists", "Socialists", and "Anarchists" who question anything their Government says about any other topic, disbelieve the Corporate Media on topics of War, but swallow without question these baseless lies about Stalin and the Soviet Union.

This is such a remarkable stranglehold on a narrative of Revisionist History, I'm stunned whenever someone actually questions it.

Consider some other well worn lies that people swallow hook-line-and-sinker.

A. America won the war against Fascism

Nevermind the fact that the US didn't even enter the European Front until the tide had turned. Ask any Westerner and they'll tell you it was the US that defeated the Nazis and Fascism, and liberated the Concentration camps.

B. America entered World War II to defend "Freedom" (whatever that means), to Liberate the Jews, to defeat Fascism and Nazism, and to defend "Western Values" (another meaningless refrain repeated without thought everywhere in the Western world).

Again, completely ignoring the fact that the US didn't even enter the War until the Red Army was marching on Berlin. Nevermind, that the US was only interested in preventing a Europe united under Socialism. Nevermind that any Holocaust survivor remembers like it was yesterday exactly who Liberated them from the Concentration camps; and Earth to America! It wasn't us!

These are just the most obvious examples of how the Bourgeois of the Western Imperialist Powers have a complete stranglehold on the Narratives that even most Leftists still believe.

You're allowed to question anything in America. As long as that anything isn't the Historical Revisionism of the Second World War or the Anti-Stalin Paradigm.

So for me, the question becomes, how exactly do we educate the Proletariat in Western Nations if we can't even get them to believe that Stalin didn't kill 60 million Soviet Citizens (out of 100 million total) and the Soviet Union wasn't an Totalitarian dictatorship that was essentially the same as Nazi Germany?

I mean, how do you build Socialism when the Bourgeoisie have convinced the world that the only example of Socialism to have ever existed wasn't actually Socialist but was instead akin to Fascism?

And now even the word "Socialism" is being debased by Liberals and Social Democrats to mean something completely different from what it is? If prominent Politicians and Political figures are allowed to go around claiming Sweden is a Socialist country, then how do you ever convince people that this not only isn't true, but real Socialism looks like the Boogieman of Nation States the Soviet Union?

How do we reclaim Socialism from the Capitalists and Liberals? Better yet, how can we reclaim Socialism with scaring off Working Class when they have disinformation coming, not only from their enemies, but also from the Petty-Bourgois Political figures who've convinced them they're on their side?

We're essentially battling multiple disinformation campaigns coming from all sides. How can we blame the Working Class for being confused by all this?

And this is how the Bourgeois Class of today operates. They allow Liberals to reclaim Socialism without challenging it all that much because they see how this will only add to the confusion and divisions of the Working Class; essentially assuring enough confusion to keep a genuine Revolutionary Proletariat from forming.

Which leads me back to the beginning. Things can go either way right now. But with Liberals being so distrusted and no adding to the difficulties facing Communists in building a genuinely Revolutionary Working Class, I see Workers facing a much easier path towards Fascism than I do Socialism.

I don't know what to do other than educate people as best I can, involve myself in local Socialist Organizations as I already do, and just hope that something profound changes in the radicalization process for Workers.

We need to build a broad infrastructure on the Socialist Left that can bring diverse viewpoints that share a unified vision for Revolution together. This has to include a network of Revolutionary Socialist media productions such as podcasts, radio shows, websites and news sources, as well as a network of Socialist Organizations and Parties; basically some type of connecting Infrastructure that as it grows and matures, could eventually lead to a unified Vanguard Party that will hopefully be able by then to be dominated by Marxist-Leninists while slowly shedding it's more Right Wing and Opportunist wings of the Party.

That's the only way I can visualize an actual path towards Revolution. Any goal less than that is doomed to fail. That should be clear to everyone after Venezuela and Bolivia this year.

So yeah, again I've gone way way over the top in response to a comment, but this is the most important issue facing the Socialist Movement. I have some hope, I do. Just not a whole hell of a lot.

[jkottke]

The Best Books of 2019 (So Far)

It started in mid-April, barely 3 and 1/2 months into the year. To hit expectant readers before Memorial Day with suggestions for beach reads, summer reads, roadtrip reads, and just plain read reads, publications started rounding up the best books released in 2019:

Best books of 2019 so far (The Guardian) The Best Books of 2019 (So Far) (Vulture) The Best Books of 2019 (So Far) (Real Simple) The Best Books of 2019 (So Far) (Glamour) The Best Books of 2019 to Add to Your Reading List (Marie Claire) The Best Books of 2019 (So Far) (Esquire)

I love that almost everyone uses the same title -- it's economical and the "(So Far)" is a wink that, yes, it's a more than a little absurd to be talking about the best books of the year in freaking April. Of course, I couldn't resist using it too.

But never mind the meta crap, what books are actually on these lists? Here are some that caught my eye or featured on one or more of these lists.

Normal People by Sally Rooney. This one is going to be on all the year-end lists, so it's almost required reading at this point.

The Porpoise by Mark Haddon. "This contemporary story mirrors the ancient legend of Antiochus, whose love for the daughter of his dead wife was discovered by the adventurer Appolinus of Tyre. The tale appeared in many forms through the ages; Apollinus becoming the swashbuckling Pericles in Shakespeare's eponymous play."

Gingerbread by Helen Oyeyemi. "Influenced by the mysterious place gingerbread holds in classic children's stories -- equal parts wholesome and uncanny; from the tantalizing witch's house in Hansel and Gretel to the man-shaped confection who one day decides to run as fast as he can -- beloved novelist Helen Oyeyemi invites readers into a delightful tale of a surprising family legacy, in which the inheritance is a recipe."

A Thousand Ships by Natalie Haynes. A retelling of the Trojan War from the perspective of the women in the story. In the same vein as Circe and Emily Wilson's The Odyssey, both of which I loved.

Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez. I wrote about Cirado Perez's book back in February. "In her new book, Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, Caroline Criado Perez argues that the data that scientists, economists, public policy makers, and healthcare providers rely on is skewed, unfairly and dangerously, towards men."

Daisy Jones & The Six by Taylor Jenkins Reid. "A gripping novel about the whirlwind rise of an iconic 1970s rock group and their beautiful lead singer, revealing the mystery behind their infamous breakup."

Winners Take All by Anand Giridharadas. "Giridharadas asks hard questions: Why, for example, should our gravest problems be solved by the unelected upper crust instead of the public institutions it erodes by lobbying and dodging taxes?"

The History of the Bible by John Barton. "In our culture, the Bible is monolithic: It is a collection of books that has been unchanged and unchallenged since the earliest days of the Christian church. The idea of the Bible as "Holy Scripture," a non-negotiable authority straight from God, has prevailed in Western society for some time. And while it provides a firm foundation for centuries of Christian teaching, it denies the depth, variety, and richness of this fascinating text."

The Collected Schizophrenias by Esmé Weijun Wang. "Opening with the journey toward her diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, Wang discusses the medical community's own disagreement about labels and procedures for diagnosing those with mental illness, and then follows an arc that examines the manifestations of schizophrenia in her life."

You Know You Want This by Kristen Roupenian. A collection of stories from the author that broke the internet with Cat Person. Included in the collection is The Good Guy, also very much worth a read.

Save Me the Plums by Ruth Reichl. Reichl's memoir about her time at Gourmet magazine. "This is the story of a former Berkeley hippie entering the corporate world and worrying about losing her soul. It is the story of the moment restaurants became an important part of popular culture, a time when the rise of the farm-to-table movement changed, forever, the way we eat."

[rfidblocking]

What defines radical feminism as opposed to other forms of feminism, and why should people who espouse it be blocked? If you have a link to an explanation at the top of your page or something I'd appreciate just a link, as I browse Tumblr mobile and can't see it. Sincerely asking, btw. I've seen terms used in varying ways and the categories of feminist thought seem blurry to me.

Classes of feminism are not very sharply defined. Any feminist can espouse ideas influenced by radical feminism, and vice versa. Indeed, intersectional feminism is a reaction to and evolution of radical feminism.

Feminism in the Western world is roughly sorted into four “waves.” Non-western feminism addresses different cultural needs than western feminism and does not necessarily follow these patterns. It emphatically does not follow this timeline.

What we consider first wave feminism arose from upper class white women in the late 19th century. The suffragette movement, reduction of hysteria diagnoses, etc were “first wave” actions. By far, the first wave was the wave of respectability. In a world where women were property, being seen as human was already a large task.

The methodology used to achieve this “humanization” was very much focused on improving the state of the uppermost class of women, with vague notions of “coming back for the rest” later. Or not at all.

Nevertheless, first wave feminism- what we might today call “white feminism”- was the foundation upon which later western feminist ideologies were built. It is also where the first strides towards legal equality for women (voting rights, inheritance law, etc) came from.

The second wave of feminism arose in the 1960s, alongside other major protest cultures. Modern radical feminism generally considers itself to be “second wave.” Where the first wave focused on basic legal rights of personhood, the second wave focused on social limitations and domestic rights, as well as examining the specific struggles and consequences of being a woman in a man-centered society. 

This included things such as attempting to abolish dress codes that required excessive levels of modesty or infringed on the freedom of expression of women. It also included successes such as no-fault divorce, domestic abuse studies and shelters, title IX sports and education protections, etc.

It also included and fostered an enormous amount of hatred towards men. The second-wave was the wave of militancy and separatism. There was a persistent belief that if men could be eliminated from the lives of women, women would magically become utopian creatures.

This fostering of separatist attitudes also exacerbated a lot of what we would now call intersectional issues: any woman who disagreed with the party line was clearly just hypnotized by the patriarchy, and needed to be forced to agree with the party.

This led to ignoring a lot of very valid concerns from a great many women. Such as:

+ Ssecond wave feminism’s separatist attitude seeking in many cases to separate women from their sons and other beloved male family members,

+ The hatred of women who were assigned male at birth,

+ The hatred of women who worked with or for men, especially those who worked in sex,

+ Hatred for sexuality involving men,

+ Hatred for sexuality  between women,

+ Hatred for women of color,

+ Hatred for religions and religious women involved in anything other than Christian derived mother-goddess paganism,

And so on.

These are problems that still exist in today’s “radical feminists” who seek to recreate, or never left, the second wave. Indeed, while transgender status prior to the rise of second wave feminism’s influence in the US was hardly a cakewalk, it was second wave feminists, with their hatred of all things “male” who exacerbated tensions, or entirely created new ones, and created many of the most horrifying aspects of transphobia that we see today.

The third wave of feminism rose in the late 80s and early 90s.

Taking inspiration from the many, many, many women who were attacked and hated by second wave policies, the third wave of feminism, today called, “intersectional feminism,” sought to examine just what it was that caused women who weren’t in the ruling class of feminist momvements throughout history to experience a combination of patriarchal misogyny and hegemonic racism/queerphobia/classism that was greater than the sum of its parts.

Many Black and queer feminist scholars were especially active and especially well regarded during this time period. The expansion of queer theory and racial equality efforts in academia and certain public sectors including child education in the third wave time period was also a prominent influence on third wave feminism.

One especially important aspect of third wave feminism was individualism. The belief that there is no “one right way” to be a woman, and that womanhood is necessarily influenced by the individual’s other identities, as well as their internal truths. This is what led to many feminine subcultures: feminine academics, feminine punks, feminine queers.

Unfortunately, one draw back of the third wave’s strong focus on individualism was that it lacked the cohesive force of early waves. Organization of large scale protest and revolution is very difficult when no one can entirely agree on what is being fought for.

Another critical factor of the third wave, and the defining point between third and fourth wave feminism, is that the third wave existed before the spread of internet access and internet culture. This contributed to the communication problems and scale problems third wave feminists experienced.

The fourth wave of feminism is where we currently exist today.

In effect, it is the third wave, but with broadly accessible systems of communication and organization. Intersectionality 2.0, as it were.

Information overload is common in fourth wave spaces. While everyonenow knows what conflicting access needs are, at least, there is little experience in satisfactorily dealing with them.

Because so much of fourth wave feminism is “talking the talk” rather than “walking the walk,” it gives the impression of being a toothless cacophony of young modern feminists screaming at each other incoherently. Because everyone has a platform, it is difficult for leaders to emerge who are not falling back on earlier, more “cohesive” waves: the first and second.

On the other hand, when everyone has at least the potential to have a voice, then people who have existed in silence for generations finally get to speak: people with multiple stacking intersections of marginalization. People who lack the access to historic methods of learning feminist theory can now get a firm foundation in gender equality without needing to pay for 4 years at a liberal arts college. People who are too weird, too queer, to black or brown or disabled or fat or traumatized to participate in the historical forums of feminism can participate in the fourth wave, due to its strong online presence.

With easy, omnipresent recording and data collection methodologies, it becomes increasingly difficult for people to deny the existence of misogyny. With easy, omnipresent communication platforms, this data can be spread to people it could reach before. People who are trapped in controlled environments of abuse, people who are too poor or disabled or anything else to escape the small town hyper-conservative bubble they were born into.

The fourth wave has been “in progress” for between 6 and 10 years, depending on who you talk to. Currently, it doesn’t have a catchy name, but if I were going to give it one, I might call it “accessible feminism.” The barriers to entry have never been lower.

And yet, it has its many problems, too.

No social movement is perfect, because the people involved in it are not perfect. And each wave of feminism overlaps with and influences those that came before and after it.

But, given the choice, I would say each subsequent wave of feminism has been “better” than those before it, and I would also say that no wave of feminism was as openly and violently hostile as second wave feminism and the radical feminists who still espouse it. That it was more effective than the first wave is a point in its favour, but little else is.

That many modern radical feminists seek to undo the leaps and bounds we have made in the decades since radical feminism fell out of favour as the dominant feminist ideology is somewhere between regressive and openly horrifying.

So, I suppose that wasn’t necessarily as helpful as it could have been, in terms of specifically identifying radical feminist ideology today.

But with any luck, it has given you enough of a foundation upon which to build your own research in the future.

XOXOX

💮 Yazminx 💮 

PS: The title of our blog is a pun. You should only block people who you, personally, feel should be blocked. If you want to use our work as a guideline, then by all means do so. However, we are not operating any kind of blocklist here.

[duyixaun-blog]

New perceptions of different education systems

 Education has always been the most fundamental industry supporting the development of a nation and a country. This is my fifth month of my study in the UK.I deeply feel the difference between Chinese and western education, and it bring me different experience. I really cherish this learning opportunity. Next, I will introduce my learning experience and different learning skills form different aspects.

 Personal learning

 As is known to all, Britain is a country with a long tradition of education. After hundreds of years of development, it is sophisticated and complex, and flexible. Form China to UK, I think the biggest chance is learning style. lt is hard to get a university in China. Studying hard everyday may lead a good university University life and study is casual. For example, I didn’t have so many restrictions and courses in college, so I studied hard and prepare before the exam. Although I graduated successfully, I didn’t really learn anything

useful to me. In China, most universities are not difficult to graduate. Before coming to the UK, I have heard that British education is rigorous and attaches great important to graduation. If students are not good enough, then they will go back to study and graduate with good grades.

 Improvement and reflection in study

 After the first term of adjust, form the beginning of not understand and can not speck many English to now have own learning methods. Compared with the first term, the learning difficulty of the second term has increased a lot. This is a big challenge for me. First of all, I want to talk about “research”. My research topic is about marketing, I haven’t learn this course before, coupled with the

language barrier, it is difficult for me to learn. Teachers don’t give ours a direct indication of what you’re going to do, instead, let is increase our personal learning ability through this course. When we have mistakes, the teacher will not say it clearly, let us go to the library to find books to read, through own learning to correct mistake. I learned many by studying this course. It look me more than a month to finish about topic and three questions. I revised it again and studied it by myself through reading. It will be a long process, but I will feel a sense of accomplishment from what I have learned. I prefer the present teaching mode to that in my hometown. Because, compared with directly giving the template to the students to learn, we can more remember and improve our own set of learning methods through the study of books, and can stimulate

the creativity of students by using the brain to think about problems, which is more suitable for work and study in the society.

 The second one is about the course of marketing. Learn theoretical knowledge about the market first through the course. I also learned many professional knowledge. For example, the 7Ps of marketing, it includes the product, the price, the place, the promotion, the people, the process and the physical evidence. A successful marketing involves these conditions. For the marketing course, we did two assignments—a team assignment and a personal essay. In terms of team work, I would say it’s a different experience. Because, I haven’t had the group study and finish homework together in the before. There are four people in our group, we have different division of labor, to complete a task, and finally complete the essay. Through group study, it is easy to create a good learning atmosphere, help other, cultivate a good sense of teamwork and the concept of collective, help to develop students' sense of competition and

competitive ability. Then came the personal thesis of the market, analyzing the development of Internet marketing in the past ten years. I finished my essay through the professional knowledge taught by the teacher in class and searching materials in the library and searching relevant knowledge on the Internet. Last semester, we learned a course about management, through this course, I also

learned a lot, there are group study, make a speech on the stage, let me become more confident. Simon's class, let us have more practical ability, through the hands and thinking, let our thinking become more open. Also summary, let us more personal thinking and reflection ability, to make a perfect summary of their own semester.

 Change in study

 In the past, learning as a burden, for the examination and learning, is to learn to learn; In the era of knowledge economy, people gradually realize that learning is for survival, development and self-worth. Learning has become the pressure of social development, an important part of people's life, a need of life and work, as well as a pleasure. Make people actively look for opportunities to recharge themselves, become a conscious "I want to learn". In terms of time, I like to study in the evening now. After the class in the daytime, I prefer to summarize the course content in the daytime in the evening and reflect on myself. On weekends, I like to study in the library with my classmates. From the individual to the team learning, we may pay more attention to the individual learning before, but now the team accounts for a large proportion, teamwork can improve the learning ability at the same time. I also need to improve my learning ability and oral English, communicate more with teachers and classmates from other countries, improve my English expression ability,

and write more articles and reflect.

Before, the study in the school is study, it is "grow period" ability enjoys the treatment; In the era of knowledge economy, the learning process runs through one's whole life, and learning is to adapt to social changes. The unpredictability of the future becomes a powerful driving force for learning, which is lifelong in time. ln the past, learning was a personal matter, which had little to do with others. In the era of knowledge economy, team learning is emphasized. Individual IQ is very high, but the overall IQ of the team is very low. In the rapidly changing market economy competition, the team is bound to lose out. Today, a high-quality team is especially important. Only the team with good teamwork can overcome the opponent and achieve success.

 Learning objectives

 My study goal, in addition to successful graduation，Also through learning and practice to learn really useful can be used in the work, as well as listening, speaking, reading and writing comprehensive improvement. Learning goal is the direction of students' learning efforts, the correct learning goal can encourage people to forge ahead, so as to produce the power to struggle for the realization of this goal. Learning without a purpose is a great waste of time, like wandering the streets without knowing where to go. In scheduling time, we should consider not only study, but also rest and entertainment; We should consider not only in-class study, but also extra-curricular study, as well as the time combination of different subjects. I think scientific arrangement of time will make our study more efficient with half the effort. I hope that every day in addition to class time, can have more than two hours to read other extra-

curricular books, especially the reference books related to the textual research, but also have one hour to do exercises. Exercise at least three days a week. Try to read a lot in the library every weekend. Of course, it is necessary to play computer games and relax ourselves.

Accurately identify their strengths and weaknesses, in order to clarify the characteristics of their own learning, development direction, to find their own best ability in learning. Long plan is to clarify the learning objectives, determine the content of learning, topics, and roughly plan the investment of time; Short schedule refers to the specific action plan, that is, the specific arrangement and action implementation every week and every day. In addition to studying, the plan also includes time for social work and collective service.

Get enough sleep; There is time for recreational and sports activities. The schedule cannot conflict with the normal activities and life of the class and family.

To sum up, in order to make my college life full, but also for their own learning. I will make full use of my time to live a good life in the most critical one year, to lay a solid foundation for my future life. This is the ultimate goal of my study plan. I hope that one year later, when I see this study plan again, I can make great achievements according to this plan, and I will not waste the most precious time of one year.

 How to get along with classmates

 Came to study in the UK, in addition to know China's students, also know many friends in other countries, such as Indonesia, Burma, Africa, Malaysia, etc., we have different culture and living habits, just start to know, speak very cautious, later became a classmate later found that it is easy to get along with everyone, even though from different countries, they are very help us in our studies, we

often discuss questions about learning, after class, we will dinner, eat together to share different countries diet and culture.

When getting along with each other, I respect each student, treat each student sincerely, look at others' strengths, don't talk about others behind their backs, don't shy away from conflicts, and insist on my own correct opinions.Show concern for others. Wanting to be cared for is a basic human need. The reason why those who have a bad relationship with their classmates often feel lonely and annoyed is that they cannot satisfy the need to be cared about. How do you get people to care? The only way is to care about others first. Because you have the desire to be cared for and the need to be cared for. The more you care about someone, the more important you will be in their life and naturally they will care about you. Once we can care for each other, our classmates will become close naturally. Be selfless in your concern for others.

 Future career planning

 Now I should study hard, finish school, waiting for an internship with their reserve of knowledge, if the internship opportunities can be found in the UK, that is my goal, also is a challenge, if you have any work experience, can be in the UK will give a very good in my future career, help me to return to work in the future. when l back my country, I want to become a professional in this field, but I know it will be a long-term process. Now my preliminary plan is as follows: at the first stage, I hope to accumulate at least working experience and lay a solid foundation in 1-2 years from now on in the position I am applying for. In the second stage, I hope to make use of 3-5 years to become a person who can take charge of his/her own professional work independently, who can take responsibility alone, find problems and solve them, and do not let the boss worry about them. In the third stage, I will become a professional in this field and have innovation and development in my work, which can bring greater value to the company.

My character, potential, professional to a certain analysis and so on, how should I as a student according to their own conditions, suitable for their own action plan, first of all use now good times efforts to learn scientific and cultural knowledge and professional knowledge, efforts to practical work, be to combine theory with practice. Recognize their own strengths and weaknesses, actively

develop their strengths, to complement their own shortcomings, actively cultivate their independence, efforts to adjust their own mentality, when l melancholy learn to appropriate vent, control own character, so that their own character become calm, not in a hurry. Efforts to improve own personality deficiency, make the most of their potential in the study, in learning and

in the later work to maintain their interests to our career, to establish own career goals, constantly enrich my knowledge in learning professional knowledge, constantly improve their own self-cultivation, to get more good professional skills, actively cultivate their adaptability to society, to adapt to the day with intense social talented person's competition. In which we need to start from now

seriously understand the society, to participate in the competition!

 Conclusion

 In the future work and life, I will study harder and make unremitting efforts to improve my self-cultivation. In the case of others do not urge, to be able to take the initiative to learn, and as soon as learning requires their own state immediately, into it, do not do other things at the same time or think of other things. To the task that teacher assigns, want to finish instantly. While listening attentively, make simple notes or marks with your pen. Doing so already convenient oneself review.I am deeply aware of the importance of learning, which is the basic of students, so I always put learning as the first priority. Absorb new skills and knowledge to enrich myself, improve the ability to analyze and deal with the work, pay attention to summarize experience, improve myself. Sometimes things aren't done for one reason or another. Time is always precious, I don't want to be a waste of time, don't want to be old when I regret such a waste of time. As a student, study always comes first. I will try my best to correct my shortcomings and make myself develop in a better direction. This is the fifth month of my study in the UK. I have grown a lot in the past five months, including how to properly manage myself in

my personal study and life in a foreign country. In my study, I have made a great change through different ways of thinking and learning methods, which is also a challenge for me. In order to better learning, to complete a study plan and goal of the system, and own future through the way of how to accomplish, distribution of good learning and living, exercise more at ordinary times, a

good get along with classmates, have certain communication and party, and for my future career plan, step by step to progress toward their own direction, finally, in short, want to be a positive person. Cherish and enjoy this learning opportunity to become better.

[saltandlimes]

I feel like the very last person I know to get married, and I'm completely single. It makes me panic, feeling like I must be so completely inadequate, and I feel like I have to completely change myself if I ever want to meet anybody. I have a lot of friends but I feel lonely and like I've completely messed up because I didn't date much in college. You give such great advice and I would love to hear your take.

*hugs* I’m so sorry you’re feeling this way. This is a sad artifact of the way our culture tells us that the perfect het, cis marriage is the key to life. I’m not saying that your pain over this can be reduced down to a cultural mistake, but I am saying that it’s not your fault that you feel this way, and that there’s nothing wrong with you.

I could go on a rant here about western culture - I did, but then I realized that didn’t help you at all. So instead, here are a few thoughts to consider.

First of all, there is nothing wrong with being single. I can’t tell from your message whether you want a partner because your friends are all getting married, or because you want the sort of companionship that a romantic partnership brings with it. 

Romantic relationships should be engaged in because you want them, not because you feel as though you’re missing out on some key element of adult life if you’re not in one. There are plenty of other reasons to get married - religion, or culture demands it - but in those cases, we’re talking about an idea of marriage that differs fairly dramatically from the mainstream western one. Think long and hard about what it is you really want.

The second thing to think about is this. You don’t have to change yourself to meet someone. In fact, you shouldn’t. Any major change you made with the sole purpose of finding a relationship would be unsustainable, and mean that your relationship had unstable foundations. It’s far more important to find someone who enjoys the real you, than it is to constantly be having to pretend to be someone you’re not.

If we’re talking about changes like “go out more” or “not scream profanities at all my friends” (which I’m sure you don’t do), yeah, those changes you’ll probably have to make. But anything that’s fundamental to your personality matters far more than any person who might not even exist in your future.

Also, lots of people meet their significant other(s) long after college ends. My goodness, most people finish college around 22! There’s so much time left for finding a relationship!

So in short, think long and hard about whether you want a relationship for you, and if you decide you do, remember that there are 7 billion people out there, and that many, many of them will love you for you, not for whoever you turn yourself into. And with the internet, access to a person who’s right for you is easier than ever before.

[It’s Sleepover Saturday]

[patriotsnet]

Do Republicans Or Democrats Give More To Charity

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/do-republicans-or-democrats-give-more-to-charity/

Do Republicans Or Democrats Give More To Charity

The Relationship Between Generosity And Political Affiliation And Gender

Who LIES More- Republicans or Democrats?

Most people tip their hair stylists, while only 27% tip their hotel housekeeper.

+1.63%

Tipping can be a social and cultural maelstrom. And social media doesnt always help.

A National Basketball Association player who has a $30 million contract drew internet ire last week after leaving a $13.97 tip on a $487.13 bill. Andre Roberson of the Oklahoma City Thunder made headlines for the paltry tip, and the strong reaction shows just how emotional the question of tipping can be.

But it wasnt quite as clear-cut as it seemed. Roberson released a statement on Twitter TWTR, +1.63%  saying he was misrepresented, saying he bought one bottle of liquor for $487 at a bar, around five times the retail price and rounded it out to $500. Roberson said he also had a $100 tab on shots for which he left a $200 tip. I thought hed be grateful for the $200 tip, he wrote of the barman who served him.

Meanwhile, some restaurants have banned tipping while Uber is finally encouraging riders to open their wallets to drivers who go the extra mile.

See more:Meet the most generous tipper in America

Some of the findings seemed to play out in real life when three supporters of President Donald Trump left a $450 tip for a Washington, D.C. waitress in January, though they were from Texas, not the relatively more generous northeast.

Dont miss:How much to tip everyone

Also read: Is this the worst tipper in America?

Statistics On Us Generosity

In this section youll find charts and graphs laying out the most important numbers in American philanthropy. They document how much we give, how that has changed over time, what areas we give to, and what mechanisms we use to donate. There are figures here on where charities get their money, how many people offer volunteer labor, the demographic factors that influence generosity , and how various states and cities differ. The top foundations and donor-advised funds are ranked by their giving. We present surprising information on overseas aid, and statistics on how the U.S. compares to other countries when it comes to donating to charity.

Beto Orourke Other Democrats See The Downside Of Releasing Tax Returns

CHARLOTTESVILLE About 24 hours after presidential hopeful Beto ORourke released his tax returns from the past decade, a University of Virginia student asked him why he didnt donate more money to charities.

ORourke, a former congressman from El Paso, and his wife reported in their 2017 tax return that they donated $1,166 which was one-third of 1 percent of their $370,412 of income that year. ORourke told reporters on Wednesday that, over the years, he and his wife have donated thousands of dollars more that they did not itemize because it wasnt important for us to take the deduction. The campaign has yet to provide updated numbers.

Ive served in public office since 2005. I do my best to contribute to the success of my community, of my state and, now, of my country, ORourke said in responding to the student on Tuesday night. Im doing everything that I can right now, spending this time with you not with our kiddos, not back home in El Paso because I want to sacrifice everything to make sure that we meet this moment of truth with everything that weve got.

ORourke is not the only Democratic candidate who has had personal finances questioned at a time when many voters are frustrated by the ever-growing economic divide in the country. One by one, Democratic candidates have released their tax returns something that President Trump has refused to do in an attempt at transparency.

Also Check: How Many Presidents Have The Republicans Tried To Impeach

Charitable Giving By State: Are Republicans More Generous Than Democrats Or Just More Religious

It turns out that the old Bushism about compassionate conservatism may not be a myth after all. In a new analysis of Internal Revenue Service tax records, the Chronicle of Philanthropy on Monday ranked U.S. cities and states by how much money their residents give to charity. The bottom line? People in red states are more generous with their green. 

The study, which compared IRS data from 2012 with data from 2006, showed that the 17 most generous states — as measured by the percentage of their income they donated to charity — voted for Mitt Romney in the last presidential election. The seven states at the bottom of the list, meanwhile, voted for Barack Obama.

Exactly why is a bit of a mystery. Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the data only showed how much money people gave away, not which types of organizations they gave to. But generally speaking, she said its fair to assume that political ideology aligns to some extent with ideas about charitable giving.

Not to be too simplistic about it, but if you believe that government should take care of basic social services, then youre going to go that way, Palmer told International Business Times. If you think charities should take care of things, and not government, then youre probably going to give more generously to charity.

Got a news tip? . Follow me on Twitter .

Volunteering In The Us

This data comes from detailed time logs that statisticians ask householders to keep. In less strict definitions like phone surveys, more like 45 percent of the U.S. population say they volunteered some time to a charitable cause within the last year.

Current estimates of the dollar value of volunteered time range from $179 billion per year to more than twice that, depending on how you count.Volunteering is closely associated with donating cash as well. One  Harris study showed that Americans who volunteered gave 11 times as much money to charity in a year as those who did not volunteer.

An interesting pattern emerges if one studies giving by income level. As incomes rise, more and more of the people in that bracket make gifts to charity. The sizes of their gifts tend to rise as well. However: if you look at average donations as a fraction of funds available, they tend to level off at around 2-3 percent of income.

Religious faith is a central influence on giving. Religious people are much more likely than the non-religious to donate to charitable causesincluding secular causesand they give much more.

Among Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike, almost exactly half of the group averaged $100-$999 in annual charitable donations at the time of this 2005 poll. There was virtually no difference among the parties in the size of that moderate-giving group, so those results were not included in the graph to the left.

Also Check: What Did Republicans Gain From The Compromise Of 1877

How Political Ideology Influences Charitable Giving

Many issues seem to divide Democrats and Republicans, and new research has found one more: philanthropy.

Red counties, which are overwhelmingly Republican, tend to report higher charitable contributions than Democratic-dominated blue counties, according to a new study on giving, although giving in blue counties is often bolstered by a combination of charitable donations and higher taxes.

But as red or blue counties become more politically competitive, charitable giving tends to fall.

Theres something about the like-mindedness where perhaps the comfort level rises, said one of the authors of the study, Robert K. Christensen, associate professor at the George W. Romney Institute of Public Service and Ethics at Brigham Young University. They feel safe redistributing their wealth voluntarily. It also matters for compulsory giving.

The study was conducted by four research professors who set out to explore how political differences affect charitable giving. It was published on Oct. 20 in the academic journal Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. The other authors were Laurie E. Paarlberg of Indiana UniversityPurdue University Indianapolis, Rebecca Nesbit of the University of Georgia and Richard M. Clerkin of North Carolina State University.

Dr. Christensen said the team had analyzed more than 3,000 counties, but it did not reveal the county-by-county breakdowns. Its hard to pull those counties out because of the control variables, he said.

Charitable Giving Does Not Match Government Aid

Those in favor of lower taxes have argued that individuals are more capable than the government of allocating money to important causes, including people in need of assistance. But the study found that was not true. Donations do not match government assistance, and without tax money, social services are not funded as robustly.

The evidence shows that private philanthropy cant compensate for the loss of government provision, Dr. Nesbit said. Its not equal. What government can put into these things is so much more than what we see through private philanthropy.

On the other hand, private philanthropy can do many things better than government aid, as in being responsive to a need and willing to fail without political fallout.

The studys authors make the case for a combination approach.

Theyre complementary means of redistribution of wealth rather than substitutions for each other, Dr. Christensen said. We cant put all of our eggs in one basket.

You May Like: Who Are The Republicans On The Ballot

Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals

Second, a much larger body of research has long demonstrated that, all things being equal, conservatives tend to be happier overall than their liberal neighbors are. This is truer for social conservatives than for fiscal conservatives, and the more conservative a conservative is, the happier he or she seems to be. Thats not nothing.

A massive study published earlier this year, involving five different data samples from 16 Western countries spanning more than four decades, adds more meat to this topic. These scholars from the University of Southern California found, as they put it, In sum, conservatives reported greater meaning in life and greater life satisfaction than liberals.

Of course, both qualities are much deeper and richer than happiness itself. This was the robust and consistent finding in the 16 distinct countries examined. It was generally truer for social conservatives than their fiscal brethren, and the greater-meaning-in-life slope spiked upward among individuals who were very conservative.

These scholars explain in their academic parlance that this was true for conservatives at all reporting periods . This is a significant finding. Conservatives experience greater meaning in life across their lives generally, but also daily and at most given moments throughout the day. The researchers conclude these findings are robust and that there is some unique aspect of political conservativism that provides people with meaning and purpose in life.

Conservatives Are Satisfied With Their Family Lives

Do NFL Teams Give More to Republicans or Democrats?

New research released by the Institute for Family Studies demonstrates that conservatives tend to be much more completely satisfied with their family lives compared to their liberal friends and neighbors. Forty-one percent of both liberals and moderates report being completely satisfied with their family lives, while 52 percent of conservatives do.

Conservatives are also vastly more likely than liberals to believe marriage is essential in creating and maintaining strong families. They are also much more likely to actually be married, 62 versus 39 percent, thus benefiting from all the ways marriage improves overall well-being and contentment, personal happiness, economic security, long-term employment, longevity, better physical and mental health, and more.

These scholars explain that regardless of other basic life characteristics such as family income, marital status, age, educational attainment, race/ethnicity, and church attendance, being a conservative increases the odds of being completely satisfied with family life by 23 percent, a considerable positive impact given the centrality of these other life factors. Married men and women who believe marriage is needed to create strong families have 67 percent greater odds of being completely content with their own family life than married couples who do not believe this.

You May Like: Who Are The 10 Republicans Who Voted For Impeachment

Poorer Conservatives More Generous Than Wealthy Liberals New Study

Respected non-government sector newspaper The Philanthropy Chronicle collated the itemized charity deductions on the tax returns of hundreds of millions of Americans between 2006 and 2012, the latest year available. While only about a third of all givers write off their charity expenses, the sums included about 80 percent of all donations in the country.

The Extreme Views Of The Donor Class

The main finding of the research is that the policy views of elite donors are more extreme than the views of partisan voters at large. They also vary widely by party.

If you look at Republican donors, explains Malhotra, they have much more extreme views than ordinary Republicans on economic issues, such as taxation, the redistribution of wealth, and spending on social programs. For example, a good number of Republican voters want universal health care, but very few Republican donors want that. On the other hand, Republican donors and voters have very similar views on social issues, such as abortion and gay marriage. They are not out of line in that arena.

Malhotra and Broockman found a similar pattern among Democratic donors and partisans, but in a mirror image. Democratic donors are, if anything, a little more liberal on economic issues than Democratic partisans, says Malhotra. But their social views are much more liberal than partisans, especially when you look at issues like the death penalty.

Don’t Miss: Who Won More Democrats Or Republicans

Who Gives More To Charity Democrats Or Republicans

About Patt Morrison

Patt Morrison

The ongoing calls for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to issue additional years of his tax returns havent ceased.

Romney has faced criticism for his reasoning that doing so would violate his religious freedom because it would reveal exactly how much money he has tithed to his Mormon church. Democrats continue to press the issue, but should they be so vocal about taking a look at charitable contributions?

According to philanthropy.com, a website that tracks charitable giving state-by-state, Utah tops the list of giving, with residents donating 10.2 percent of their discretionary income to charities. Utah is a solidly red state and went for John McCain 62 percent to 24 percent in 2008 and it has a large Mormon contingent.

Blue state New Hampshire is bringing up the rear with residents of the The Granite State donating only 2.5 percent of their discretionary income to philanthropic organizations. But if you tweak the numbers to remove donations to religious charities the giving evens out some.

Republican Donate More To Charity Than Democrats

8 comments:

Anonymoussaid…

Just this weekend, in an ongoing election year discussion with my sister, I stated my experience is and has been when Democrats see others money or wealth, they want it and/or want to tell them what to do with it… I was also informed that others are not like me. Yours being the very first site I checked regarding this subject, I would like to thank you for the confirmation that this happens elsewhere, just not in my “little” world. Bellyburke

Anonymoussaid…

Thanks, I try to leave informative bits of information that are skipped over in the drive by soundbites and stereotype attacks that are out there. Sorry I have’t posted more lately.To go beyond that, I think that Republicans- particularly religious republicans give a lot more than Democrats because we beleive we have a moral duty to give to charity. Democrats seem to want to government to control the “giving” even though that actually corrupts the ‘charity’ aspects of the gift when you ‘have to do it’ or the IRS will come knocking.

Read Also: Who Controls The Senate Republicans Or Democrats

Giving Under Different Governments

A change in government didnt seem to change peoples donations of money to charities, but there did seem to be an increase in time given to volunteering when the Coalition and Conservative governments were in power.

The exception to this came from the Greens. When Labour were in power from 1997-2010, Green Party supporters gave 182% more of their income to charity than Labour supporters did although this fell to 85% under the Coalition, and fell again when the Conservatives went into government on their own in 2015.

In terms of volunteering, under a Labour government, Green supporters gave no more of their time than did Labour supporters. After 2015, Greens increased their volunteering time by 56%.

Do Your Political Views Make You Charitable

24 Jul, 2019

Professor Sarah Brown,Professor Karl Taylor

A new working paper asks whether people on the left or right give more to charity

Student volunteers at the University of Essex

In 2017, people in the UK gave over £10 billion to charity, and ONS figures suggest that unpaid labour in the form of volunteering is worth over £20 billion.

But what motivates us to give our money or time? Theres existing research which shows that we give in order to feel good, or to look good to others, but we wanted to look at another motivation: our political leanings.

Also Check: Should Republicans Vote In Democratic Primary

Data Sources: Irs Forms 990

The Form 990 is a document that nonprofit organizations file with the IRS annually. We leverage finance and accountability data from it to form Encompass ratings. .

  Impact & Results

This score estimates the actual impact a nonprofit has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.

Impact & Results Score

Leftist Media And Academia Tell The Public The Opposite

12/29/10 – Stossel, Republicans donate much more than Democrats

Some liberals might argue that religious, conservative republicans are happier simply because they are mentally ill; they are disassociated with reality and just dont know any better. They claim this is even demonstrated in scientific research. In fact, one articles first line in reporting this research was quite blunt: Anyone whos wanted to dismiss Republican politics as straightforwardly mean now has some data to back them up. Lands sakes.

Some research did appear to show this, and it got a great deal of press. Retraction Watch, however, tells us it had some serious mistakes in its calculations, and an erratum was published by the American Journal of Political Science. In fact, Retraction Watch reports, The descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed. The data shows a strong correlation between liberalism and psychoticism, not conservatism. This correction was not widely reported for some curious reason.

Finally, if you had to guess who are more generous with their money and volunteering their time to help those in need, would you guess Democrats or Republicans? Of course, its Democrats. Republicans only care for themselves and their own pocketbook. In fact, dont they want to actually punish the poor for not working hard enough? Well, you would be right if stereotypes were the arbiter of truth. But what does objective research tell us?

Recommended Reading: What News Channel Do Republicans Watch

Percentage Of Us Donations Going Tovarious Causes

Nonprofits have grown faster than government and faster than the business sector over the last generation, even during boom periods.

The figures charted here actually underestimate the fraction of American manpower that goes into charitable workbecause they show only paid employment, while volunteers carry out a large share of the labor poured into these groups. Various calculations of the cash value of donated labor suggest that at least an additional 50 percent of output by charities takes place invisibly because it is produced by volunteers. Youll find more statistics on American volunteering in Graphs 8 and 9.

Charitable activity is becoming a bigger and bigger part of Americas total economy. For perspective, consider that annual U.S. defense spending totals 4.5 percent of GDP. The nonprofit sector surpassed the vaunted military-industrial complex in economic scope way back in 1993.

Real Rise In Us Giving

After adjusting for inflation, charitable giving by Americans was close to seven times as big in 2016 as it was 62 years earlier.

Of course, one reason total giving went up is because the U.S. population almost doubled. But if we recalculate inflation-adjusted charitable giving on a per capita basis, we see that has also soared: by 3½ times. Charitable causes are very lucky to have a remarkably expansive American economy behind them, and a standard of living that refuses to stagnate.

What if we calculate charitable giving as a proportion of all national production ? The math reveals that over the last 60 years, donations as a proportion of our total annual output increasedbut only very slightly. For most of the last lifetime, giving has hovered right around 2 percent of our total national treasure.

Two percent of GDP is a huge sum, particularly in comparison to other countries . But it’s interesting that even as we have become a much wealthier people in the post-WWII era, the fraction we give away hasn’t risen. There seems to be something stubborn about that 2 percent rate.

Keep in mind too that religious charities tend to have less access to supplemental funds than other nonprofits. Hospitals and colleges charge users fees to supplement their donated income; other nonprofits sell goods; many museums charge admission; some charities receive government grants. Churches and religious charities, however, operate mostly on their donated funds depicted in this graph.

Recommended Reading: What Cities Are Run By Republicans

What Elite Donors Want

Big-money donors, both Democrat and Republican, not only have more political influence than the average voter, they also have more extreme beliefs.

The outsize political influence of elite donors, whose views tend to be more extreme than that of mainstream voters, partly explains why political polarization is on the rise. | Illustration by Alvaro Dominguez

In November 2012, newly elected Democratic members of the United States Congress got about a week to savor their victories. Then, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee advised them to start hitting the phones for 3-4 hours per day. Who were they supposed to be calling? Mainly, elite donors the fewer than 1% of Americans who give candidates more than $200 in any given election cycle.

It isnt news that politicians court elite donors or that elite donors have greater political access and influence than the typical voter. But, as Stanford Graduate School of Business political economist Neil Malhotra points out in an article recently published in Public Opinion Quarterly, we know remarkably little about what they actually want from government.

This is a particularly relevant issue during the current, seemingly endless, election cycle, in which the battle for control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government is unusually contentious and fraught with implications for the future of the nation.

Do Democrats Hate Charity

Another round of COVID-19 relief from Congress is on life support but not dead, as centrist Democrats have begun to pressure Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi toward compromise. That would mean finding some middle ground between the $3 trillion House HEROES Act, with its bailout for profligate blue-state governments, and the Republican $500 billion skinny bill. If serious negotiations do ensue, there is one provision on which Senate Republicans should not budge: a strong new form of tax relief for individual charitable giving. Its a provision both important in its own right and revealing of a larger philosophical difference between the parties when it comes to charity.

The latest skinny Senate bill would specifically have expanded the so-called above-the-line tax deduction included in the original CARES Act, which authorized a $300 deduction even for those who do not itemize their tax returns. The Senate bill proposed to double that amount for 2020 taxpayers, to $600 for individuals and $1,200 for those filing a joint return. The House bill included no such provision, or even an extension of a less-generous version included in the first COVID-19 relief bill.

The above-the-line deduction proposed by Republicans provides an incentive for all taxpayers, not just the wealthy, to give to charity.  

This piece originally appeared at the Washington Examiner

______________________

Recommended Reading: How Many Republicans Are In The Us House

[statetalks]

Do Republicans Or Democrats Give More To Charity

The Relationship Between Generosity And Political Affiliation And Gender

Who LIES More- Republicans or Democrats?

Most people tip their hair stylists, while only 27% tip their hotel housekeeper.

+1.63%

Tipping can be a social and cultural maelstrom. And social media doesnt always help.

A National Basketball Association player who has a $30 million contract drew internet ire last week after leaving a $13.97 tip on a $487.13 bill. Andre Roberson of the Oklahoma City Thunder made headlines for the paltry tip, and the strong reaction shows just how emotional the question of tipping can be.

But it wasnt quite as clear-cut as it seemed. Roberson released a statement on Twitter TWTR, +1.63%  saying he was misrepresented, saying he bought one bottle of liquor for $487 at a bar, around five times the retail price and rounded it out to $500. Roberson said he also had a $100 tab on shots for which he left a $200 tip. I thought hed be grateful for the $200 tip, he wrote of the barman who served him.

Meanwhile, some restaurants have banned tipping while Uber is finally encouraging riders to open their wallets to drivers who go the extra mile.

See more:Meet the most generous tipper in America

Some of the findings seemed to play out in real life when three supporters of President Donald Trump left a $450 tip for a Washington, D.C. waitress in January, though they were from Texas, not the relatively more generous northeast.

Dont miss:How much to tip everyone

Also read: Is this the worst tipper in America?

Statistics On Us Generosity

In this section youll find charts and graphs laying out the most important numbers in American philanthropy. They document how much we give, how that has changed over time, what areas we give to, and what mechanisms we use to donate. There are figures here on where charities get their money, how many people offer volunteer labor, the demographic factors that influence generosity , and how various states and cities differ. The top foundations and donor-advised funds are ranked by their giving. We present surprising information on overseas aid, and statistics on how the U.S. compares to other countries when it comes to donating to charity.

Beto Orourke Other Democrats See The Downside Of Releasing Tax Returns

CHARLOTTESVILLE About 24 hours after presidential hopeful Beto ORourke released his tax returns from the past decade, a University of Virginia student asked him why he didnt donate more money to charities.

ORourke, a former congressman from El Paso, and his wife reported in their 2017 tax return that they donated $1,166 which was one-third of 1 percent of their $370,412 of income that year. ORourke told reporters on Wednesday that, over the years, he and his wife have donated thousands of dollars more that they did not itemize because it wasnt important for us to take the deduction. The campaign has yet to provide updated numbers.

Ive served in public office since 2005. I do my best to contribute to the success of my community, of my state and, now, of my country, ORourke said in responding to the student on Tuesday night. Im doing everything that I can right now, spending this time with you not with our kiddos, not back home in El Paso because I want to sacrifice everything to make sure that we meet this moment of truth with everything that weve got.

ORourke is not the only Democratic candidate who has had personal finances questioned at a time when many voters are frustrated by the ever-growing economic divide in the country. One by one, Democratic candidates have released their tax returns something that President Trump has refused to do in an attempt at transparency.

Also Check: How Many Presidents Have The Republicans Tried To Impeach

Charitable Giving By State: Are Republicans More Generous Than Democrats Or Just More Religious

It turns out that the old Bushism about compassionate conservatism may not be a myth after all. In a new analysis of Internal Revenue Service tax records, the Chronicle of Philanthropy on Monday ranked U.S. cities and states by how much money their residents give to charity. The bottom line? People in red states are more generous with their green. 

The study, which compared IRS data from 2012 with data from 2006, showed that the 17 most generous states — as measured by the percentage of their income they donated to charity — voted for Mitt Romney in the last presidential election. The seven states at the bottom of the list, meanwhile, voted for Barack Obama.

Exactly why is a bit of a mystery. Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the data only showed how much money people gave away, not which types of organizations they gave to. But generally speaking, she said its fair to assume that political ideology aligns to some extent with ideas about charitable giving.

Not to be too simplistic about it, but if you believe that government should take care of basic social services, then youre going to go that way, Palmer told International Business Times. If you think charities should take care of things, and not government, then youre probably going to give more generously to charity.

Got a news tip? . Follow me on Twitter .

Volunteering In The Us

This data comes from detailed time logs that statisticians ask householders to keep. In less strict definitions like phone surveys, more like 45 percent of the U.S. population say they volunteered some time to a charitable cause within the last year.

Current estimates of the dollar value of volunteered time range from $179 billion per year to more than twice that, depending on how you count.Volunteering is closely associated with donating cash as well. One  Harris study showed that Americans who volunteered gave 11 times as much money to charity in a year as those who did not volunteer.

An interesting pattern emerges if one studies giving by income level. As incomes rise, more and more of the people in that bracket make gifts to charity. The sizes of their gifts tend to rise as well. However: if you look at average donations as a fraction of funds available, they tend to level off at around 2-3 percent of income.

Religious faith is a central influence on giving. Religious people are much more likely than the non-religious to donate to charitable causesincluding secular causesand they give much more.

Among Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike, almost exactly half of the group averaged $100-$999 in annual charitable donations at the time of this 2005 poll. There was virtually no difference among the parties in the size of that moderate-giving group, so those results were not included in the graph to the left.

Also Check: What Did Republicans Gain From The Compromise Of 1877

How Political Ideology Influences Charitable Giving

Many issues seem to divide Democrats and Republicans, and new research has found one more: philanthropy.

Red counties, which are overwhelmingly Republican, tend to report higher charitable contributions than Democratic-dominated blue counties, according to a new study on giving, although giving in blue counties is often bolstered by a combination of charitable donations and higher taxes.

But as red or blue counties become more politically competitive, charitable giving tends to fall.

Theres something about the like-mindedness where perhaps the comfort level rises, said one of the authors of the study, Robert K. Christensen, associate professor at the George W. Romney Institute of Public Service and Ethics at Brigham Young University. They feel safe redistributing their wealth voluntarily. It also matters for compulsory giving.

The study was conducted by four research professors who set out to explore how political differences affect charitable giving. It was published on Oct. 20 in the academic journal Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. The other authors were Laurie E. Paarlberg of Indiana UniversityPurdue University Indianapolis, Rebecca Nesbit of the University of Georgia and Richard M. Clerkin of North Carolina State University.

Dr. Christensen said the team had analyzed more than 3,000 counties, but it did not reveal the county-by-county breakdowns. Its hard to pull those counties out because of the control variables, he said.

Charitable Giving Does Not Match Government Aid

Those in favor of lower taxes have argued that individuals are more capable than the government of allocating money to important causes, including people in need of assistance. But the study found that was not true. Donations do not match government assistance, and without tax money, social services are not funded as robustly.

The evidence shows that private philanthropy cant compensate for the loss of government provision, Dr. Nesbit said. Its not equal. What government can put into these things is so much more than what we see through private philanthropy.

On the other hand, private philanthropy can do many things better than government aid, as in being responsive to a need and willing to fail without political fallout.

The studys authors make the case for a combination approach.

Theyre complementary means of redistribution of wealth rather than substitutions for each other, Dr. Christensen said. We cant put all of our eggs in one basket.

You May Like: Who Are The Republicans On The Ballot

Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals

Second, a much larger body of research has long demonstrated that, all things being equal, conservatives tend to be happier overall than their liberal neighbors are. This is truer for social conservatives than for fiscal conservatives, and the more conservative a conservative is, the happier he or she seems to be. Thats not nothing.

A massive study published earlier this year, involving five different data samples from 16 Western countries spanning more than four decades, adds more meat to this topic. These scholars from the University of Southern California found, as they put it, In sum, conservatives reported greater meaning in life and greater life satisfaction than liberals.

Of course, both qualities are much deeper and richer than happiness itself. This was the robust and consistent finding in the 16 distinct countries examined. It was generally truer for social conservatives than their fiscal brethren, and the greater-meaning-in-life slope spiked upward among individuals who were very conservative.

These scholars explain in their academic parlance that this was true for conservatives at all reporting periods . This is a significant finding. Conservatives experience greater meaning in life across their lives generally, but also daily and at most given moments throughout the day. The researchers conclude these findings are robust and that there is some unique aspect of political conservativism that provides people with meaning and purpose in life.

Conservatives Are Satisfied With Their Family Lives

Do NFL Teams Give More to Republicans or Democrats?

New research released by the Institute for Family Studies demonstrates that conservatives tend to be much more completely satisfied with their family lives compared to their liberal friends and neighbors. Forty-one percent of both liberals and moderates report being completely satisfied with their family lives, while 52 percent of conservatives do.

Conservatives are also vastly more likely than liberals to believe marriage is essential in creating and maintaining strong families. They are also much more likely to actually be married, 62 versus 39 percent, thus benefiting from all the ways marriage improves overall well-being and contentment, personal happiness, economic security, long-term employment, longevity, better physical and mental health, and more.

These scholars explain that regardless of other basic life characteristics such as family income, marital status, age, educational attainment, race/ethnicity, and church attendance, being a conservative increases the odds of being completely satisfied with family life by 23 percent, a considerable positive impact given the centrality of these other life factors. Married men and women who believe marriage is needed to create strong families have 67 percent greater odds of being completely content with their own family life than married couples who do not believe this.

You May Like: Who Are The 10 Republicans Who Voted For Impeachment

Poorer Conservatives More Generous Than Wealthy Liberals New Study

Respected non-government sector newspaper The Philanthropy Chronicle collated the itemized charity deductions on the tax returns of hundreds of millions of Americans between 2006 and 2012, the latest year available. While only about a third of all givers write off their charity expenses, the sums included about 80 percent of all donations in the country.

The Extreme Views Of The Donor Class

The main finding of the research is that the policy views of elite donors are more extreme than the views of partisan voters at large. They also vary widely by party.

If you look at Republican donors, explains Malhotra, they have much more extreme views than ordinary Republicans on economic issues, such as taxation, the redistribution of wealth, and spending on social programs. For example, a good number of Republican voters want universal health care, but very few Republican donors want that. On the other hand, Republican donors and voters have very similar views on social issues, such as abortion and gay marriage. They are not out of line in that arena.

Malhotra and Broockman found a similar pattern among Democratic donors and partisans, but in a mirror image. Democratic donors are, if anything, a little more liberal on economic issues than Democratic partisans, says Malhotra. But their social views are much more liberal than partisans, especially when you look at issues like the death penalty.

Don’t Miss: Who Won More Democrats Or Republicans

Who Gives More To Charity Democrats Or Republicans

About Patt Morrison

Patt Morrison

The ongoing calls for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to issue additional years of his tax returns havent ceased.

Romney has faced criticism for his reasoning that doing so would violate his religious freedom because it would reveal exactly how much money he has tithed to his Mormon church. Democrats continue to press the issue, but should they be so vocal about taking a look at charitable contributions?

According to philanthropy.com, a website that tracks charitable giving state-by-state, Utah tops the list of giving, with residents donating 10.2 percent of their discretionary income to charities. Utah is a solidly red state and went for John McCain 62 percent to 24 percent in 2008 and it has a large Mormon contingent.

Blue state New Hampshire is bringing up the rear with residents of the The Granite State donating only 2.5 percent of their discretionary income to philanthropic organizations. But if you tweak the numbers to remove donations to religious charities the giving evens out some.

Republican Donate More To Charity Than Democrats

8 comments:

Anonymoussaid…

Just this weekend, in an ongoing election year discussion with my sister, I stated my experience is and has been when Democrats see others money or wealth, they want it and/or want to tell them what to do with it… I was also informed that others are not like me. Yours being the very first site I checked regarding this subject, I would like to thank you for the confirmation that this happens elsewhere, just not in my “little” world. Bellyburke

Anonymoussaid…

Thanks, I try to leave informative bits of information that are skipped over in the drive by soundbites and stereotype attacks that are out there. Sorry I have’t posted more lately.To go beyond that, I think that Republicans- particularly religious republicans give a lot more than Democrats because we beleive we have a moral duty to give to charity. Democrats seem to want to government to control the “giving” even though that actually corrupts the ‘charity’ aspects of the gift when you ‘have to do it’ or the IRS will come knocking.

Read Also: Who Controls The Senate Republicans Or Democrats

Giving Under Different Governments

A change in government didnt seem to change peoples donations of money to charities, but there did seem to be an increase in time given to volunteering when the Coalition and Conservative governments were in power.

The exception to this came from the Greens. When Labour were in power from 1997-2010, Green Party supporters gave 182% more of their income to charity than Labour supporters did although this fell to 85% under the Coalition, and fell again when the Conservatives went into government on their own in 2015.

In terms of volunteering, under a Labour government, Green supporters gave no more of their time than did Labour supporters. After 2015, Greens increased their volunteering time by 56%.

Do Your Political Views Make You Charitable

24 Jul, 2019

Professor Sarah Brown,Professor Karl Taylor

A new working paper asks whether people on the left or right give more to charity

Student volunteers at the University of Essex

In 2017, people in the UK gave over £10 billion to charity, and ONS figures suggest that unpaid labour in the form of volunteering is worth over £20 billion.

But what motivates us to give our money or time? Theres existing research which shows that we give in order to feel good, or to look good to others, but we wanted to look at another motivation: our political leanings.

Also Check: Should Republicans Vote In Democratic Primary

Data Sources: Irs Forms 990

The Form 990 is a document that nonprofit organizations file with the IRS annually. We leverage finance and accountability data from it to form Encompass ratings. .

  Impact & Results

This score estimates the actual impact a nonprofit has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.

Impact & Results Score

Leftist Media And Academia Tell The Public The Opposite

12/29/10 – Stossel, Republicans donate much more than Democrats

Some liberals might argue that religious, conservative republicans are happier simply because they are mentally ill; they are disassociated with reality and just dont know any better. They claim this is even demonstrated in scientific research. In fact, one articles first line in reporting this research was quite blunt: Anyone whos wanted to dismiss Republican politics as straightforwardly mean now has some data to back them up. Lands sakes.

Some research did appear to show this, and it got a great deal of press. Retraction Watch, however, tells us it had some serious mistakes in its calculations, and an erratum was published by the American Journal of Political Science. In fact, Retraction Watch reports, The descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed. The data shows a strong correlation between liberalism and psychoticism, not conservatism. This correction was not widely reported for some curious reason.

Finally, if you had to guess who are more generous with their money and volunteering their time to help those in need, would you guess Democrats or Republicans? Of course, its Democrats. Republicans only care for themselves and their own pocketbook. In fact, dont they want to actually punish the poor for not working hard enough? Well, you would be right if stereotypes were the arbiter of truth. But what does objective research tell us?

Recommended Reading: What News Channel Do Republicans Watch

Percentage Of Us Donations Going Tovarious Causes

Nonprofits have grown faster than government and faster than the business sector over the last generation, even during boom periods.

The figures charted here actually underestimate the fraction of American manpower that goes into charitable workbecause they show only paid employment, while volunteers carry out a large share of the labor poured into these groups. Various calculations of the cash value of donated labor suggest that at least an additional 50 percent of output by charities takes place invisibly because it is produced by volunteers. Youll find more statistics on American volunteering in Graphs 8 and 9.

Charitable activity is becoming a bigger and bigger part of Americas total economy. For perspective, consider that annual U.S. defense spending totals 4.5 percent of GDP. The nonprofit sector surpassed the vaunted military-industrial complex in economic scope way back in 1993.

Real Rise In Us Giving

After adjusting for inflation, charitable giving by Americans was close to seven times as big in 2016 as it was 62 years earlier.

Of course, one reason total giving went up is because the U.S. population almost doubled. But if we recalculate inflation-adjusted charitable giving on a per capita basis, we see that has also soared: by 3½ times. Charitable causes are very lucky to have a remarkably expansive American economy behind them, and a standard of living that refuses to stagnate.

What if we calculate charitable giving as a proportion of all national production ? The math reveals that over the last 60 years, donations as a proportion of our total annual output increasedbut only very slightly. For most of the last lifetime, giving has hovered right around 2 percent of our total national treasure.

Two percent of GDP is a huge sum, particularly in comparison to other countries . But it’s interesting that even as we have become a much wealthier people in the post-WWII era, the fraction we give away hasn’t risen. There seems to be something stubborn about that 2 percent rate.

Keep in mind too that religious charities tend to have less access to supplemental funds than other nonprofits. Hospitals and colleges charge users fees to supplement their donated income; other nonprofits sell goods; many museums charge admission; some charities receive government grants. Churches and religious charities, however, operate mostly on their donated funds depicted in this graph.

Recommended Reading: What Cities Are Run By Republicans

What Elite Donors Want

Big-money donors, both Democrat and Republican, not only have more political influence than the average voter, they also have more extreme beliefs.

The outsize political influence of elite donors, whose views tend to be more extreme than that of mainstream voters, partly explains why political polarization is on the rise. | Illustration by Alvaro Dominguez

In November 2012, newly elected Democratic members of the United States Congress got about a week to savor their victories. Then, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee advised them to start hitting the phones for 3-4 hours per day. Who were they supposed to be calling? Mainly, elite donors the fewer than 1% of Americans who give candidates more than $200 in any given election cycle.

It isnt news that politicians court elite donors or that elite donors have greater political access and influence than the typical voter. But, as Stanford Graduate School of Business political economist Neil Malhotra points out in an article recently published in Public Opinion Quarterly, we know remarkably little about what they actually want from government.

This is a particularly relevant issue during the current, seemingly endless, election cycle, in which the battle for control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government is unusually contentious and fraught with implications for the future of the nation.

Do Democrats Hate Charity

Another round of COVID-19 relief from Congress is on life support but not dead, as centrist Democrats have begun to pressure Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi toward compromise. That would mean finding some middle ground between the $3 trillion House HEROES Act, with its bailout for profligate blue-state governments, and the Republican $500 billion skinny bill. If serious negotiations do ensue, there is one provision on which Senate Republicans should not budge: a strong new form of tax relief for individual charitable giving. Its a provision both important in its own right and revealing of a larger philosophical difference between the parties when it comes to charity.

The latest skinny Senate bill would specifically have expanded the so-called above-the-line tax deduction included in the original CARES Act, which authorized a $300 deduction even for those who do not itemize their tax returns. The Senate bill proposed to double that amount for 2020 taxpayers, to $600 for individuals and $1,200 for those filing a joint return. The House bill included no such provision, or even an extension of a less-generous version included in the first COVID-19 relief bill.

The above-the-line deduction proposed by Republicans provides an incentive for all taxpayers, not just the wealthy, to give to charity.  

This piece originally appeared at the Washington Examiner

______________________

Recommended Reading: How Many Republicans Are In The Us House

source https://www.patriotsnet.com/do-republicans-or-democrats-give-more-to-charity/

[stephenmccull]

No-Cancel Culture: How Telehealth Is Making It Easier to Keep That Therapy Session

When the covid-19 pandemic forced behavioral health providers to stop seeing patients in person and instead hold therapy sessions remotely, the switch produced an unintended, positive consequence: Fewer patients skipped appointments.

This story also ran on NBC News. It can be republished for free.

That had long been a problem in mental health care. Some outpatient programs previously had no-show rates as high as 60%, according to several studies.

Only 9% of psychiatrists reported that all patients kept their appointments before the pandemic, according to an American Psychiatric Association report. Once providers switched to telepsychiatry, that number increased to 32%.

Not only that, but providers and patients say teletherapy has largely been an effective lifeline for people struggling with anxiety, depression and other psychological issues during an extraordinarily difficult time, even though it created a new set of challenges.

Many providers say they plan to continue offering teletherapy after the pandemic. Some states are making permanent the temporary pandemic rules that allow providers to be reimbursed at the same rates as for in-person visits, which is welcome news to practitioners who take patients’ insurance.

“We are in a mental health crisis right now, so more people are struggling and may be more open to accessing services,” said psychologist Allison Dempsey, associate professor at University of Colorado School of Medicine in Aurora. “It’s much easier to connect from your living room.”

The problem for patients who didn’t show up was often as simple as a canceled ride, said Jody Long, a clinical social worker who studied the 60% rate of no-shows or late cancellations at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center psychiatric clinic.

But sometimes it was the health problem itself. Long remembers seeing a first-time patient drive around the parking lot and then exit. The patient later called and told Long, “I just could not get out of the car; please forgive me and reschedule me.”

Long, now an assistant professor at Jacksonville State University in Alabama, said that incident changed his perspective. “I realized when you’re having panic attacks or anxiety attacks or suffering from major depressive disorder, it’s hard,” he said. “It’s like you have built up these walls for protection and then all of a sudden you’re having to let these walls down.”

Absences strain providers whose bosses set billing and productivity expectations and those in private practice who lose billable hours, said Dempsey, who directs a program to provide mental health care for families of babies with serious medical complications. Psychotherapists often overbooked patients with the expectation that some would not show up, she said.

Now Dempsey and her colleagues no longer need to overbook. When patients don’t show up, staffers can sometimes contact a patient right away and hold the session. Other times, they can reschedule them for later that day or a different day.

And telepsychiatry performs as well as, if not better than, face-to-face delivery of mental health services, according to a World Journal of Psychiatry review of 452 studies.

Virtual visits can also save patients money, because they might not need to travel, take time off work or pay for child care, said Dr. Jay Shore, chairperson of the American Psychiatric Association’s telepsychiatry committee and a psychiatrist at the University of Colorado medical school.

Shore started examining the potential of video conferencing to reach rural patients in the late ’90s and concluded that patients and providers can virtually build rapport, which he said is fundamental for effective therapy and medicine management.

But before the pandemic, almost 64% of psychiatrists had never used telehealth, according to the psychiatric association. Amid widespread skepticism, providers then had to do “10 years of implementations in 10 days,” said Shore, who has consulted with Dempsey and other providers.

Dempsey and her colleagues faced a steep learning curve. She said she recently held a video therapy session with a mother who “seemed very out of it” before disappearing from the screen while her baby was crying.

She wondered if the patient’s exit was related to the stress of new motherhood or “something more concerning,” like addiction, she said. She thinks she might have better understood the woman’s condition had they been in the same room. The patient called Dempsey’s team that night and told them she had relapsed into drug use and been taken to the emergency room. The mental health providers directed her to a treatment program, Dempsey said.

“We spent a lot of time reviewing what happened with that case and thinking about what we need to do differently,” Dempsey said.

Providers now routinely ask for the name of someone to call if they lose a connection and can no longer reach the patient.

In another session, Dempsey noticed that a patient seemed guarded and saw her partner hovering in the background. She said she worried about the possibility of domestic violence or “some other form of controlling behavior.”

In such cases, Dempsey called after the appointments or sent the patients secure messages to their online health portal. She asked if they felt safe and suggested they talk in person.

Such inability to maintain privacy remains a concern.

In a Walmart parking lot recently, Western Illinois University psychologist Kristy Keefe heard a patient talking with her therapist from her car. Keefe said she wondered if the patient “had no other safe place to go to.”

To avoid that scenario, Keefe does 30-minute consultations with patients before their first telehealth appointment. She asks if they have space to talk where no one can overhear them and makes sure they have sufficient internet access and know how to use video conferencing.

To ensure that she, too, was prepared, Keefe upgraded her Wi-Fi router, purchased two white noise machines to drown out her conversations and placed a stop sign on her door during appointments so her 5-year-old son knew she was seeing patients.

Keefe concluded that audio alone sometimes works better than video, which often lags. Over the phone, she and her psychology students “got really sensitive to tone fluctuations” in a patient’s voice and were better able to “pick up the emotion” than with video conferencing, she said.

With those telehealth visits, her 20% no-show rate evaporated.

Kate Barnes, a 29-year-old middle school teacher in Fayetteville, Arkansas, who struggles with anxiety and depression, also has found visits easier by phone than by Zoom, because she doesn’t feel like a spotlight is on her.

“I can focus more on what I want to say,” she said.

In one of Keefe’s video sessions, though, a patient reached out, touched the camera and started to cry as she said how appreciative she was that someone was there, Keefe recalled.

“I am so very thankful that they had something in this terrible time of loss and trauma and isolation,” said Keefe.

Demand for mental health services will likely continue even after the lifting of all covid restrictions. About 41% of adults were suffering from anxiety or depression in January, compared with about 11% two years before, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Health Interview Survey.

“That is not going to go away with snapping our fingers,” Dempsey said.

After the pandemic, Shore said, providers should review data from the past year and determine when virtual care or in-person care is more effective. He also said the health care industry needs to work to bridge the digital divide that exists because of lack of access to devices and broadband internet.

Even though Barnes, the teacher, said she did not see teletherapy as less effective than in-person therapy, she would like to return to seeing her therapist in person.

“When you are in person with someone, you can pick up on their body language better,” she said. “It’s a lot harder over a video call to do that.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

No-Cancel Culture: How Telehealth Is Making It Easier to Keep That Therapy Session published first on https://smartdrinkingweb.weebly.com/

[gordonwilliamsweb]

No-Cancel Culture: How Telehealth Is Making It Easier to Keep That Therapy Session

When the covid-19 pandemic forced behavioral health providers to stop seeing patients in person and instead hold therapy sessions remotely, the switch produced an unintended, positive consequence: Fewer patients skipped appointments.

This story also ran on NBC News. It can be republished for free.

That had long been a problem in mental health care. Some outpatient programs previously had no-show rates as high as 60%, according to several studies.

Only 9% of psychiatrists reported that all patients kept their appointments before the pandemic, according to an American Psychiatric Association report. Once providers switched to telepsychiatry, that number increased to 32%.

Not only that, but providers and patients say teletherapy has largely been an effective lifeline for people struggling with anxiety, depression and other psychological issues during an extraordinarily difficult time, even though it created a new set of challenges.

Many providers say they plan to continue offering teletherapy after the pandemic. Some states are making permanent the temporary pandemic rules that allow providers to be reimbursed at the same rates as for in-person visits, which is welcome news to practitioners who take patients’ insurance.

“We are in a mental health crisis right now, so more people are struggling and may be more open to accessing services,” said psychologist Allison Dempsey, associate professor at University of Colorado School of Medicine in Aurora. “It’s much easier to connect from your living room.”

The problem for patients who didn’t show up was often as simple as a canceled ride, said Jody Long, a clinical social worker who studied the 60% rate of no-shows or late cancellations at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center psychiatric clinic.

But sometimes it was the health problem itself. Long remembers seeing a first-time patient drive around the parking lot and then exit. The patient later called and told Long, “I just could not get out of the car; please forgive me and reschedule me.”

Long, now an assistant professor at Jacksonville State University in Alabama, said that incident changed his perspective. “I realized when you’re having panic attacks or anxiety attacks or suffering from major depressive disorder, it’s hard,” he said. “It’s like you have built up these walls for protection and then all of a sudden you’re having to let these walls down.”

Absences strain providers whose bosses set billing and productivity expectations and those in private practice who lose billable hours, said Dempsey, who directs a program to provide mental health care for families of babies with serious medical complications. Psychotherapists often overbooked patients with the expectation that some would not show up, she said.

Now Dempsey and her colleagues no longer need to overbook. When patients don’t show up, staffers can sometimes contact a patient right away and hold the session. Other times, they can reschedule them for later that day or a different day.

And telepsychiatry performs as well as, if not better than, face-to-face delivery of mental health services, according to a World Journal of Psychiatry review of 452 studies.

Virtual visits can also save patients money, because they might not need to travel, take time off work or pay for child care, said Dr. Jay Shore, chairperson of the American Psychiatric Association’s telepsychiatry committee and a psychiatrist at the University of Colorado medical school.

Shore started examining the potential of video conferencing to reach rural patients in the late ’90s and concluded that patients and providers can virtually build rapport, which he said is fundamental for effective therapy and medicine management.

But before the pandemic, almost 64% of psychiatrists had never used telehealth, according to the psychiatric association. Amid widespread skepticism, providers then had to do “10 years of implementations in 10 days,” said Shore, who has consulted with Dempsey and other providers.

Dempsey and her colleagues faced a steep learning curve. She said she recently held a video therapy session with a mother who “seemed very out of it” before disappearing from the screen while her baby was crying.

She wondered if the patient’s exit was related to the stress of new motherhood or “something more concerning,” like addiction, she said. She thinks she might have better understood the woman’s condition had they been in the same room. The patient called Dempsey’s team that night and told them she had relapsed into drug use and been taken to the emergency room. The mental health providers directed her to a treatment program, Dempsey said.

“We spent a lot of time reviewing what happened with that case and thinking about what we need to do differently,” Dempsey said.

Providers now routinely ask for the name of someone to call if they lose a connection and can no longer reach the patient.

In another session, Dempsey noticed that a patient seemed guarded and saw her partner hovering in the background. She said she worried about the possibility of domestic violence or “some other form of controlling behavior.”

In such cases, Dempsey called after the appointments or sent the patients secure messages to their online health portal. She asked if they felt safe and suggested they talk in person.

Such inability to maintain privacy remains a concern.

In a Walmart parking lot recently, Western Illinois University psychologist Kristy Keefe heard a patient talking with her therapist from her car. Keefe said she wondered if the patient “had no other safe place to go to.”

To avoid that scenario, Keefe does 30-minute consultations with patients before their first telehealth appointment. She asks if they have space to talk where no one can overhear them and makes sure they have sufficient internet access and know how to use video conferencing.

To ensure that she, too, was prepared, Keefe upgraded her Wi-Fi router, purchased two white noise machines to drown out her conversations and placed a stop sign on her door during appointments so her 5-year-old son knew she was seeing patients.

Keefe concluded that audio alone sometimes works better than video, which often lags. Over the phone, she and her psychology students “got really sensitive to tone fluctuations” in a patient’s voice and were better able to “pick up the emotion” than with video conferencing, she said.

With those telehealth visits, her 20% no-show rate evaporated.

Kate Barnes, a 29-year-old middle school teacher in Fayetteville, Arkansas, who struggles with anxiety and depression, also has found visits easier by phone than by Zoom, because she doesn’t feel like a spotlight is on her.

“I can focus more on what I want to say,” she said.

In one of Keefe’s video sessions, though, a patient reached out, touched the camera and started to cry as she said how appreciative she was that someone was there, Keefe recalled.

“I am so very thankful that they had something in this terrible time of loss and trauma and isolation,” said Keefe.

Demand for mental health services will likely continue even after the lifting of all covid restrictions. About 41% of adults were suffering from anxiety or depression in January, compared with about 11% two years before, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Health Interview Survey.

“That is not going to go away with snapping our fingers,” Dempsey said.

After the pandemic, Shore said, providers should review data from the past year and determine when virtual care or in-person care is more effective. He also said the health care industry needs to work to bridge the digital divide that exists because of lack of access to devices and broadband internet.

Even though Barnes, the teacher, said she did not see teletherapy as less effective than in-person therapy, she would like to return to seeing her therapist in person.

“When you are in person with someone, you can pick up on their body language better,” she said. “It’s a lot harder over a video call to do that.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

No-Cancel Culture: How Telehealth Is Making It Easier to Keep That Therapy Session published first on https://nootropicspowdersupplier.tumblr.com/

[maryanntorreson]

Introducing the launch of the TED-Ed Innovative Educator Alumni Innovation Projects

TED-Ed Innovative Educators

In 2015, TED-Ed launched the TED-Ed Innovative Educator (TIE) program, a year-long professional development program for dynamic educators who are dedicated to celebrating the ideas of students and teachers around the world. Six years later, we have 104 alumni representing over 20+ countries, constantly thinking of new ways to innovate in education.

2020 brought on unpredictable levels of global change: a pandemic, racial reckoning, and world-wide political upheavals. The traditional system of schooling has experienced significant disruptions in the past year.

These changes signaled a call to action: the TIEs, coming from rural, urban and suburban communities, in roles including classroom teachers, adjunct professors, superintendents, librarians, college advisors, district tech specialists, and more, are coming together to build some solutions.

First, the TIEs identified problems in global education and turned them into four main Opportunity Statements:

1. Redesign instruction: Reimagine how instruction can comprehensively meet the needs of all students. 2. Redesign how we address inequities: Reimagine how to empower teachers and communities to address race, equity, inclusion, and justice issues. 3. Assess innovations in pandemic: Assess how to carry forward the innovations created during the pandemic into full-time in-school instruction (and continue to build a culture of school/district innovation). 4. Reinvest in educators’ well-being: Reinvest in how best to support our teachers and admin, professionally and personally.

Next, each TIE has chosen one Opportunity Statement to work on for their Innovation Project. Follow their journey over this year as they collaborate, design, test, and share their innovations; we will be reporting back through the project development.

Explore why some TIEs are working on their chosen Innovation Project:

Redesign instruction

Alejandra Guzman (Texas, USA)

I have worked in the curriculum and instruction department in two different school districts over the last 6 years. I know that in many schools, some parts of instruction, curriculum, and assessment are out-dated, focused too much on standardized assessments and not on deep learning, making connections with other content areas, and application to solve real-world problems. This type of instruction will strengthen student critical thinking, problem solving, and communication skills. I believe rethinking what instruction should and can look like and creating a realistic instructional model will help many educators go back to focus on what the true meaning of education should be.

Christie Simpson (Perth Western, Australia)

I work at school in a low socio-economic area. We have high rates of poverty and transiency and over 60% of our students have some developmental trauma. Only 35% of our Year 7 students arrive at high school able to read at grade level. 35% are still learning to read with fluency and 30% are still learning to decode words. How do teachers cater for this? Mostly, they try to muddle through the vast amounts of content in our curriculum, often using ineffective – though well-intentioned – discovery or inquiry based learning practices. I know there is great value in those models, but I also know that our students need strong foundational literacy and numeracy capacity as well as concrete background knowledge which they can draw on as they start to inquire. I’d like to see us arm teachers at both ends of the instructional spectrum, so that they can competently and effectively meet their students at their point of need.

Georgios Villias (Athens, Greece)

I honestly believe that living in a world which overwhelms us daily with information, it is humanly impossible to stay focused on something unless it is useful, exciting, and meaningful for you. This reality applies to schools as well. Instruction should be much more than just content knowledge. Instruction should also care about developing skills, showcasing each individual’s unique talents, engaging learners to act in real-life situations, nourishing and inspiring youngsters’ minds, teaching moral values in a social context and so much more. Molding students’ character, encouraging active citizenship, and raising the next generation of ethical problem-solvers always start from family and school. I would be honored as an educator to make even a minor, constructive contribution to my students’ lives towards that direction.

“Instruction should be much more than just content knowledge.”

Kristin Leong (Washington, USA)

Students and teachers deserve more diverse, timely, and dynamic resources and more support. Teaching is hard. Online teaching during a pandemic, a civil rights uprising, and an insurrection is really hard. In addition, the news cycle is relentless. The Sisyphean task of educators to constantly find great resources to build an engaging curriculum that responds to quickly-shifting current events is profoundly challenging. Lastly, our students are increasingly diverse in race, culture, sexual orientation, and gender identity, while our teachers remain mostly white, female, and heterosexual. Connecting with young people across these divides, when you instruct 30+ students at a time, only compounds the challenge of designing original curriculum. As a former QPOC teacher myself, I know teachers need more support and a reliable flow of trustworthy and updated resources by diverse sources to connect their classrooms to current events in ways that inspire students to engage with the world and their learning.

My weekly newsletter ROCK PAPER RADIO is one way I’m offering support to teachers. Every Thursday, I share three multimedia stories by diverse thinkers and creatives delivered via email for free. The newsletter is quick (less than five min to read), and organized by format (an audio feature, an essay or article, a human interest story). All stories are linked to current events and framed for personal engagement.

The Black Lives Matter movement has shaken awake all of the systems that make up society, including our education system. Young people are paying attention and rightfully demanding more inclusive and more current curriculum now. I’m thrilled to be part of this TIE alumni group working to usher in that much-needed change with heart, innovation, and more than a little bit of courage.

Mahrukh Bashir (Tangerang Selatan, Indonesia)

I have encountered instructional models dominated by the ideas of transfer of content and knowledge with the implicit understanding that learners are merely vessels to be filled. This system had, and still has, standardized curricula delivered in standardized ways and the effectiveness assessed using standardized testing. On the other hand, I have been refreshingly greeted by ideas of developing students’ talents and dispositions, differentiation and individual needs. However, the perfect instructional model that takes into account individual needs and delivers academic rigor and deep learning is yet to present itself. I want to explore and implement an innovative model of instruction that comes closest to this, what has effectively become “the holy grail of modern education.”

Reimagine how we address inequities

Craig Zimmer (Ontario, Canada)

I love the fact that we are having some real conversations here. We need to advocate for students and show that, as educators, we are on their side no matter what. In 2021, we have to ensure that education is inclusive and accessible to all students. This is going to require very big changes and it all starts when we go to work to bring about real reform.

Fred Sagwe (Kisii, Kenya)

I believe the approach to inequities on race, equity, inclusion and social justice issues means different things depending on the region and countries. For example in Kenya and most parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the challenges have a gender-based perspective. There was the challenge of FGM among young girls who, after circumcision, are married young, hence dropping out of schools. Also, marginalization in less developed regions in Kenya also hinder favorable educational outcomes. School infrastructure is a concern too, including the availability of reliable internet connectivity. The government is trying to remedy the situations.

Jen Ward (Michigan, USA)

This past year has served to highlight in so many different ways the divides, gaps, and inequalities that are systematized in our educational spaces. I selected this project because I believe as a global group of change-makers, we are able to come together, dig deep, and put forth proposals for real change to ensure that all students have an opportunity to learn, grow, and be heard.

Sandy Chambers (North Carolina, USA)

Working to change a system that perpetuates inequities is my calling. Working with others who believe that change can happen is inspirational and hopeful. As an administrator, I have more “power” than I think. I know we can make a change!

“Empowering starts with radical truth-telling, which means listening to all stakeholders, especially students.”

Shameka Williams (Georgia, USA)

I want better for all students that have unfair disadvantages due to a system that was not historically designed with all children in mind. I want better for each generation, so they do not experience the same setbacks as those before them and have to work harder to prove themselves as equal. Moreover, I want to tackle this problem with others that bring different perspectives so that the narrative and outcomes are inclusive of everyone! One perspective cannot be the solution to this global issue.

Tim Leistikow (Minnesota, USA)

I am not sure how we achieve any meaningful change in our system (I teach in the USA, but I assume similar issues in other countries) until we start telling the truth about the history that led to the inequities that exist and persist today. Empowering starts with radical truth-telling, which means listening to all stakeholders, especially students. I have done a project with students on creating the ideal education system for the past 10 years, and every cohort sees addressing inequities around race, gender, religion, sexuality, socio-economic status, and more, as being a primary first step to making schools a better place for students.

Wiputra Cendana (Tangerang, Banten, Indonesia)

Equity and equality become great challenges especially for the students who have learning difficulties, connectivity issues, and other variables. This project is to give a new learning model as I synthesize from a particular current teaching experience. I truly hope the project will be a small sparkle and idea which can equip educators around the world to confront these issues. Entrust the learning essence and ‘meat’ will be absorbed well by the students across the world. Let’s think globally, connect intentionally, share clearly, and act locally.

Assess innovations during the pandemic

Lisa Winer (Florida, USA)

I found that during Hybrid teaching, I couldn’t see my students’ work – they used to work on whiteboards or I could walk around and see how well they understood. But even then, I didn’t hear from or see everyone. For my capstone project for my EdD, I am researching how to add ed tech to the classroom to help capture student thought and to include the voices of the students who are quiet or who aren’t risk-takers. I want to hear from all students and showcase them all as well. This was something brought forth from the pandemic because never before had I not been able to see the work of my students as they were thinking.

Maggie Muuk (Kching, Malaysia)

I would want to know more about innovation as many of my students were left behind by this pandemic. Many of them do not have sufficient access to gadgets or internet to enable them to stay aligned with the lesson. Currently, we are only using WhatsApp to communicate. I’m looking for low technology to make them want to study.

Małgorzata Guzicka (Legnica, Poland)

I truly believe that because of the pandemic, we have rediscovered online learning. Teachers are learning how to use different platforms and educational apps to enhance online learning; students are doing projects in groups using educational websites. I think it would be awesome if students and teachers from different countries could work and learn from one another, do projects together and meet online. I am thinking about a project that could help teachers and students learn from one another about their cultures.

Shawn T. Loescher (California, USA)

The pandemic has represented a time of tremendous learning for our educational and social institutions. Within the pandemic, nearly 1.5 billion children around the world have had disruptions to their typical educational environment. Through this disruption, we have learned that there are multiple modalities and ways of learning. To me, the challenge we face as we emerge from the pandemic is which of the many successful lessons we’ve learned should be adopted and institutionalized to advance academic performance, address inequities, and redesign our schools, in order to create a more human-centered experience that is sustainable in scale and scope.

“The students we will meet on the other side of this pandemic will deserve better than a return to the ‘old normal.’”

Susan Herder (Minnesota, USA)

Educators and students were forced to change suddenly in the midst of the pandemic, often without adequate support. I chose this project because as we return to a combination of in-person and online classes, teachers need to be able to let go of the practices that are not effective and continue to use innovations that engage students and close gaps and eliminate inequities.

Tim Couillard (Virginia, USA)

Well frankly, there is no going back. The students we will meet on the other side of this pandemic will deserve better than a return to the “old normal.” I suspect (and secretly hope) they will demand it. Amid the toll and tragedy of this past year, I hope we find a way to get education “unstuck,” to shed the lockstep factory model of learning once and for all. Let’s hope that necessity is still the mother of invention. I suspect that we have all had a chance to cultivate some new habits of mind that will be as useful in-person as they are at a distance. I’m excited to see where that leads us.

Lastly, I hope that we abandon, or at least push back against, the anxiety-fueled march of “more is more” when it comes to education. Students are people first, learners second. They are more than the test data the system can coax from them to tout their “success.” If we truly believe in social and emotional learning, we need to reject it as a mere tool to boost productivity. We need to not only mean what we say, but ask ourselves if our actions match our words. Ultimately, I hope we can look back on all this and say, tired as we are, we still found the strength to work for a world where what we have gained from this pandemic will be greater than all we have lost.

Umar Anjum (Lahore, Pakistan)

I am working on this as I have seen that inequalities and gaps in the education system have been growing and merely adding more resources is not helping. That is why I believe the answer is hidden in the Innovations.

Reinvest in educators’ well-being

Sarah Harkin (Shanghai, China)

Self-care isn’t just a buzzword; it’s critical. So much is asked of teachers. I hope to find real ways to help build teacher capacity and systemic support within schools in order to better prioritize teacher well-being, specifically mental health and work-life balance.

“Self-care isn’t just a buzzword; it’s critical.”

Sharon Hadar (Raanana, Israel)

During the pandemic, most things have become accelerated – emotions, thoughts, worries, health issues, financial difficulties, and more. On top of this, education systems and educators have been put under the microscope. We get so much criticism from parents, the media, politicians, our administrators, and more.

We, the educators, are the foundation and base for our communities. Our well-being is essential for our communities; teachers have to support each other, be strong, and stay united. It is also making sure there is a way to release and vent, while at the same time find the strength to continue doing our job the best way we can. I want to find the right way to do this, together with the rest of the TIEs, as a part of a strong and cohesive group that can change people’s viewpoint about teachers. It’s time for us to take care and support each other. I am sure that with this project we will find the best way to achieve this!

Introducing the launch of the TED-Ed Innovative Educator Alumni Innovation Projects published first on https://premiumedusite.tumblr.com/rss