News Feeds

British climate finance largess in Brazil Channel News brendan 11th May 2026 Teaser Media

The last federal transportation law gave states more than enough money to fix every crumbling highway and bridge in America — but a disturbing share of departments of Transportation sunk that windfall into expanding highways instead, a new report found. And unless Congress learns from its mistakes and finally requires transportation officials to “fix it first,” we will continue to set billions of taxpayer dollars on fire.

A stunning 16.3 percent of U.S. roads that were eligible for federal money were still rated in “poor” condition in 2024, according to a recent Transportation for America analysis — despite Congress providing state DOTs with $56.8 billion in largely unrestricted transportation funds that year alone, and nearly $1.5 trillion over the 30 years prior.

Experts say it would take $43.2 billion per year to maintain all of the country’s existing roads in “acceptable” condition, or roughly 23 percent less than Congress authorized annually under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

And the authors of the report say the waste may be even worse than it seems.

Because increasingly lax reporting standards conceal broken roads from public view, and DOTs routinely mis-categorize expensive expansion projects as simple “maintenance” or lump them into a mysterious “other” category, Transportation for America suspects the national highway network is actually even more drastically overbuilt than it appears on paper.

That means that even a steep increase federal dollars may not be enough to repair our rapidly expanding transportation network — at least without using that money to shift people onto modes other than driving and take pressure off our battered asphalt.

“We’re still adding to the system faster than we’re able to take care of it,” said Mehr Mukhtar, the group’s senior policy associate. “We’re still seeing inconsistencies and a lack of transparency in reporting standards. And all of this just leads us to the conclusion that until we see a meaningful shift in our priorities, and in how we’re tying our spending to our outcomes, the backlog of roads in poor conditions is going to persist — and likely it’s going to worsen.”

Mukhtar traces much of America’s pothole crisis to a long-standing tradition of giving states broad latitude over how they spend their federal “formula” dollars, or grants doled out to DOTs based on a pre-determined government calculation.

In the absence of federal rules to rein them in, many states pick ribbon-cuttings for new and “improved” — i.e., widened — highways over the unsexy work of repaving the lanes they already have, even if those lanes are falling apart.

A whopping 24 states chose to spend less than $2.35 on maintenance for every dollar they spent on expansion — a ratio that Transportation for America says is alarming — despite the fact that those states have a higher share of roads in poor condition than the national average.

Worse, experts say those expansions won’t come close to accomplishing the goals they’re theoretically supposed to achieve. Decades of research has shown that widening roads does nothing to fix traffic jams over the long term, encourages drivers to fill newly added lanes, and saddles communities with compounding long-term maintenance obligations that they can’t keep up with.

It’s a little like adding a ballroom to a house when the roof is so leaky that rain is pouring in — except that ballroom is somehow accelerating a traffic violence crisis that claims nearly 40,000 lives a year, super-charging climate change, and amplifying income inequality by reducing access to jobs, rather than, say, hosting waltzes.

“That’s fiscally irresponsible, and it’s a burden on taxpayer dollars,” Mukhtar added.

Of course, not all states are neglecting their maintenance backlog in favor of climate arson — and some of them are even offsetting the worst offenders.

Communities like North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota and Vermont won applause from the report’s authors for strong repair-to-expansion ratios, which helped bring their average road conditions above the national average — though, to be fair, many of those states have a high share of depopulated rural roads that need less-frequent maintenance than highly trafficked urban arterials. Still, Mukhtar credited those communities with lowering America’s total share of roads and bridges in poor condition by three percentage points between 2018 and 2024.

But she warned that extremely modest progress won’t be enough to outrun America’s looming maintenance obligations. The report says every new lane-mile of highway built will cost future taxpayers $47,300 per year to maintain in good condition — roughly the cost of a year’s out-of-state tuition at a decent public university — and America built 119,257 of them in the six years the researchers analyzed.

Worse, even some of the “good” states are still delaying maintenance until its bridges are on the brink of collapse, driving maintenance costs well above the average. Mukhtar pointed to Michigan, whose maintenance spending, which looks impressive on paper, actually masks the fact that the Wolverine State tends to postpone repaving until roads are so bad that they need to be totally rebuilt.

“With the costs of construction ballooning and inflation rising, even those same dollars don’t get stretched as far now as they would have decades ago, if [states] started prioritizing repair earlier,” she said.

With the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act due to expire on Sept. 30, Mukhtar said Congress has a rare opportunity to restore sanity to the transportation system and finally require states to “fix it first,” rather than adding endless new ballrooms to a falling-down house.

That might look like setting “tangible goals, such as reducing the backlog by half,” requiring federal agencies to collect better data on the actual condition of roads, and establishing enforceable mandates that state DOTs be more transparent about how taxpayer dollars are spent.

And until they actually do, no voter should believe a politician who pledges to “fix America’s crumbling roads and bridges” — because nearly $57 billion a year later, they still haven’t done so.

“Whenever a transportation bill is passed, we hear the same thing come out of Congress time and time again: the same rhetoric about fixing crumbling roads and bridges, and why we need to increase funding,” said Mukhtar. “But I think what we need to see this time around are enforceable requirements, which actually compel states to spend that money on fixing it first.”

• The Guardian asked experts how to fix traffic-choked cities, especially in light of high gas prices. The answers: Expand and improve transit, create more space for pedestrians and cyclists, focus on providing alternatives for commuters traveling into the city core from car-centric suburbs, and address the reasons why people choose to drive, such as service hours and safety concerns.
• Uber is shifting tactics away from fighting with local governments and labor unions as it seeks to roll out robotaxis, according to Axios. Meanwhile, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating Uber partner Avride after at least 16 documented autonomous vehicle crashes (Tech Crunch).
• Urban trees counter half the heat island effect from climate change in cities, but less so in poorer neighborhoods, according to a new study. (Associated Press)
• Seattle’s Sound Transit adopted a two-decade plan to close a $34 billion budget gap in future capital projects. (KOMO)
• The first Vision Zero report from Indianapolis indicates that traffic deaths fell to 85 last year from a high of 120 in 2021, but a number of major roads remain dangerous. (WTHR)
• Nashville Mayor Freddie O’Connell, whose major accomplishment has been passing the “Choose How You Move” transit expansion referendum, will run for re-election. (News Channel 6)
• San Antonio is considering dropping speed limits on neighborhood streets from 30 miles per hour to 25, but in places where it’s already been done, it hasn’t had an effect on driver behavior. (Report)
• Amtrak is adding cars to its Missouri River Runner route to accommodate additional riders traveling to the World Cup in Kansas City. (Mass Transit)
• Construction on Baltimore’s long-awaited Purple Line is complete, but service won’t begin until late 2027 at the earliest. (Maryland Matters)
• An Omaha traffic reporter is still out of work after having been hit by two different drivers in separate crashes; one as a pedestrian, one while she was behind the wheel. (KETV)
• Cincinnati’s Red Bike bikeshare had a record number of users in 2026. (CityBeat)
• Kansas City opened a new bike and pedestrian bridge on Grand Boulevard. (Fox 4)
• Lime introduced a new type of bikeshare bike in Seattle that looks like a scooter with pedals. (Seattle Bike Blog)
• Pending the governor’s signature, South Carolina recently became the first East Coast state to adopt the “Idaho stop,” allowing cyclists to proceed through a yield sign or red light when it’s safe to do so. (Palmetto Walk Bike)
• A lot of people like to ride the D: The new Metro line in Los Angeles opened last weekend to great fanfare. (Streetsblog LA)

In a triumphal move back toward democratic rule, Hungary's new leader Péter Magyar took his oath of office Saturday in a "regime-change" ceremony rich with symbolism before thousands of jubilant constituents. The sense of a hopeful new political era resonated in Magyar's tribute to a victory for "ordinary, flesh-and-blood people" - and in the gleeful moves and air guitar of unstoppable "dancing machine" and new Health Minister Zsolt Hegedűs. Lookit this guy boogie. Damn, we can't wait.

The day's celebration" marked Magya's stunning defeat last month of authoritarian Viktor Orbán after 16 years in power. A 45-year-old lawyer who founded the center-right Tisza party in 2024, Magyar won a two-thirds majority over Orbán’s nationalist Fidesz party, which will allow him to roll back many of Orbán’s policies. Tisza now controls 141 seats in the 199-seat Parliament, with over a quarter held by women; Fidesz won 52 seats, down from 135, and far-right Mi Hazánk (Our Homeland) took six. Magyar has vowed to restore democratic institutions, clamp down on corruption, repair ties with the EU, where Orbán often vetoed key decisions including support for Ukraine, and unlock about $20 billion of EU funds to help jump-start Hungary's struggling economy,

Magya was sworn in at the sprawling Parliament building as tens of thousands of Hungarians gathered outside in Kossuth Square. Marking the sea change his victory represents, the EU flag flew for the first time since Orbán’ removed it in 2014, and the Beethoven-inspired European anthem Ode to Joy, symbolizing peace and solidarity, rang out. "Today, every freedom-loving person in the world would like to be Hungarian a little," Magya told the crowd in a message aimed at healing the deep divisions of Orbán's rule. "You have taught (the) world that the most ordinary, flesh-and-blood people can defeat the most vicious tyranny...Today is the fulfillment of a long journey made together (to) once again be a common homeland for all Hungarians."

As the party went all day and into the night - when Magyar took on DJ duties - the high point of its joy and fervor may have come after Magyar's speech when Zsolt Hegedűs, unable to restrain himself, broke out into dancing as the singer Jalja began performing The Hanging Tree: "Strange things have happened here." Hungary's new 56-year-old Health Minister and an internationally recognised orthopaedic surgeon who spent 10 years working for the UK's NHS, Hegedűs had already gone viral last month when, on stage after Magyar's landslide victory, he busted out some fiery dance moves and air guitar in his excitement. This time, he said he wasn't planning a repeat performance. Then the music started...And 140 Party members joined in.

"I could see the audience had been waiting for this," he said. "I didn’t want to let down the people.” So off he went, delighting everyone (except, possibly, his kids if he has any) with his slick moves. The next day, he ascribed it all to his "emotional roller-coaster" since Magyar's victory, with his chance to repair Hungary's health care system, take down Orbán's hate-mongering propaganda, urge people to focus on their mental health. "It's not that I'm going to start dancing in Parliament, but I want (to) encourage people to adopt a healthy lifestyle...Go outside, dance, be together," he said. "The weight has begun to lift from people’s shoulders." America, weary, ravaged, hungry for peace, just imagine the miracle of it. And for now enjoy his glee.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Join us on May 21st at 6:30pm for a panel on Radicals, Realists, and Repression: The State of Activism in the US. The panel will feature Prof. Thomas Zeitzoff, professor…

A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, May 3, 2026 thru Sat, May 9, 2026. Stories we promoted this week, by category:

Climate Change Impacts (6 articles)

• The ramifications of record-shattering heat on the West`s ecosystems Not only did Western US locations set new March highs but many exceeded temperature records for May, according to Climate Central scientist Zachary Lab. Grist, Christine Peterson, May 02, 2026.
• Flooding in Chicago Is Getting Worse. Here`s Why. Over the past century in Chicago, the likelihood of heavy rainstorms has increased sevenfold. Inside Climate News, Brett Chase, May 04, 2026.
• `Point of no return`: New Orleans relocation must start now due to sea level, study finds Louisiana’s cultural hotspot could be surrounded by Gulf of Mexico before end of this century, authors say The Guardian, Oliver Milman, May 04, 2026.
• Dangerous heavy rains are getting more likely and widespread Seven of the top 11 highest-volume precipitation events over the past 77 years have occurred just in the past 10 years. Yale Climate Connections, Jeff Masters, May 04, 2026.
• New Study Shows Risks of Amazon Deforestation. And Rewards of Protection. Researchers examined the combined effects of tree loss and global warming in an effort to better understand how and when an ecosystem collapse could unfold. NYT, Sachi Kitajima Mulkey, May 06, 2026.
• Our Oceans Are Tipped To Collapse: Can we still act? ClimateAdam on Youtube, Adam Levy, May 8, 2026.

Climate Science and Research (6 articles)

• Benjamin Santer: Speaking Science to Power Youtube, College of the Holy Cross, Mar 27, 2026.
• Climate scientist finds large errors in a global climate pollution database New research from Northern Arizona University found that a global greenhouse gas emissions database produced by the Climate TRACE consortium is underestimating vehicle carbon dioxide emissions in cities by an average of 70%. Phys.org, Gaby Clark, May 05, 2026.
• Climate models struggling to capture human impact on storm tracks Models are accurately capturing the impact of a warmer atmosphere holding more moisture, but struggling to represent the shift in atmospheric circulation patterns caused by human emissions, which ultimately determine where the rain falls. The Guardian, Kate Ravilious, May 06, 2026.
• Skeptical Science New Research for Week #19 2026 Our regular weekly scan of scientific, NGO and government research publications on matters pertaining to climate change. Skeptical Science, Doug Bostrom & Marc Kodack , May 07, 2026.
• Why fears are growing over the fate of a key Atlantic current Mounting evidence suggests the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current may be nearing a tipping point, though the research is far from certain. The Daily Climate, Nicola Jones, May 08, 2026.
• Antarctic sea ice defied global warming for decades - now, hidden ocean heat is breaking through 'Antarctica was long considered a part of the climate system expected to change slowly. The speed of the recent sea ice decline has therefore come as a shock.'' The Conversation, Aditya Narayanan, May 08, 2026.

Miscellaneous (5 articles)

• Two months in, the Iran war has changed the global energy system forever The conflict may be the beginning of the end of fossil fuel dominance and a clear opening for accelerated energy modernization. Grist, Jake Bittle, May 01, 2026.
• 2026 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #18 A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, April 26, 2026 thru Sat, May 2, 2026. Skeptical Science, Bärbel Winkler & Doug Bostrom, May 3, 2026.
• Why we need to treat Earth like a spaceship 'On Earth, there is no mission control – only us.'' The Conversation, Chris Rapley, May 06, 2026.
• Faster slaughterhouse line speeds are increasingly a climate problem Worker safety, animal welfare and climate concerns overlap in ways that are not immediately obvious. The Daily Climate, EHN Curators, May 07, 2026.
• EGU2026 - Five days of virtual learning This is the diary our team member Bärbel Winkler wrote over the past week while participating online in a large scientific conference. Skeptical Science, Bärbel Winkler, May 9, 2026.

Climate Policy and Politics (3 articles)

• DeBriefed 1 May 2026: Countries chart path away from fossil fuels | China`s clean-tech surge | Global forest loss slows Countries attending a first-of-its-kind summit have walked away with plans to develop national “roadmaps” to move away from fossil fuels, along with new tools to address subsidies and carbon-intensive trade. Carbon Brief, Daisy Dunne, May 01, 2026.
• Hard choices test breakaway climate summit A first-of-its-kind conference that focused on phasing out fossil fuels now confronts the challenge of turning plans into policy. Politico, Sara Schonhardt, May 01, 2026.
• Trump’s NOAA cuts would save less than a day and a half of Iran War spending Administration's incoherent and/or ignorant national security policy exposed by funding priorities. Heated, Emily Atkin, May 7, 2026.

Climate Education and Communication (2 articles)

• Spiralling global temperatures A decade later... Climate Lab Book, Ed Hawkins, May 8, 2026.
• A look back at `An Inconvenient Truth,` 20 years later Al Gore’s famous documentary has mostly stood the test of time. Yale Climate Connections, Dana Nuccitelli, May 08, 2026.

Health Aspects of Climate Change (2 articles)

• Extreme heat is a growing threat to health, jobs and food security in southern Africa - study looks for practical solutions The Conversation, Jerome Amir Singh & Caradee Yael Wright, May 03, 2026.
• How climate change makes your allergies worse As pollen season worsens, allergies compound with other climate health hazards. Ars Technica, Keerti Gopal, May 08, 2026.

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation (1 article)

• States are demanding property insurance records to study climate change State insurance regulators are undertaking the most comprehensive analysis of the nation’s battered property-insurance market to try to understand how climate change is affecting the price and availability of coverage. Poltico E&E Daily Climate, Saqib Rahim, May 01, 2026.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Science (1 article)

• Despite big storms, U.S. winters are still warming Events like the January 23rd storm capture headlines and attention, but they don’t occur often enough to outweigh the long-term influence of human-caused global warming on U.S. winter temperatures. climate.us, Rebecca Lindsey, Jan 01, 2031.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Solutions (1 article)

• Fact brief - Were the 2022 whale deaths off the US East Coast caused by offshore wind development? No - The 2022 whale deaths have not been linked to offshore wind surveys or construction. Research has found no evidence of wind farms driving whale deaths, and responsibly developed wind farms avert systemic harms of fossil fuels. Skeptical Science, Sue Bin Park, May 4, 2026.

Climate Law and Justice (1 article)

• Event With Links to Oil Industry Teaches Judges "Healthy Skepticism" of Climate Science As congressional Republicans accuse climate scholars and lawyers of colluding to influence the judiciary, a symposium hosted by a center funded by the fossil fuel industry injects free market ideology into courts. ProPublica, Abrahm Lustgarten, May 02, 2026.

If you happen upon high quality climate-science and/or climate-myth busting articles from reliable sources while surfing the web, please feel free to submit them via this Google form so that we may share them widely. Thanks!

Two high-profile water crises, juiced up by climate change and industrial overuse, are building in the U.S. From a city in Texas staring down a drought emergency to a decades-long political crisis coming to a head for the states that rely on the Colorado River, water issues in the West will take center stage this summer — and experts tell WIRED that other places should take notes and start planning ahead for their own future.

In February, following a winter of record-breaking heat, snowpack in various mountain ranges across the American West reached record lows. March came in even hotter, smashing records in states across the region.

“What happened in March was unprecedented and stunning and disturbing and out of this world, frankly — we had temperatures the likes of which we have never seen and couldn’t have happened without human-caused climate change,” said Brad Udall, a senior water and climate researcher at Colorado State University’s Colorado Water Center. “We had a crummy snowpack that went from crummy to god-awful in three weeks.”

This snowmelt crisis is having dire impacts on the Colorado River, one of the most crucial water sources in the West, which provides water for 40 million people across seven states. River flow in some areas on the Colorado had slowed to a trickle last week, thanks to the early snowmelt this year.

Read Next The West’s unprecedented winter could fuel a summer of disaster Tik Root

The Colorado River isn’t just a crucial water supply: It also provides power for more than 25 million people through dams at Lake Powell and Lake Mead, the two largest reservoirs in the country. Low water levels in those reservoirs spell trouble for electricity generation. As of Tuesday morning, Lake Mead was sitting at just 17 feet above its record low level, set in July of 2022.

This record dry season is also colliding with a decades-long political crisis on the Colorado River. For years, the states drawing water from the river have sparred over how to equitably divide the supply from the river, as the growth of agriculture and a series of climate-charged droughts have begun threatening the long-term water supply. Alfalfa for cattle feed is the biggest consumer of water from the Colorado, using more water than all of the cities along the river combined. States have missed key deadlines, including one in February, to renegotiate the Colorado River Compact of 1922, which regulates how water in the region is distributed. Each state gets an annual allotment, and the total amount of water is supposed to be divided evenly between an upper basin and a lower basin.

Earlier this month, following dire projections for the summer, the U.S. Interior Department stepped in, announcing a series of actions intended to keep hydropower at Lake Powell running. The government acknowledges that this could lessen hydropower at Lake Mead as well as water availability in states along the lower part of the river.

With all this chaos, there’s a chance, Udall said, that this season’s scarce water could cause a historic first in the next few years: States in the upper basin of the river could fail to deliver enough water to states in the lower basin, violating the 1922 agreement for the first time. This could trigger a potential lawsuit between states.

“What’s frustrating to somebody like myself is this is all foreseeable,” said Udall. “Those of us who are kind of in the know, and that includes a lot of people in the Colorado River Basin, have seen something like this coming for a long, long time.”

Read Next In Texas, Corpus Christi’s water crisis may be a glimpse into the future Rebecca Egan McCarthy

Even with this dire set of circumstances, it’s unlikely that the millions of people who rely on the Colorado River will reach Day Zero, the term for when municipal water sources run dry. No U.S. city has ever gotten to that point.

However, there’s a region that could be inching closer to this kind of catastrophe. Officials in Corpus Christi, the eighth-largest city in Texas, said last week that the city is set to reach a Level 1 drought emergency — what it defines as 180 days of water demand outpacing supply — by September. Some projections say that, barring major weather patterns that bring more rain, municipal water sources could run dry by next year.

People living in Corpus Christi are already under restrictions for their water use, including limits on lawn watering and car washing. Residential water bills also increased by an average of just under $5 this year. City officials said that industrial customers would be asked to cut use by 25 percent in September.

“We don’t want to wreck our economy,” Corpus Christi city manager Peter Zanoni told NBC News of the decision to wait until September to declare a Level 1 drought emergency, which would force those industrial customers to curb their use. “We don’t want to have operations close down.”

Corpus Christi’s water supplies come overwhelmingly from surface water sources. Two of the most important local sources — the Choke Canyon Reservoir and Lake Corpus Christi — have reached critically low levels over the past few years as drought has gripped the region. As of Tuesday, they were sitting at 7.4 percent full and 8.7 percent full, respectively.

Read Next Arizona’s water is drying up. That’s not stopping the data center rush. Jake Bittle

Many of the city’s problems stem from industrial water use. Corpus Christi is a major petrochemical hub, and the largest industrial consumer of water in the area, according to permit statistics obtained by Inside Climate News, is a joint Exxon Mobil and Saudi Basic Industries Corporation plastics plant. The plant used an average of 13.5 million gallons of water each day between 2022 and 2024. The average residential customer, according to the city, uses 6,000 gallons per month. (Exxon Mobil did not return a request for comment.)

The city has discussed building a desalination plant to provide water to its industrial customers — including the Exxon plant, which began operating in 2022 — for years. But the project’s potential costs ballooned to more than $1 billion, while residents expressed concerns about the ecological impacts the plant could have. Last year, regulators voted to pass on the project, with no backup plan for water supply in place. On Wednesday, the Houston Chronicle reported that Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s office had denied Corpus Christi additional funding for a separate desalination plant.

“Some lessons to learn from this situation that are important for a lot of cities, especially in the Southwest, is that water infrastructure projects are getting more expensive with time,” said Shane Walker, director of the Water and the Environment Research Center at Texas Tech University. “If you think you can wait around and get a cheaper deal on a water infrastructure project, it’s probably the opposite.”

This push and pull between attracting business and what a city can maintain waterwise, Walker said, is a common tension for city planners. As more cities in Texas see population growth — and struggle with planning out their water needs — more of them need to be thinking much farther ahead.

“You have to think of a 20-year time horizon as urgent,” Walker said. “If you’re relying on groundwater — groundwater is a finite resource. Lakes are vulnerable to drought. What’s your alternative supply?”

There could be some short- and medium-term relief for both Corpus Christi and the Colorado River. At a water update briefing last week, Zanoni said that recent rains had been “beneficial” to the region, helping to boost water levels in Lake Texana, another water source for the city. Udall said that recent wet weather has also helped stabilize some conditions out West. And the upcoming El Niño phenomenon — forecast to be one of the most intense El Niños on record — could bring a heavy monsoon season to the West this summer.

But both the municipal situation in Corpus Christi and the regional crisis for the Colorado River have specific similarities: a lack of attention to slow-building problems, exacerbated by industrial use. Climate change is pushing water crises like these to a new type of breaking point.

“Around the world we’ve seen climate change events that are really big and massive,” Udall said of the crisis on the Colorado River. “Maybe this is the first worldwide climate change crisis that’s going to force really fundamental policy-level decisions to be made, and fundamental changes in how we operate. Seven states, two nations, 40-plus million people, a whole bunch of farmers, and major cities are going to have to completely rethink how they use this resource.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline This summer, the American water crisis becomes real on May 10, 2026.

Headline News:

• “Why Rolls-Royce Is Hiring Cabinet Makers And Tattoo Artists To Build Its Cars” • Last month, British automaker Rolls-Royce showed off what is called “Project Nightingale.” It is a car, the company’s new, electric two-seater. Production begins at the factory in Goodwood, England, next year, but there’s one catch: all 100 units are already sold. [ABC News]

Project Nightingale (Rolls-Royce image)

• “Two Years After Completion, Plant Vogtle Still Looms Over The Nuclear Debate” • As states across the country weigh a new wave of nuclear energy, many in Georgia urge caution. Plant Vogtle’s newest reactors came online there two years ago. The customers are paying for the project, and many say they are not getting their money’s worth. [Inside Climate News]
• “‘Triple Whammy’: Antarctica’s Sea Ice Collapse Is No Longer A Mystery” • A study found that deep ocean heat, strong winds, and a self-reinforcing feedback loop have destabilized the ocean around Antarctica since 2015. Researchers warn that the losses could disrupt ocean currents, accelerate warming, and add to rising sea levels worldwide. [Euronews]
• “Gujarat Launches 870 MW Of Battery Storage for Stable Renewable Power” • Gujarat commissioned 870 MW of battery storage in five sites. This capacity is crucial for a more resilient renewable power grid capable of integrating intermittent solar and wind sources. The initiative upholds the Gujarat Integrated Renewable Energy Policy. [Whalesbook]
• “Microsoft Weighs Abandoning Renewable Energy Target In AI Boom” • Microsoft is in the spotlight amid reports that the tech titan is considering delaying or abandoning its ambitious 2030 goal of meeting 100% of its hourly electricity use with renewable energy. This shift shows friction between hyperscalers’ climate pledges and AI’s power demands. [MSN]

For more news, please visit geoharvey – Daily News about Energy and Climate Change.

Ucapan itu bukan sekadar candaan. Dunia judi online memang berkembang sangat cepat, terutama sejak teknologi Artificial Intelligence (AI) mulai masuk ke dalam sistem permainan digital. Perubahan tersebut bukan hanya terlihat dari tampilan visual yang makin realistis, tetapi juga dari cara platform memahami perilaku pemain secara detail.

Teknologi AI Mulai Mengubah Cara Permainan Berjalan

Beberapa tahun terakhir, teknologi AI menjadi salah satu fondasi penting dalam industri hiburan digital. Banyak platform game online mulai menggunakan sistem otomatis yang mampu mempelajari pola permainan pengguna. Teknologi ini bekerja diam-diam di balik layar, namun dampaknya terasa nyata.

AI digunakan untuk menganalisis data pemain, mulai dari waktu bermain, jenis permainan favorit, hingga kebiasaan melakukan taruhan. Dari situ, sistem akan memberikan rekomendasi permainan yang dianggap paling sesuai dengan karakter pengguna.

Bagi sebagian pemain, fitur ini terasa membantu. Mereka lebih mudah menemukan game yang cocok tanpa harus mencoba satu per satu. Tetapi di sisi lain, ada juga yang merasa sistem tersebut membuat permainan menjadi semakin intens dan sulit dilepaskan.

Rian pernah mengalami momen itu. Awalnya ia hanya mencoba satu permainan slot karena rekomendasi muncul di halaman utama. Namun beberapa menit kemudian, muncul lagi rekomendasi lain dengan tema yang mirip dan bonus yang terlihat lebih menarik.

“Kayak aplikasi streaming film,” ujarnya. “Semakin sering dimainkan, semakin ngerti apa yang kita suka.”

Pengalaman Bermain yang Kini Terasa Lebih Personal

Salah satu alasan mengapa AI berkembang pesat di industri game online adalah kemampuannya menciptakan pengalaman yang terasa personal. Teknologi ini mampu membuat pemain merasa diperhatikan oleh sistem.

Jika dulu permainan online terlihat monoton, sekarang tampilannya jauh lebih interaktif. Ada animasi dinamis, efek suara yang menyesuaikan situasi permainan, hingga fitur live chat otomatis yang mampu menjawab pertanyaan pemain dalam hitungan detik.

Bahkan beberapa platform sudah memakai AI untuk mendeteksi emosi pemain melalui pola aktivitas mereka. Ketika sistem melihat pengguna mulai pasif atau kehilangan minat, permainan akan memunculkan promosi tertentu agar pemain kembali aktif.

Di sinilah teknologi menjadi pedang bermata dua.

Di satu sisi, inovasi tersebut menunjukkan kemajuan luar biasa dalam dunia digital. Pengalaman bermain menjadi lebih nyaman, cepat, dan modern. Namun di sisi lain, muncul pertanyaan besar tentang batas antara hiburan dan manipulasi perilaku.

Industri Judi Online Semakin Kompetitif

Perkembangan AI juga membuat persaingan antar platform judi online semakin ketat. Banyak penyedia layanan berlomba menghadirkan teknologi terbaru agar pengguna betah lebih lama di platform mereka.

Mulai dari sistem keamanan berbasis AI, deteksi aktivitas mencurigakan, hingga fitur anti-kecurangan kini menjadi bagian penting dalam operasional situs modern. Teknologi ini membantu menjaga stabilitas permainan sekaligus meningkatkan kepercayaan pengguna.

Beberapa pengamat industri digital menilai bahwa AI sebenarnya tidak selalu membawa dampak negatif. Jika digunakan secara tepat, teknologi ini bisa membantu menciptakan sistem permainan yang lebih aman dan transparan.

Contohnya adalah fitur responsible gaming yang mulai diterapkan beberapa platform besar. Sistem AI dapat mendeteksi pola bermain berlebihan dan memberikan peringatan otomatis kepada pengguna agar beristirahat.

Walau belum diterapkan secara merata, langkah tersebut menunjukkan bahwa teknologi juga bisa diarahkan untuk melindungi pemain, bukan sekadar meningkatkan keuntungan perusahaan.

Ketika Teknologi dan Emosi Manusia Bertemu

Yang menarik dari perkembangan ini bukan hanya soal mesin atau algoritma, melainkan bagaimana manusia meresponsnya secara emosional.

Banyak pemain merasa permainan digital sekarang lebih “hidup”. Mereka tidak lagi sekadar menekan tombol taruhan, tetapi seperti masuk ke dalam dunia virtual yang penuh interaksi.

Ada suara dealer langsung, tampilan grafis ultra-realistis, hingga sistem AI yang membuat permainan terasa responsif terhadap tindakan pemain. Semua itu menciptakan sensasi yang jauh berbeda dibanding era awal judi online beberapa tahun lalu.

Namun di balik kecanggihan tersebut, ada satu hal yang tetap tidak berubah: manusia tetap menjadi pusat dari semua keputusan.

Teknologi bisa membantu membaca pola, memprediksi kebiasaan, bahkan menciptakan pengalaman yang terasa personal. Tetapi kendali tetap berada di tangan pemain itu sendiri.

Rian akhirnya menyadari hal tersebut setelah beberapa kali terlalu larut dalam permainan. Ia mulai membatasi waktu bermain dan melihat judi online sebagai hiburan digital, bukan jalan instan untuk mendapatkan keuntungan besar.

“Teknologinya makin pintar,” katanya pelan. “Makanya pemain juga harus lebih pintar.”

Masa Depan Judi Online dan AI Masih Akan Terus Berkembang

Melihat perkembangan saat ini, banyak pihak percaya bahwa hubungan antara AI dan industri judi online akan semakin erat di masa depan. Kemungkinan besar, teknologi akan menghadirkan pengalaman bermain yang lebih realistis melalui virtual reality, analisis data real-time, hingga sistem interaksi yang semakin menyerupai manusia.

Bagi industri digital, AI adalah alat untuk menciptakan efisiensi dan pengalaman pengguna yang lebih baik. Tetapi bagi pemain, pemahaman dan kontrol diri tetap menjadi hal terpenting.

Karena pada akhirnya, secanggih apa pun teknologi berkembang, keputusan manusia tetap menjadi faktor utama yang menentukan arah permainan.

We have entered a new epoch of global capitalism. It is characterized by crisis, imperial rivalry, authoritarian nationalism, and episodic, explosive resistance from below. The Trump administration’s brief year of misrule has brought all these to a head, particularly with its war on Iran. That war has put a definitive end to Washington’s imperial order of free trade globalization that it constructed within its bloc after World War II and expanded globally after the Cold War. Now the U.S. is a predatory imperialist state out for its own interests against nominal allies, rivals, regional powers, and subject nations.

Trump’s rise to power, like that of other authoritarian nationalists, did not come out of the blue. The electoral successes of the Right are the product of capitalism’s multiple crises and the establishment parties’ inability to overcome them. Their failure has triggered political polarization to the right and left. Given the revolutionary Left’s decline and reformist parties’ incapacity to deliver when in power, the new Right, in the form of authoritarian nationalism, has been the principal beneficiary. But their program of austerity, bigotry, and scapegoating has also failed to address capitalism’s systemic crises, undercutting their ability to secure hegemony and impose stable rule. As a result, political instability is the order of the day throughout the world.

These conditions have triggered wave after wave of resistance from below. But so far this resistance has been episodic and unable to win, largely because of the decomposition of class, social, and political organizations to sustain struggle and pose an alternative to the establishment parties and the Right. Nonetheless, these struggles open opportunities to rebuild the infrastructure of resistance, cohere a militant minority, and reconstruct a revolutionary Left for the 21st century.

Capitalism’s global slump

Capitalism is beset by multiple systemic crises from climate change to mass migration and pandemics like COVID. The other two, which are the most important ones for shaping our new epoch, are the global economic slump and the return of inter-imperial rivalry. The 2008 economic crisis triggered the Great Recession, which brought an end to the long neoliberal boom that began in the 1980s.

While capitalism survived, its recovery has been characterized by low profitability and slow growth, punctuated by recessions and weak recoveries. The heartlands of the system, from the U.S. to Europe and Japan, are either growing at a modest rate or are stagnant. As far as the U.S. is concerned, only the high-tech companies’ massive investment in AI data centers and the accompanying stock market bubble have kept the economy growing. But that is now in jeopardy as a result of the war with Iran. Even China, which was key to the global recovery after the Great Recession, has seen its growth drop from 10 percent a year in the 2000s to under 5 percent today.

As far as the U.S. is concerned, only the high-tech companies’ massive investment in AI data centers and the accompanying stock market bubble have kept the economy growing. But that is now in jeopardy as a result of the war with  Iran.

Inflation in the wake of the COVID recession has forced the U.S. and Europe to maintain relatively high interest rates, hampering investment and growth. On the other hand, overinvestment, cutthroat competition, and low profitability have fueled deflation in China, forcing its corporations to seek out profitable sites for investment internationally through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), while exporting their surplus products and in the process undercutting their competition everywhere.

The combination of U.S. high interest rates and Chinese dumping has triggered a double crisis in the Global South. First, high interest rates have hammered indebted countries, which are now facing the prospect of another debt crisis like the one they suffered in the 1980s. Already, creditors are demanding austerity measures from governments in the Global South. Second, Beijing’s exports have undermined the Global South’s domestic manufacturing base, reducing it to exporting raw materials to China for China’s ongoing expansion.

Thus, we are in a global slump. It will continue until a deeper crisis clears out all the uncompetitive capital in the world economy. Up to today, the main capitalist states have stopped this from happening. They have bailed out corporations they consider too big to fail, fearing mass bankruptcies and a 1930s-style depression. That has propped up the so-called zombie corporations. These are so unprofitable that they are forced to take out ever more loans to repay interest on their existing loans. As a result, the system limps along.

By contrast, ruling classes have imposed austerity measures on their workers, cutting social welfare spending and attacking wages and benefits. As a result, class inequality has deepened throughout the world. At the same time, states have turned to protectionism and other beggar-thy-neighbor policies to protect their capitals against other states and their capitals.

The return of inter-imperial rivalry

Thus, the global slump is intensifying the second key crisis—inter-imperial rivalry, especially between the two biggest economies in the world, the U.S. and China. Washington no longer oversees the unipolar world order as it did after the Cold War. The long neoliberal boom produced new centers of capital accumulation from China to Russia and a host of regional powers.

Washington no longer oversees the unipolar world order as it did after the Cold War. The long neoliberal boom produced new centers of capital accumulation from China to Russia and a host of regional powers.

The U.S. attempt to defend its increasingly challenged hegemony through wars in Afghanistan and Iraq backfired, leading to disastrous defeats. On top of that, the Great Recession hammered the U.S., Europe, and Japan, in contrast to China, which used massive state investment to keep its economy booming, and with that, all its tributary economies expanding from Russia to Australia and Brazil.

These developments led to the relative decline of the U.S. against its rivals, especially China, ushering in today’s asymmetric multipolar world order. The U.S. remains the largest economy with the biggest military and greatest geopolitical influence. Its dollar remains the world’s reserve currency, it oversees an empire of 800 military overseas bases, and uses that power to bully allies, rivals, and so-called rogue states.

But it is no longer unrivaled. China is now a potential peer competitor, while Russia, with its vast nuclear stockpile and fossil capitalist economy, is an outsized regional power with global pretensions. In this context, regional powers exploit conflicts between the great powers to pursue their own interests. Iran, for instance, oversaw the so-called Axis of Resistance, which it used to build regional imperial influence against the U.S., the Arab states, and Israel.

Faced with this new order, successive U.S. administrations have abandoned Washington’s post-Cold War strategy of superintending capitalism by incorporating all states into a neoliberal world order of free trade globalization. Obama initiated a shift toward great power competition with China through his Pivot to Asia.

In his first term, Trump enshrined great power rivalry as Washington’s new grand strategy, naming specifically China and Russia. His America First foreign policy put what he perceived to be U.S. interests over and above those of both friends and foes. He began to abandon free trade for protectionism, particularly by raising tariffs on China. But his administration’s internal divisions, hostility to traditional allies, propensity to make transactional deals with rivals, and general incompetence prevented its coherent implementation.

The Biden administration retained Trump’s focus on great power but abandoned his unilateralism. Instead, it tried to rebuild Washington’s alliance structure, especially NATO, and unite its vassals against China and Russia in defense of the so-called rules-based international order. It paired that with strategic protectionism against Beijing and an industrial policy to ensure U.S. dominance in high-tech industries, especially microchips, which it wanted to onshore from Taiwan.

Biden capitalized on Russia’s imperialist war on Ukraine to rally NATO behind Kyiv’s national liberation struggle. His aim was not to defend Ukraine’s right to self-determination but to weaken Russia. However, his administration fatally discredited its claims to support international law, human rights, and oppressed nations by championing, bankrolling, and arming Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.

Waves of resistance

The global slump, growing inter-imperial rivalries, and capitalism’s other systemic crises have combined to destabilize societies around the world. These conditions have set off waves of resistance from below by various classes, from the petty bourgeoisie to the working class and peasantry. The movements have been politically heterogeneous, spanning the gamut from right-wing small business revolts to uprisings of workers and the oppressed.

Most important for the Left have been the progressive class and social struggles throughout the world from the Arab Spring revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa to the Red State Teachers Revolt, Black Lives Matter, and Palestine solidarity in the U.S. These movements have been the largest since the 1960s and have a class content more like that of the 1930s, expressing rage against the deep economic and social inequalities of our epoch.

But they all have been hampered by the weaknesses inherited from the previous period of defeat and retreat. These include everything from the collapse of the revolutionary Left to the dramatic drop in trade union density and retreat of social movements from membership-based groups to grant-funded NGOs with all their golden chains.

As a result, workers and the oppressed have gone into struggle bereft of class, social, and political infrastructures of dissent. That has impacted the character of movements today. They tend to seemingly come out of nowhere and explode in size, challenging capital and the state. Their demands are usually negative in character, like the slogan of the Arab Spring, which was “the people want the fall of the regime,” and lack a positive alternative. In the words of one analyst, they are revolutions without revolutionaries.

That makes them vulnerable in all sorts of ways. The states and capitals can crush them with brute force as the regimes succeeded in doing throughout the Middle East and North Africa. They can also co-opt them as the Ford Foundation did with key leaders of Black Lives Matter. Reformist parties can also channel uprisings into the dead-end of electoral attempts to use the capitalist state to overcome systemic crises and inequalities. The movements can also dissipate in demoralization over the difficulties of winning victories faced with the intransigence of the state and capital.

That said, more and more activists have drawn lessons from these experiences that it’s necessary to build more serious class, social, and political organizations capable of sustaining struggles for positive demands and reforms on the way to systemic change.

Political polarization to the right and left

Global capitalism’s crises and the waves of resistance have intensified political polarization to the right and to the left. The various regimes and parties of the capitalist classes offer no solutions either to the system’s intractable problems or popular grievances. Undemocratic regimes have turned to increasing authoritarianism to enforce their rule in countries like China and Russia. In bourgeois democracies, angry electorates have voted out capital’s traditional parties, searching for alternatives on the right and the left.

The chief beneficiary of this polarization has been the Right for obvious reasons. The revolutionary Left is far too weak to offer an alternative. The reformist Left has ridden the resistance to win elected office in various countries, but constrained by capitalism’s crisis and the intransigence of the capitalist class, their electoral strategy has been unable to deliver reforms to improve people’s lives. They have, at best, administered neoliberal capitalism with a human face or, worse, broken their promises and turned on their working-class base. The examples of this are legion, from Syriza’s betrayal of Greek workers to the collapse of the Pink Tide in Latin America.

The authoritarian nationalist politicians have reaped the rewards of disappointment with establishment and reformist parties. The Right’s parties represent at best a minority of capital but are mainly an expression of petty bourgeois radicalization. They have found a base in the atomized, defeated, and demoralized sections of the working class. As a result, authoritarian nationalist regimes have multiplied throughout the world, from Putin in Russia to Modi in India, Orban in Hungary, Kast in Chile, Milei in Argentina, and, of course, Trump in the United States.

But their “solutions” of class war, bigotry, and scapegoating, especially of migrants, have also failed to solve the system’s crises and address mass popular grievances from their own petty bourgeois base to the much larger popular classes. So, they too have not been able to establish stable regimes and have even been driven out of power. For instance, Hungarian voters recently voted Orban out of office. Authoritarian states also have faced resistance from below as well as other forces. President Xi Jinping faced a mass uprising against his brutal Zero-COVID policy, and Vladimir Putin faced a coup attempt by the Wagner Group.

In bourgeois democracies, when the new Right has faced governmental crises, some have been tempted to turn to authoritarian rule, like Brazil’s Bolsonaro, who tried to organize a coup after he lost the election to stay in power. He failed. In reality, few democracies have yet fallen to such seizures of power. Instead, the old capitalist parties have exploited the failure of the reformists and the Right to return to power, often by adopting elements of the authoritarian nationalists’ program, especially its attacks on migrants.

But such triangulation only confirms the arguments of the Right, giving them a new lease on life. With bourgeois rule unstable, states across the board are becoming more authoritarian, enforcing rule through coercion, not consent. At the same time, they are becoming more aggressive internationally, the great imperial powers in particular.

With bourgeois rule unstable, states across the board are becoming more authoritarian, enforcing rule through coercion, not consent. At the same time, they are becoming more aggressive internationally, the great imperial powers in particular. Trump’s authoritarian nationalism

The Trump administration is part of this global pattern of the rise of a new Right. Trump’s victory in the 2024 election was entirely the fault of the Democratic Party and its commitment to capitalism and imperialism. The Biden administration failed to address the system’s crises, oversaw the immiseration of workers through inflation, and carried out mass deportations. Abroad, it ramped up inter-imperial conflict and backed Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.

Trump exploited disappointment with the Democrats, but still only managed to squeak out a narrow victory over Harris, winning around half of those who bothered to vote, only about 33 percent of the overall electorate. Like other authoritarian nationalists, he does not represent a capitalist consensus, but a rogue clique of billionaires and the radicalized petty bourgeoisie. And, at best, he won a weak mandate in the 2024 election.

But that does not make his administration any less vicious. Unlike his first term, Trump now has a coherent program in Project 2025 and a unified cabinet of sycophants that, despite their differences, support their leader, including his wildest impulses and without question. They are aggressively implementing their authoritarian nationalist project.

In the U.S., they have launched a class war, cutting taxes on the rich, firing government workers, stripping the rest of union rights, gutting social welfare, and deregulating the economy. They are carrying this out through classic divide-and-rule tactics, blaming the oppressed and scapegoating them, especially immigrants, for the system’s failures. He has poured $85 billion into ICE’s budget over the next four years to hire and unleash thousands of new agents to occupy cities and arrest hundreds of thousands of migrants, detain them in new concentration camps, and deport them back to their countries of origin

In a fit of irrationalism, Trump is also carrying out revenge on the deep state, slashing entire parts of the government bureaucracy essential for reproducing U.S. capitalism, like the National Institute of Health, and managing U.S. imperialism like the State Department. In place of professional managers, he is appointing right-wing hacks, ideologues,  and lackeys.

He’s extended this assault into the private sphere as well, targeting, for example, elite higher education, which trains future CEOs, scientists, professionals, and state managers, all personnel essential for U.S. capitalism and its state. He really seems to want to Make America Stupid Again.

Ripping up the imperial order

Abroad, largely in defiance of the capitalist class and state managers, Trump has ripped up the entire order that the U.S. built after World War II and expanded globally after the Cold War. His administration’s project is not isolationist, but one of predatory dominance in pursuit of its conception of U.S. interests against both allies and rivals. Trump’s representatives laid out this in their National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy, and a series of speeches by JD Vance and Marco Rubio.

Their stated goal is to Make America Great Again by putting America First, definitively abandoning all their predecessors’ project of superintending global capitalism. In geopolitics, they are withdrawing from multilateral bodies like the UN and World Health Organization that the U.S. set up to oversee the world. Trump has even gutted funding for humanitarian aid programs like USAID that used to garner support from countries in the Global South. He dismissed those as corrupt welfare schemes, essentially abandoning any use of soft power.

In economics, he has abandoned free trade globalization, establishing a protectionist trade regime against both allies and rivals. But he has run into international and domestic opposition. China, unlike most other states, stood toe to toe with his administration, imposed crippling restrictions on its exports of processed rare earths, and left Trump no choice but to lower his tariffs.

In the U.S., the capitalist class and Trump’s own petty bourgeois base of farmers forced him to grant them carve-outs. And the Supreme Court ruled against his use of the International Emergency Powers Act to impose his tariffs, forcing the administration back to the drawing board to use other powers to maintain the new protectionism.

Finally, on the military front, the administration has doubled down on hard power, jacking up the Pentagon’s budget to over $1 trillion. And now Trump is proposing to raise it to $1.5 trillion. At the same time, his regime has retreated from enforcing global order. It is demanding that its nominal allies in Europe and Asia shoulder the burden of their own security so that the U.S. can focus on carving out a sphere of influence in Latin America through crude gunboat diplomacy for naked economic gain.

The goal of its new “Donroe Doctrine” is to lock the region under its dominion, crushing opponents, and pushing out China. Already, Trump bullied Panama into withdrawing from China’s BRI, carried out a coup in Venezuela to seize control of its oil, threatened to take over Greenland to establish bases and stake claim to the Arctic’s resources, and has imposed a brutal blockade on Cuba, threatening it with regime change to open it up for U.S. real estate capital.

While that sphere of influence is Trump’s top priority, he has three others—Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. In Europe, he is supporting the far Right to restore “white civilization” and imperialist pride, pressuring the EU to deregulate, and bullying NATO to increase its military spending and manage its own security, including against Russia. He has all but sold Ukraine down the river, conceding to Moscow its old sphere of influence in Eastern Europe.

In Asia, he has stated that he intends to maintain the status quo standoff with China, but he’s also hinted that he might cut a deal with Beijing to concede it a sphere of influence. And in the Middle East, he backs Israel to finish off Hamas in Gaza, impose a predatory “peace” there, and dismantle the rest of the so-called Axis of Resistance, including its headquarters in Iran. After that, Trump wants to expand the so-called Abraham Accords to normalize relations between Israel and the region’s regimes, all under the thumb of the U.S., not China and Russia.

Survival of the most vicious

With this project, the Trump administration has put the world on notice that it has abandoned the so-called rules-based order to advance its narrow economic interests without disguise. It is establishing a new world disorder where might makes right, the great powers struggle for dominance, and the weak, in the words of Thucydides, “suffer what they must.”

While other powers like the EU may pine for the rules-based order, they have no choice but to adapt to the pressure from the U.S. and other great powers to abide by their dog-eat-dog rules. In a stunning speech at the World Economic Forum, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney laid out the new global disorder in stark terms. He eulogized the old rules-based order. While he recognized that it was always a sham, he argued that at least there were some political and economic restraints on great powers.

But Trump, he noted, has laid waste to it and so-called middle powers like Canada must recognize that fact and respond accordingly, otherwise they “won’t be at the table but on the menu.” Whether he liked it or not, Carney argued, Canada has to put its imperial interests first. Already, he is advancing that project, increasing his state’s military budget, staking claims to the Arctic, and cutting economic deals with U.S. rivals like China. Other U.S. allies are doing the same. In a shocking example, Denmark actually made plans to deploy its troops to Greenland and blow up its airport runways to stop a U.S. invasion.

All states are adapting to Trump’s contest for the survival of the most vicious. The EU, NATO, and individual states, especially France and Germany, do not trust the U.S. and recognize that they have no choice but to stake out their own path. The European powers are cutting trade deals with China and Latin America in defiance of the U.S., jacking up their military budgets, and imposing austerity on workers with cuts to social welfare spending, wages, and benefits. Russia has already established a war economy to fuel its imperialist invasion of Ukraine. In Asia, Japan is doing the same. So is China, Washington’s key rival. We are thus in the midst of a new global arms race.

Iran—A turning point in world history

The so-called rules-based order was already in tatters in the wake of Russia’s imperialist war in Ukraine and the U.S. and Israel’s genocide in Gaza. And now with his war on Iran, Trump destroyed what remained of it. Flush with success after kidnapping Maduro in Venezuela and turning the remnants of his regime into a servant of U.S. imperialism, Trump thought he and Israel could do the same in Iran. Instead, it has blown up in his face with Tehran launching a regional war in response.

While the U.S. and Israel started this war together, they have different war aims. Trump had sought a Venezuela-style solution; he wanted to find a figure in the regime that would play the role Delcy Rodriguez did in Caracas and cut a deal to survive on the condition of obeying U.S. dictates. He hoped a reconfigured Iranian regime would then join the Abraham Accords along with the Arab states and normalize relations with Israel.

By contrast, Netanyahu intends to destroy the entire regime, balkanize the country, and wipe out its allies to ensure that none can pose any challenge to Israel’s regional hegemony. Thus, as Trump admitted, Israel undermined Washington’s goal by killing the Iranian leaders Washington hoped to cut a deal with. Unsurprisingly, Israel has paired its blitzkrieg in Iran with a new offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon to go with its ongoing genocide in Gaza and settlement expansion in the West Bank. It aims to carve out its own mini-empire—Greater Israel.

Of course, Israel pressured Trump to launch the war, but it did not sucker him into doing it. The tail does not wag the dog. Even Netanyahu ridiculed that idea in an interview with Sean Hannity. When Hannity said, “There are people that say, ‘Wow, the prime minister of Israel dragged him into it,” Netanyahu laughed. “That’s ridiculous,” he said. “Donald Trump is the strongest leader in the world. He does what he thinks is right for America.”

Thus, Trump launched the war for his own stupid reasons. He is no puppet of Israel. But he catastrophically miscalculated. Iran is not Venezuela; it is a battle-tested, theocratic regime with a loyal base in a minority of the population. It has carried out a regional war and repeatedly crushed every democratic uprising of its workers and the oppressed peoples. And it had been elaborately prepared not only to survive a U.S. and Israeli war but also to launch a devastating counter-attack.

Catastrophic consequences

So, when Trump started this war, Iran withstood the assault and responded by firing missiles and drones at Israel, all the Arab states, and even NATO powers. It attacked Turkey and  British bases in Cyprus and Diego Garcia. And they shut down the Strait of Hormuz, cutting off shipment of oil and natural gas to the world. That sent fossil fuel prices spiraling upwards, threatening global economic growth and setting off inflation—the capitalist nightmare of stagflation.

And the danger to the world economy could get far worse if the conflict escalates. Already, when Israel struck Iran’s natural gas field, Tehran responded by attacking Qatar’s liquid natural gas (LNG)  processing plant in Ras Laffan, which supplies Asia with much of its LNG. That provoked Trump to tell Israel to refrain from further strikes. But the damage may have already been done. Qatar reports that it will take 3 to 5 years to repair its massive plant. One analyst said this will lead to the Armageddon scenario—the biggest oil and natural gas shock in history.

But the impact of the war will be even greater than that. Contrary to stereotypes, the importance of the region’s economy to the world extends far beyond fossil fuels. The Gulf states have transformed themselves into centers of industry, international travel, commercial shipping, and finance capital. The disruption of all this will be devastating for the system and, more importantly, for the working class and peasants of the world.

The war and the closure of the Strait are blocking the export of the region’s fertilizer industry. That will lead to shortages and drive up prices of fertilizer right as planting season starts over the next few months across the world. Farmers in the Global North may be able to stomach the costs and gobble up the bulk of the supply, but farmers in the Global South will be priced out of the market, suffer shortages, and produce lower crop yields. The combination of increased fertilizer and fuel costs will trigger a spike in food prices in the Global North and famine in the Global South.

The war is also blocking the region’s export of all sorts of fossil fuel byproducts that are essential for the global economy. For example, its plants produce naphtha, one of the key components for the global manufacturing of plastic, which corporations use for almost everything from packaging to cars and fighter jets. Another example is helium. It is essential for the manufacture of microchips, without which today’s high-tech economy can’t function.

Moreover, the region’s ports and airports are essential hubs for both international travel and commercial transit. Their disruption is causing all sorts of problems in the world economy. Even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens along with the airports, corporations will now distrust them as reliable hubs for transport and commerce, throwing into question their vast investments, infrastructure, and trade and travel routes.

Finally, the Gulf states like the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have turned themselves into major centers of international finance capital. They have used their funds to invest in all sorts of things, but especially AI data centers, not only in their region, but also in the United States. Now, companies will doubt the security of data centers in the Gulf states. And the Gulf states will have to pull back from their international investment and use their capital to rebuild their own infrastructure. Such a drawback will undercut the U.S. data center boom and could pop the high-tech bubble, the main prop for U.S. capitalism’s growth. Thus, the war is disrupting the whole system.

The logic of escalation

Trump has thereby stumbled into the biggest imperialist crisis since Iraq and potentially a far worse one. The U.S., Israel, and Iran, up until the ceasefire, were locked in a logic of escalation with no clear end in sight. The Iranian regime faced an existential threat and will fight to its death. It therefore expanded the war to force states throughout the region and world to compel the U.S. and Israel to stop it and prevent another one. No doubt they will be determined to build nuclear weapons after the war to deter any future attack.

Trump has thereby stumbled into the biggest imperialist crisis since Iraq and potentially a far worse one.

Iran’s counterattacks forced the U.S. and Israel to respond, prolonging what Trump had hoped would be a quick victory. Thus, like the sorcerer’s apprentice, Trump lost control of a spiraling war. And his decision to stage his own blockade of the Strait of Hormuz to cut off Iranian exports has intensified the conflict’s damage to the world economy.

Faced with this crisis, Trump relented, agreeing to a ceasefire with none of his goals achieved. Iran’s regime remains in power, it still has nuclear stockpiles, it retains significant missile and drone capacity to threaten attacks on the region, and it has promised to continue support for its regional allies in Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen.

At this point, the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, the talks are at stand still, and the world economy stands at the precipice of an even greater crisis. The Iranian regime clearly believes it can weather the standoff longer than the U.S.. While Trump clearly wants to cut a deal, he cannot accept one that further humiliates the U.S. Meanwhile, Israel is braying for more war in Iran and Lebanon.

Regardless of what happens, the U.S. is in the midst of a metastasizing economic, geopolitical, and military crisis. The world economy has been hammered. No one in the region can now trust the United States. All its military bases and defense systems have not protected its vassals like Saudi Arabia but have made them targets for attack. And no regime will risk normalizing relations with Israel against the wishes of the masses of the population in the region, who are now furious with the U.S. and Israel. That puts Trump’s Abraham Accords in jeopardy.

Trump has thoroughly alienated all of Washington’s allies, whom he kept in the dark about his plans to launch the war. Now, with the U.S. in crisis, none of them has agreed to bail Trump out. They all have refused to join his war and send ships to open the Strait of Hormuz. At this point, they want to keep out of it and have become increasingly critical of it. The German chancellor’s remark that Iran had humiliated the U.S. drove Trump in a fit of rage to threaten to withdraw all of Washington’s troops from Europe, threatening the entire NATO alliance.

Even worse for the U.S., Trump’s war has benefited Washington’s main rivals, Russia and China. In a desperate attempt to lower fossil fuel prices, Trump lowered sanctions on Russia’s oil exports. Putin has thus scored a victory, securing desperately needed funds to aid his ailing economy. That will enable him to escalate his imperialist war on Ukraine. Trump lowered sanctions on Russia even though it is aiding Iran by giving it military intelligence. Sensing his advantage, Putin even offered to suspend its intelligence sharing if the U.S. stops doing the same for Ukraine.

China is happy to see the U.S. bogged down in yet another catastrophic war. While it has lost oil and natural gas from Iran, it can, for now, draw on its huge fossil fuel reserves and can expand contracts for more supplies from Russia, further consolidating their “friendship without limits.” But China is not immune to the war’s consequences. It will find difficulties securing key materials for its manufacturing, the global slump will weaken its export markets that are its main engine of continued growth, and countries in its debt will find it ever more difficult to repay their loans, putting Chinese financial capital in jeopardy.

Trump’s intensifying domestic crisis

Trump’s war will intensify his domestic political crisis. Already deeply unpopular, he now faces splits in his MAGA leadership with figures like Tucker Carlson opposing the war. He has also alienated sections of his base that voted for him, believing naively that Trump would keep the U.S. out of “forever wars.” With no end in sight, this war dooms the Republican Party to defeat in the upcoming midterm elections, if they are free and fair. The Democrats will take the House, possibly the Senate, tie Congress up in hearings, block all legislation, and try to impeach Trump and members of his cabinet.

Trump knows that. So, he is turning to more and more authoritarian means to maintain power. He is trying to rig the election through gerrymandering and voter suppression, most recently with the Save America Act, which would effectively disenfranchise millions. The Supreme Court also helped Trump in its recent ruling that overturned Louisiana’s congressional map that afforded Black voters a majority in two districts. Their decision effectively guts the Voting Rights Act, risking a return to electoral white supremacy not seen since the Jim Crow era. Already, in a dangerous precedent, Louisiana has suspended the primary election to enable redistricting to the advantage of the GOP.

In an even more ominous sign, some on the right, like Bannon, have argued for Trump to deploy ICE at polling locations. Trump has already tested the water by deploying ICE to the airports across the country. Thus, U.S. norms of bourgeois democracy hang in the balance. Lest anyone think this to be an exaggeration, three new studies found that the U.S. is slipping toward an autocracy at astonishing speed.

Faced with this spiraling crisis, the Democratic Party spent the last year practically in hiding. They adopted James Carville’s “possum strategy”—literally playing dead when faced with a predator. While outliers like Bernie Sanders and AOC agitated for action against the billionaire class, the establishment Democrats bided their time, hoping Trump would punch himself out and discredit the GOP so that they could sweep the midterms. Then they could find some new corporate standard bearer like Gavin Newsom or JB Pritzker or even worse turn back to genocidaire, Kamala Harris, to win back the White House in 2028 and restore the status quo ante.

Truth be told, the Democratic Party did next to nothing to resist Trump until the Minneapolis mass strike against ICE. Only then did they challenge the funding of ICE and Homeland Security. But just like they have done with police, their demand was not for the abolition of ICE’s racist goon squad, but that its agents wear body cameras, get more training, and stop wearing masks. With those “reforms,” they have promised to grant ICE more funding! That should surprise no one since the Democrats have bankrolled DHS and ICE with billions since their creation in 2003. And, under Obama and Biden, they used ICE and Border Patrol to deport millions of people.

Their supposed opposition to Trump’s catastrophic war on Iran has been even more pathetic. Why? Because they share with the GOP U.S. imperialism’s determination since Iran’s 1979 revolution to topple the Islamic Republic. So, their initial objections were procedural—that Trump had not made the case for war, had not secured support from Congress under the War Powers Act, and had no plan or clearly stated goals. And their main concern is that Trump’s idiotic war has weakened U.S. imperialism and its capacity to fight China and Russia.

While some reformists in the party have denounced the war, they remain trapped in an imperialist party, which is both reactionary and incapacitated in a moment of emergency. As a result, despite the fact that the Democrats are likely to win the midterms, if the elections happen in any normal fashion, they remain deeply unpopular and offer no solutions to the system’s crises and popular grievances.

In resistance, there is hope

Unlike the Democratic Party, workers and the oppressed have risen up against Trump, producing a mass heterogeneous resistance. Some of its currents predate Trump’s presidency, like the Palestine solidarity movement, which persists despite state repression and hostility from liberal and Zionist forces. Most other currents have been galvanized by Trump’s unrelenting class and social attacks, particularly on ICE’s war on immigrants. All these converged in Minneapolis, culminating in a mass strike and protest that forced Trump to retreat, fire his commander of the Border Patrol, Greg Bovino, demote Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, and withdraw hundreds of ICE and Border Patrol agents.

That uprising against ICE was based on a developed infrastructure of resistance forged over the last couple of decades. That included the George Floyd uprising against police brutality, union organizing and strikes, immigrant rights struggles, and indigenous-led climate justice campaigns. But most parts of the country lack this infrastructure of resistance. And even there, the militant minority and revolutionary Left remain small as elsewhere. These hamper the organization and politics of the resistance.

Nevertheless, the struggle is forging new organizations and a new Left. The two main organized currents of the national resistance are Indivisible and May Day Strong. Indivisible was formed by two Democratic Party organizers who explicitly conceived the project as a means to galvanize its base in struggle and then turn it to elections to defeat Trump and Republicans. It is thus a popular front formation, wedding workers and the oppressed to a capitalist party in the hopes of securing liberal reforms.

It has staged three massive No Kings rallies. But, because of its ties to the Democratic Party, it has tended to exclude Palestine solidarity activists and has proved reluctant to even include opposition to the war on Iran. Its strategy is to turn the millions on its demonstrations into campaigners for the Democrats in the midterms and 2028 presidential elections. But, as we know from bitter experience, the Democrats are no alternative for the vast majority. Nevertheless, the people at those demonstrations are open to much more radical ideas and strategies.

The other formation, May Day Strong, was spearheaded by the Chicago Teachers Union. It has brought together unions, immigrant rights groups, other social movement organizations, and NGOs in a potential united front of working-class forces. It does include Indivisible and another liberal formation, 5051, and it is limited by the horizons of the left union bureaucracy. Nevertheless, it has put May Day back on the map, encouraged solidarity schools to prepare unions to stage political strikes against Trump, and pushed the slogan, “no work, no school, no shopping,” for this year’s May Day.

May Day Strong offers the Left a national vehicle to advance the argument for a general strike to challenge Trump’s increasingly authoritarian regime. Its explicit model is the South Korean strike that blocked a coup and toppled the government. That said, it does not exist in all cities and towns. It is also not immune from co-optation by the Democrats through the trade union officialdom’s alliance with the party’s reformist wing. And it is an ominous sign that Indivisible plays such a prominent role in its midst. Nonetheless, May Day Strong is an important strategic orientation for the revolutionary left in building the resistance. Our challenge is how to forge similar local formations aligned with the national coalition. It is our best shot to agitate for mass, independent working-class action to topple the Trump regime.

Rebirth of the revolutionary Left

This new epoch of crisis, imperialist rivalry, authoritarianism, and resistance is opening up space for the construction of a new socialist Left. Indeed, all political organizations are now growing from reformism to neo-Stalinism and revolutionary socialism. The struggle is on to shape a new generation’s politics, strategies, and tactics for an epoch of crisis and class struggle.

Tempest argues that the tradition of socialism from below offers the best way to fight here and now on the road to international socialism. We aim to embody these politics in an organization with branches that avoid the traps of the micro party that has paralyzed our forebears—ideological uniformity, sectarianism, ultraleftism, and organization building in isolation from the living struggle. Join us to build a socialist organization, forge new infrastructures of resistance, cohere a militant minority, and eventually found a revolutionary party. These are tall tasks, but necessary ones in our apocalyptic times.

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”

The post Faultlines in a new epoch of crisis appeared first on Tempest.

Zimbabwe’s Fast Track Land Reform Program (FTLRP), launched in 2000, sought to correct colonial-era land inequalities by redistributing land from approximately 4,500 white commercial farmers — who held over 70% of arable land — to millions of landless Black Zimbabweans. While rooted in legitimate grievances, the program’s hasty and often violent implementation triggered severe economic collapse, social disruption, and environmental degradation.

This case study examines the FTLRP’s historical context, motivations, and wide-ranging impacts, drawing critical lessons for future land reform efforts across Africa and beyond.

Read the case study here

Each week, Food Tank is rounding up a few news stories that inspire excitement, infuriation, or curiosity.

Investment in Africa’s Agrifood Systems Is Growing—But Not Enough

A new joint report by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, the U.N. Economic Commission for Africa, the World Food Programme, and the African Union Commission finds that since 2018, the African continent has seen a general upward trend in government spending on agriculture, forestry, and fishing. In 2022, public expenditure in these sectors amounted to US$16 billion, up from US$12.6 billion in 2020 and US$14.6 billion in 2021. 

While encouraging, the investment is still not enough to meet targets for ending hunger and transforming food and agriculture systems in a region where hunger has increased for eight consecutive years. 

Private sector funding in the form of bank credit and foreign direct investment is particularly low and far below potential, the authors state. The perceived high risk of investing in food and agriculture markets remains a key barrier to financing solutions that can boost food and nutrition security for communities. 

That’s why the report urgently calls for public-private collaboration that will de-risk investments. Policy reforms that are inclusive of women and youth are needed as well. The report also identifies climate finance—which rose nearly 50 percent in two years—as an untapped opportunity if decisionmakers can align this funding with food systems transformation that builds resilience.

COP31 Presidency, IEA Team Up to Push Clean Energy

The COP31 Presidency recently announced a partnership with the International Energy Agency (IEA) to speed up the transition to clean energy. This comes during what IEA’s Executive Director Fatih Birol calls “the biggest energy crisis in history”

Murat Kurum, Turkey’s Minister of Environment, says that it will take collaboration to “transform the crisis into an opportunity.”

While details of the partnership are still limited, one of the most important pillars of this transition will focus on clean cooking, helping the roughly 2.3 billion people reliant on polluting fuels like charcoal, firewood, and waste switch to cleaner cooking solutions. This move can not only reduce emissions but also lower the associated negative health impacts.

The Environment Minister also shared that the IEA will conduct special research on the impact of recycling, which will inform the COP31 Presidency’s agenda on cutting emissions from waste—a top priority for Turkey. 

New South Wales Prepares for Food Waste Prevention Laws

Beginning July 1, sites in New South Wales that generate 3,960 liters of waste a week will be required to separate food waste from their general waste. This will impact larger operations including hotels, food courts, and other high-volume venues. 

By July 2028, the rules will apply to sites that produce at least 1,980 liters of waste per week. By 2030, it will apply to those generating at least 720 liters. 

Currently, households spend roughly AU$2,000 every year on food that goes uneaten. And by 2030, the government states that the country’s landfills will not be able to accept additional waste. 

The New South Wales Environment Protection Authority is offering programs and grants that will help businesses comply with the new laws. 

While their timelines vary, Victoria, the Australian Capital Territory, and Queensland are also moving toward circular economy frameworks that will prioritize diverting organic waste from landfills. 

Agricultural Cooperatives Offer Resilience and Hope

A new policy paper from the Co-operative Party finds that agricultural cooperatives could “unleash growth” and boost food security in the United Kingdom. 

At a time when the conflict is driving fuel and fertilizer prices higher, co-ops offer stability. By allowing farmers to pool resources, and share risks, and invest collectively, this model can improve resilience in the face of volatile input markets. 

Paul Gerrard, Director of public affairs at the Co-operative Group, says that a co-op “naturally lends itself to sharing costs and spreading risk” while making “the day-to-day fundamentals of farming more efficient.”

There are around 500 agricultural co-ops in the UK and around half of UK farmers are estimated to be members of a co-op of some kind. But the paper says there is “significant room for expansion.” A new Farming Roadmap for England, which will be published by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The report’s authors believe this Roadmap is an opportunity to formalize a commitment to expanding co-ops even further. 

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Danie Kawed, Unsplash

The post Food Tank’s Weekly News Roundup: Australia Cracks Down on Food Waste, COP31 Pushes Clean Energy, Ag Co-ops Offer Hope appeared first on Food Tank.

No Kings No Wars.Step Up For Democracy.

Iran is passing through a phase of exceptional violence and intensity. In the wake of the genocide in Palestine and the large-scale destruction inflicted on Lebanon, the United States and Israel are also participating in the devastation of lives, bodies, territories, and vital infrastructures in Iran.There they have been targeting not only refineries and fuel depots, but also health facilities, water resources, energy systems, oil installations, schools, and other civilian spaces. In Minab, a girls’ school was obliterated and more than 168 were killed, among them Baloch children. This war has disrupted the very conditions of social reproduction, further deepened the vulnerability of the working classes. It has undermined the material basis of social autonomy, pushing struggles from below several steps backward, and reinforcing forms of state or social-driven ethno-nationalism. The rapid shift, within the space of a month, from Trump’s promise to “make Iran great again” to the threat of reducing the country to the “stone age” dispelled any remaining ambiguity about the imperial logic at work—a formula that unmistakably recalls the language of the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq.

This imperialist “external” violence, however, cannot be understood apart from the internal crisis through which the Islamic Republic has been attempting to reconstitute its authority. Since the 2022 uprising, following the police murder of the young Kurdish woman Jina Mahsa Amini, the Islamic Republic has continuously sought, in every war and geopolitical crisis, ways to restore some of the authority and respectability it has lost.

The paradox of imperialist assault and regime legitimacy

The war waged by the genocidal Israeli colonial power against the Palestinians after October 7, 2023, followed by the first Israeli-U.S. attack on Iran in June 2025, offered the Islamic Republic an initial framework for rehabilitation. However, the January 2026 massacre, during which thousands of Iranian demonstrators were killed in just two days by the forces of the theocratic state, simply for protesting against the economic crisis and political dictatorship, reopened an acute crisis of legitimacy, domestically and internationally, for Tehran.

When Iranians were still in mourning, and while many families had not even been able to recover the bodies of their loved ones killed in January, the United States and Israel launched a new imperialist invasion on February 28, 2026, one even more violent than previous assaults. Paradoxically, the attacks have so far helped the Islamic Republic regain some of the credibility it had lost through the bloody repression of the previous month.

These two events, massacre and war, do not constitute either separate sequences or two opposing forms of violence—one repressive and the other supposedly liberatory—but rather successive, even asymmetric, moments of an interconnected counter-revolutionary process. The “external” war prolongs and deepens the internal counter-revolution, enabling the Iranian state to tighten internal cohesion and, once again, stifle popular dissent.

Recognizing this in no way minimizes the fact that Iran has been, and remains, the target of imperialist and colonial aggression carried out with impunity. On the contrary, it requires us to read this assault in terms of its deeper political function: first, as a murderous enterprise of destruction targeting civilian lives, bodies, infrastructure, and territories, carried out under false pretexts and extending the genocidal enterprise pursued in Gaza, as well as in the West bank and Lebanon; and, second, as the provision of new resources to the Islamic Republic for its own reconstitution.

What is campism?

Israeli-U.S. aggression is reinforcing Iran’s militarization, repression, and the crushing of uprisings from below. It is also intensifying a deadly political polarization. On one side, part of the opposition, especially monarchists, welcomed the imperialist bombings in the name of their hostility to the theocratic state. On the other side, other political forces have fallen back into the orbit of the Islamic Republic in the name of anti-imperialism and opposition to war. While the reactionary nature of the first current—pro-Israel, pro-U.S., and pro-genocide—has been readily opposed based on a relative consensus among the progressive and leftist forces, the second current has unfortunately captured parts of the Left and  is every bit as significant.

It is within this impasse that the question of campism re-emerges with particular urgency. By campism I mean a range of positions and tendencies that support any force or state  based on its opposition to Western imperialism regardless of its reactionary or progressive nature.

A legacy of the Cold War, campism, as articulated by self-proclaimed anti-imperialists and supporters of the so-called resistance camp, often reduces the world based on a binary logic of two “camps”: imperialism (the United States, NATO, Israel, and their allies) versus “the resistance” (Iran, Russia, China, Assad’s Syria, and so on). The democratic and subversive uprisings against the latter states, such as Rojava, are thereby dismissed as inherently suspect or as a”” Trojan Horse” of the enemy. Any criticism of dictators is immediately disqualified as “complicity with imperialism”.

Popular mobilizations are reduced to mere “Western relays”, or else instrumentalized whenever they can serve one camp. The logic of “the enemy of my enemy” becomes an alibi: it becomes an excuse for overlooking internal repression and the protests that follow,  as nothing more than parts of a larger geopolitical conflict.

The result is that internationalist, mutual solidarity based on the shared experiences and destinities of the oppressed classes becomes paralyzed, incapable of holding anti-authoritarianism and anti-imperialism together. Under the pretext of preventing any “imperialist exploitation” of revolutions, campists tend to privilege a structurally marginalized, “prudent” Left, at times condemned to perpetual defeat.

This “identity-based anti-imperialism” privileges loyalty to “anti-Western” states over an analysis of global capitalism. In so doing, it justifies repression, patriarchy, homophobia, and internal colonialism in the name of “resistance.” Absolute priority is given to the struggle against Western imperialism, and victims of these “anti-imperialist” states become “collateral damage.” .

The Irish essayist Fred Halliday described this type of thinking as “the anti-imperialism of fools.” In the name of hostility to the United States, this posture violently reinforces, in practice, a theocratic state that represses the Left, national minorities, feminists, and popular councils. The concept was later taken up by the Syrian activist Leila Al-Shami in her book Burning Country to designate supporters of Bashar al-Assad during the Arab revolution of the 2010s. From the Soviet crushing of the Hungarian uprising in Budapest in 1956 to the present, this anti-imperialism of fools has masked state violence and the crushing of revolts.

Such a tendency can be observed within certain segments of the white Western left, but also within decolonial modes of thinking. It belongs to what one might call “anti-imperialism-washing,” the strategic use of anti-imperialist rhetoric to conceal, justify, or minimize forms of authoritarianism and fascistic violence exercised within national borders, especially when these states are presented as adversaries of Western hegemonic power. While these figures denounce the colonialism of Western powers, they remain largely blind, and even complicit, when it comes to “internal colonialism,” that is, the way minoritized peoples, such as the Kurds and Baluchs, describe their relationship to Iranian state power.

This practice is also often accompanied by a form of racial gaslighting. “Gaslighting” originally referred to the manipulation of women by systematically casting doubt on their word and mental state. Having become a key term in psychology and later a critical tool of feminism, it now encompasses a form of deceitful, violent, even denialist political language more broadly. Communities that have historically been subjected both to imperial domination and to internal repression are “taught,” from positions of relative privilege, the “correct” interpretation of imperialism and resistance. This condescending posture does not merely reinscribe colonial hierarchies of knowledge; it delegitimizes the ideas and lived experiences—the very agency— of those subjected to entangled systems of violence.

The consequences are all too tangible. The Islamic Republic of Iran instrumentalizes this decolonial discourse to label demonstrators as “terrorists” and harden its coercive apparatus. This logic also helps justify the discriminatory policies directed against Afghan migrants in Iran: by portraying them as an internal threat, the state shifts onto them responsibility for difficulties that in fact stem from its own political, social, and economic regime.

No struggle should be consigned to the “waiting-room of history” in the name of a linear conception of liberation, or sacrificed to a hierarchy of supposedly more urgent causes. The counterrevolutionary logic of campism

After the genocide in Gaza and the war waged by Israel and the United States against Iran in June 2025, campism has once again  come to dominate part of the global radical Left in the West, as well as in Latin America, Africa, and the Arab world. It reduces Iranian politics to a duel between “Iran” and the “U.S.-Israeli axis.” Popular uprisings, repressed in blood since 2017, are either passed over in silence or recast through the state’s official discourse: “Mossad infiltration,” “color revolution,” “Western plot,” and so on. This framework turns social movements into a security threat and legitimizes repression—from street violence to executions—under the pretext of a “state of emergency” or an “untimely moment”. By treating insurgent people as the principal enemy, it is, in fact, profoundly counterrevolutionary.

Under the expanding regime of permanent war, people in  struggle are repeatedly told to stand down, to defer themselves for the sake of a higher urgency. Even those who recognize the repressive nature of these forces often set aside emancipatory struggles in the name of strategy. This is what Morteza Samanpour and Amir Kianpour have called “strategic campism.” Feminist struggles have long been trapped in precisely this logic: they are always asked to wait, first for class, now for anti-imperialism. But feminist politics has named the truth of this postponement with clarity: later too often means never. No struggle should be consigned to the “waiting-room of history” in the name of a linear conception of liberation, or sacrificed to a hierarchy of supposedly more urgent causes.

Recent geopolitical developments have given campists even greater room for maneuver. During Israel’s war against Iran in June 2025, often referred to as the “Twelve-Day War,” the concrete experience of destruction strengthened anti-war tendencies inside Iran. However, after the bloody massacre perpetrated by the state in January 2026, part of society, exhausted and confronted with a dead end, came to falsely view foreign intervention as a means of overthrowing the government, other internal avenues having been tried unsuccessfully and with the state not yielding to pressure. A prominent doctor reported that “at least a thousand” patients (protesters) with severe eye injuries had presented at a single hospital in Tehran following the January protests, all requiring urgent treatment in an attempt to save their eyesight.

It is precisely here that campism collapses. To condemn external war while remaining silent about internal state violence is not a principled anti-war position, but a form of relativism that effaces crucial differences between regimes and modalities of violence. This is not a claim of Iranian exceptionalism invoked to legitimize military attack, as some Trumpist and monarchist currents have done. It is, rather, the insistence that a theocratic dictatorship, in which an unelected leader exercises extralegal power over ninety million people through social terror, executions, torture, political imprisonment, digital isolation, misogynistic religious rule, and racist-colonial policies toward national minorities and Afghan migrants, cannot be treated as equivalent to states where civil and legal freedoms, however limited, still exist, and where violence operates at a structurally different scale and form. .

To condemn the external war or imperialist intervention without explicitly denouncing this internal violences, the massacre of its own population, as campists do, is both a complete political misreading of dynamics in Iran, and means siding with the state against the people it is killing. States rule by dividing people and crushing uprisings. Campists do not resist this logic; they follow it. By taking states and their geopolitical alignments as their primary point of reference, they reproduce and legitimize the divisions imposed from above, substituting allegiance to state camps for solidarities forged from below among people in struggle.

By taking states and their geopolitical alignments as their primary point of reference, they reproduce and legitimize the divisions imposed from above, substituting allegiance to state camps for solidarities forged from below among people in struggle. A betrayal of the memories of the Global South

Since the Islamic counterrevolution against the genuine 1979 revolution, part of the national and international left has subordinated class and gender analysis to its one-sided interpretation of anti-imperialism. Women’s protests against compulsory veiling, for example, were marginalized, inadvertently contributing to the consolidation of the religious and patriarchal order, and came to be presented as a guarantee of “cultural authenticity,” a sign of distinction from the West, and a marker of national independence. A dominant narrative thus took shape, one that views the Iranian Revolution exclusively through the prism of anti-Westernism and, in so doing, erases secular, feminist, queer, Kurdish, socialist, and other progressist forces. This ideology is structurally incapable of recognizing the legitimacy of internal struggles within anti-Western states. Non-Western peoples are recognized only as objects of Western imperialism, the lived experiences, collective memories, and political subjectivities of subaltern groups—women/queer communities, ethnic minorities, and the popular classes—are systematically dismissed as insignificant distractions or as being inventions of the West.

After the collapse of the USSR in 1991, this orientation persisted in the form of statist Third Worldism: the loyalty of populations was transferred to “anti-American” states, and the rights of women, queer people, and minorities were subordinated to “anti-imperialist unity.” This approach, at once Eurocentric and Orientalist, ignores the subjectivity of non-Western peoples. It treats violence as serious only when it emanates from the U.S. camp and refuses to acknowledge that populations of the Global South may genuinely struggle for democratic rights and freedoms.

“Anti-colonial unity” is thus transformed into nationalist authoritarianism. And it accepts the logic of a seemingly permanent “state of emergency”: priority is given to state power, security, and geopolitical leverage (for example: “We fight in Syria so that we do not have to fight in Tehran”).

Campism turns anti-colonial memory into an instrument for legitimizing authoritarian postcolonial states. It makes the state the agent of resistance and strips peoples of both their legitimacy and their political subjectivity. In doing so, it betrays subaltern memories that were often constituted against the state itself. Paradoxically, states such as Iran are presented as “independent from global capitalism,” even as they remain machines of internal exploitation and militarism, concerned precisely with integrating themselves into and competing with other states on the stage of global capitalism.

It is precisely in its relation to Iran’s colonized margins that this logic most clearly reveals its violence. Campism does not only erase the plurality of Iranian opposition forces. Rooted in a quasi-colonial and securitized conception of sovereignty and borders, it also reproduces internal hierarchies by relegating Kurdish and other non-Persian ethnic struggles to the background, or even disqualifying them. In this respect, from the 1980 jihad against Kurdistan to 100+ recent attacks on exiled Iranian Kurdish parties in Iraqi Kurdistan during the war, campists have often shown themselves even more hostile to the Kurds than the Iranian government, minimizing or marginalizing the legitimacy of their resistance.

These violences form part of a longer history, aggravated by the active support—or the silence—of some actors in the Arab world and of certain segments of the Left. The Al-Anfal genocide carried out by Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, costing the lives of around 180,000 Kurds simply because of their identity, illustrates this dynamic. The trauma of the murderous repression was compounded by the support of part of the Arab world and the denial of the genocide on the part of intellectuals.

More recently, in 2018, the occupation of Afrin in Rojava by the Turkish army brought systematic violence, displacement, and destruction. In response, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal, stated, “ victory in Afrin is a symbol of Turkey[’s] will. If God wills, we will submit great epics to help our people,” before praising the leadership of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his party, the Justice and Development Party, which has been in power for more than twenty years.

These events have unfortunately produced a lasting rupture in the ties between Kurdish struggles and those of the Arab or Persian worlds, as well as with certain parts of the self-proclaimed anti-imperialist left, which have too often failed to recognize and support the Kurdish struggle.

State instrumentalization of Western sanctions

The recent war against Iran did not emerge suddenly; it was long in the making through a sanctions regime that operates as an imperial technology for producing social vulnerability, as Iraq had already shown. Sanctions have not merely impoverished the population, fueled inflation, eroded healthcare and employment, and weakened collective capacities for resistance; they have also helped generate the very conditions for military escalation. By locking the country into a protracted siege economy, they have normalized the state of exception, consolidated the state’s rentier and security apparatuses, and displaced the costs of the crisis onto the popular classes. In doing so, they have prepared both the material and ideological terrain of war: a society exhausted, fragmented, and reduced to the struggle for survival becomes more exposed to external projects of militarization. Sanctions thus appear for what they are: not an alternative to war, but one of its preparatory forms.

Yet while sanctions are real and devastating, they do not alone account for the conditions of undignified life in a resource-rich country like Iran. Against campist readings that reduce all forms of social inequality in Iran to Western sanctions, analysis must also confront Iran’s own political economy: a capitalist order marked by harsh privatization, widespread labor precarity—with more than 90 percent of contracts reportedly temporary—and an internally organized regime of domination and deprivation, sustained in part through the extreme exploitation and expropriation of racialised and undocumented workers, especially Afghanis and Baluches. For campists, popular protests in Iran are interpreted as economic discontent, caused entirely by sanctions, thereby obscuring the central role of the state’s own policies. One implication of this campist logic is that, by minimizing the actual dynamics of the domestic opposition to Islamic Republic, it draws a false equivalence based on the mistaken notion that such “economic discontent” is consonant with the reactionary Pahlavist project of regime change from above. Contrary to the campist claims, opposing imperialist regime change does not require dismissing or delegitimizing domestic revolt against the Islamic Republic.

Widespread poverty in Iran is not attributable to sanctions alone; it is also rooted in a rentier political economy and in the monopolization of imports, both of which the Islamic Republic has instrumentalized. Its security and regional policies are not simply reactions to outside pressure. Rather, these policies are integral to the state’s logic of survival, channeling resources toward coercive institutions and ideological-military projects, while the population is left exhausted and impoverished. As Kayhan Valadbaigi argues, sanctions help intensify the concentration of wealth within the oligarchy while consolidating structures of power. They shift the costs onto the most vulnerable, justify repression, and further enrich the oligarchy. Economic shock policies—fluctuations in the dollar, the removal of the preferential exchange rate—appear as calculated measures of “survival” in a context of vulnerability.

In addition, campists erase the Islamic Republic’s violence against the people. Murders, torture, executions, the shooting of wounded people in hospitals, and attacks on mourning ceremonies are ignored or denied, and thus legitimized. This support for an authoritarian and anti-imperialist theocracy empties the language of emancipation of any real content.

Stop judging a cause by the way it is coopted

The spread of authoritarian campism takes place largely through social media. There, the legitimization of authoritarian states intertwines with a reductive anti-Westernism and, in some cases, with antisemitism and conspiratorial patterns of thought.

Despite the objective asymmetries between Israel (backed by the West) and the Islamic Republic (under Western sanctions), similar political and symbolic mechanisms are at work: U.S. and Israeli flags at certain “pro-Iran” rallies; Iranian state flags (or the Islamic Republic flags) and portraits of Ali Khamenei at certain pro-Palestinian mobilizations. These are all gestures liable to turn legitimate struggles into justifications for violence, while at the same time discrediting both the Iranian and Palestinian resistance. The same logic applies to the now-famous slogan “Woman, Life, Freedom” (Jin, Jiyan, Azadî). Appropriated by the Western far right, the Iranian far right in the diaspora, and pro-genocide currents, it has been instrumentalized in support of militarized violence.

This logic is not specific to Iran. As David Brophy has argued  in relation to Xinjiang, parts of the international Left have treated the repression of Uyghurs and other Muslim peoples less as a question of national rights and state violence than as a problem of Western propaganda, funding, or geopolitical manipulation; in the case of Vijay Prashad and Tings Chak, this apologetic posture has even relied on fabricated, apparently AI-generated sources. But the cynical instrumentalization of human rights by Western states does not make the suffering to which that language refers any less real.

We know all too well how progressive and radical movements from the Global South often end up being appropriated by the right once they are relayed in the West. But this process cannot lead us to abandon the duty of solidarity. The case of the queer movement illustrates this well: pinkwashing by states such as Israel cancels neither the emancipatory force of queerness nor the necessity of solidarity with queers who face repression in any context. The legitimacy of a resistance depends only on its emancipatory content and on its rootedness among the oppressed, never on its appropriation.

Campism contributes in very concrete ways to the perpetuation of historical and contemporary injustices. It creates a political vacuum through dispersal and fragmentation, a vacuum gradually filled by the right and the far right, both in the region and across the world. The Iranian far right in the diaspora occupies this vacuum by simplifying the revolution and demonizing “anti-imperialism.” It can thereby present itself as the only force for change. By artificially homogenizing entire populations (“All Ukrainians resisting Russia are Nazis.” “All Syrian revolutionaries are jihadists.” “All Iranians in revolt support Israel or the monarchists.”), campism becomes an accomplice in the rise of imperialist and reactionary forces.

By artificially homogenizing entire populations (“All Ukrainians resisting Russia are Nazis.” “All Syrian revolutionaries are jihadists.” “All Iranians in revolt support Israel or the monarchists.”), campism becomes an accomplice in the rise of imperialist and reactionary forces. The far right is the far right everywhere

In Europe, no consistent Left would accept rallying under the flags of the far right on the grounds that an enemy power was attacking the country. Yet when it comes to Iran, some consider it acceptable to demand that Iranians efface themselves and rally behind reactionary, nationalist, fanatical, even fascistic forces. Such an asymmetry implies, in effect, that the peoples of the Global South should be satisfied with a choice between imperial domination and internal barbarism. And yet the Islamic Republic is precisely a state that must be named for what it is: a fascistic formation, a non-Western far right, especially when it comes to ethnic-national minorities and Afghan immigrants.

The recent “anti-war” statement on Iran exposes the political impasse of campism: an anti-war discourse that enables certain segments of the Left to converge with fascist, antisemitic, neo-Nazi, and conspiracist milieus. The statement brought together signatories from  seemingly opposed political milieus: on the one hand, decolonial-campist anti-war figures such as Vijay Prashad, Sandew Hira, Ramón Grosfoguel, Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Munyaradzi Mushonga, Ajamu Baraka, Nordine Saïdi and Paulina Aroch Fugellie; and, on the other, a range of figures—including Dieudonné, Alain de Benoist, Thomas Werlet, Jean-Michel Vernochet, Christian Bouchet, Marion Sigaut, Jacob Cohen, Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent, and Arnaud Develay—as well as organisations such as the RN, Égalité & Réconciliation, L’Œuvre française, and the Mouvement France Résistance, all associated with conservative , far-right, nationalist, or fascist currents. This juxtaposition illustrates how a purely geopolitical form of anti-imperialism can become compatible with far-right politics. Within this framework, the Iranian regime and its criminal Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, are recast as “a voice against arrogance and terrorism” while a deeply troubling tolerance toward the violence of post-colonial states against their own populations is being normalized under the banner of anti-war politics.

Political consistency requires refusing, for Iranians as for any other people, any injunction to accommodate fascism in the name of a geopolitical “lesser evil.” We should not ask Iranians to accept politically any reality that the Left would refuse to accept for themselves elsewhere. We neither march with fascists nor under their banners: we fight them, including when they appropriate the lexicon of freedom in order to invert its meaning.

Much like Stalinism, which did so much to discredit socialism, campism in Iran weakens the Left and strengthens the far right. At the same time, it deepens the North-South divide and legitimizes the repression of anti-tyrannical movements in the South. The result is the isolation of emancipatory forces, the distrust of exiles toward the Left in the North (including decolonial currents), and the collapse of international solidarity.

We should not ask Iranians to accept politically any reality that the Left would refuse to accept for themselves elsewhere. We neither march with fascists nor under their banners: we fight them, including when they appropriate the lexicon of freedom in order to invert its meaning.

While Kurdish feminist prisoners sentenced to death in Evin prison are capable of expressing their solidarity with the Palestinian resistance—even at the risk of losing part of their support in Iran—authoritarian and identity-based anti-imperialists, speaking from the comfort of the West or elsewhere, prove incapable of showing comparable solidarity with popular struggles in Iran. At times, and even more gravely, the full extent of those sufferings is denied or called into question.

It is urgent to move beyond campism. Otherwise, will not succeed in rebuilding a genuinely emancipatory left or in revitalizing a truly popular internationalism that networks such as “Peoples Want” attempt to do. Anti-imperialism is authentic only if it fights all forms of domination, everywhere and for everyone.

Parts of this text was originally published in French  -Eds.

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”

Featured Image credit: C.Suthorn; modified by Tempest.

The post For an end to campism, the Iran war, and the anti-imperialist washing of the Islamic Republic appeared first on Tempest.

Mary Purdy, an integrative and eco-minded Registered Dietary Nutritionist, is the former Managing Director of the Nutrient Density Initiative. Her work integrates personal well-being and ecological health. As a dietary educator, she connects the dots between farming practices, food systems and individual health. Mary is also an adjunct faculty at the Master’s Program in Sustainable Food Systems at The Culinary Institute of America. She is a podcaster and author of “Serving the Broccoli Gods” and “The Microbiome Diet Reset.” This article is an edited transcript of her talk at a recent Bioneers Conference.

The concept of One Health states that humans and our health are inextricably connected to the health of the environment, of our fellow animals, of bees, birds, and are interdependent. The cornerstone of those relationships is the soil. Currently, the industrial way that we are producing food is contributing to greenhouse gases and biodiversity loss. It is using enormous amounts of land, using and contaminating freshwater, contributing to eutrophication which is killing our marine life, eroding our soil, and is a leading cause of soil contamination and air pollution. We’re losing habitats for people and animals. And a lot of this is disproportionately affecting BIPOC and marginalized populations.

Along with all of that collateral damage, the food system is producing, in large proportion, foods that don’t support health and well-being. Half of all Americans are diabetic or prediabetic. About 40% of Americans will be diagnosed with cancer and one third of teenagers are prediabetic.  Needless to say, we have a serious health crisis on our hands.

The majority of calories come from ultra processed foods, which sometimes is the only food accessible or affordable to people. A large chunk of the protein that we consume comes from industrial processed animals. Agriculture uses over one billion pounds of pesticides every single year, and we have increased the use of synthetic fertilizer 800 percent compared to 50 to 75 years ago. If we want to change this system, we should look at corporate farms and large agribusinesses that promote the practices that degrade our environment and make us suffer. 

But I don’t want to blame the farmers. I want to honor and uplift them. Farmers are doing incredible work and getting paid very little money for it. But the question is: “Why have we been farming this way?” The main reason is that yield is emphasized over quality of food. There’s a reliance on government subsidies that incentivize farmers to continue to use industrial practices. There’s security in using agrochemicals which have been in use for a long time. There’s a lack of time, resources, and education.

The current system does not provide the basic minimum nutritional needs of vitamins A, C, E, D, K or minerals. We’re not getting enough fiber. We’re not getting enough omega 3 fatty acids. We’re definitely not getting enough polyphenols to help support our health and well-being.

Why is this? Because food grown in the industrial system is less nutritious, in other words the food is not nutrient dense. The Nutrient Density Initiative defines nutrient-dense foods as foods that are rich in the vitamins, minerals, fiber, healthy fats, and polyphenols that research has shown to be beneficial for human health. And that these foods are also free of ingredients that we know degrade our health – agrochemicals, pesticides, additives, etc. All of these nutritional qualities are absolutely influenced by the way that we grow our food and the agricultural practices that are used.

Nutrients drive every chemical reaction in your body. The production of neurotransmitters in your brain and your gut are driven by nutrients. The creation and function of your immune system is driven by nutrients. The synthesis of your liver that is trying to neutralize all the toxins that regularly come into your body are driven by nutrients. So our brain and our body are functioning in accordance with the nutritional value of that food that we give it.

We are what we eat, kind of. The idea that food is our medicine isn’t always true, although it should be. The USDA has documented a significant decline in the nutritional quality of food over the past 50 years. There are up to 25 to 50 percent less vitamins and minerals, depending on the crop, than there were 5 decades ago. There are lower levels of polyphenols and omega 3 fatty acids in a lot of the foods that should be high in them. The science is really clear about this.

Food and nutrition start in the soil; 95 percent of our food is grown or raised on soil. When the soil is healthy, humans tend to be healthier. Soil health and fertility directly influence the nutritional quality of food. Healthy soils provide those essential nutrients. Soils are the medium in which food is grown and determines the quality and flavor of food. So when nutrition is deficient in the soil, there is less uptake by the plant of those nutrients.

Graphic by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) via Creative Commons

So, what is healthy soil? There are different definitions. I will characterize three. The first one is having a diverse community of a large number of microorganisms in the soil. Second is soil organic matter, which is made up of decomposed plants and animals that provide living plants with nutrition. And lastly, it is a well-developed structure so the soil is able to withstand floods, droughts and erosion by retaining water. Good soil structure also allows plant roots to reach deep into the soil and gather more nutrients.

Soil health is not only one of the strongest pathways to improve the quality of nutrition, but it also increases soil’s capacity to sequester carbon and support healthier ecosystems.  

The plant is not acting alone. Plants depend on soil microbes for their health. There’s a wonderful symbiotic relationship with the plant and soil microorganisms. The plant’s roots only go so far, so plants need help. The microbes provide that help by bringing minerals and other nutrients to the root zone in exchange for carbohydrates that the plants provide to the microbes. Beneficial microbes suppress the pathogenic microbes that we don’t want in the soil. And they are key for helping the plant synthesize the compounds called polyphenols, which have wonderful antioxidant properties and also provide flavor to the plants.

Polyphenols have a really positive influence on human health. When we don’t get enough polyphenols, people become more susceptible to all different kinds of diseases.

Additionally, polyphenols are a prebiotic feeding the beneficial microbes in our gut. Flavonoids are a type of polyphenol and flavones are a class of flavonoids that contribute to aroma and flavor. There is a strong connection between flavor and nutrition.

When we eat a carrot or a piece of spinach that has not been excessively washed or heated, along with it, you are ingesting some of the microorganisms from the plant’s microbiome which helps support our gut microbiome.

But when synthetic fertilizers are used to grow crops, that hinders the formation of the plant’s roots going further down into the ground to take up nutrients. Additionally, when we use synthetic chemical fertilizers year-after-year, there is a depletion of nutrients in the soil. Microbial diversity is reduced. It reduces phytochemical production, as well as things like vitamin C and trace minerals in plants. Chemical fertilizers are also bad for the environment. They run off of the farm into waterways contaminating drinking water.

And then there’s pesticides. Pesticides also reduce the soil microbial diversity. When people get exposed to pesticides, whether that’s direct exposure or from residues, there’s a higher incidence of endocrine disruption issues, cardiovascular, and neurodegenerative diseases. A lot of farmers are struggling with Parkinson’s disease. Birth defects, respiratory illnesses, cancers are also caused by pesticides. Needless to say, farm workers are on the front lines of exposure to toxic chemicals. So there’s a serious environmental injustice issue around pesticides.

Pesticides are having a negative impact on the human gut microbiome and inhibit phytochemical synthesis. A plant under stress normally creates phytochemical compounds as an immune response to protect themselves when it is exposed to things like pests, predators and adverse weather conditions. When we eat the plant, we get the benefit of the phytochemicals which make our immune system strong as well. However, if a pesticide is used to protect the plant, the plant doesn’t have to produce those immune-enhancing compounds.

Phytochemicals, which is the family name for different polyphenols, are associated with better cardiovascular health, better brain health, better blood sugar balance, improved lung function, better immune health, less incidents of cancer, as well as a healthier and diverse gut microbiome.

In contrast to an industrial chemical approach to farming, there are practices – whether we call them regenerative, conservation, organic, common sense, or traditional – that build the health of the soil and, as a result, grow more nutritious crops: reducing the disturbance to the soil by using low or no tillage, having a lot of biodiversity on the farm or garden, keeping the ground covered with cover crops or mulch, using compost, rotating crops, eliminating chemicals, and integrating livestock into the fields. It’s not just about using one or two of these practices, it is the whole suite that increases soil health and grows more nutritious crops.

And the good thing is that they also have planetary benefits. When we garden or farm, whether it is large scale or small scale, we are helping to elevate the ability of the soil to sequester carbon, which is key for the climate crisis. These practices also help provide pollinator habitats and reduce environmental harm in general.

There’s a huge variation between the nutrient density of plants that come from different farming systems, but in general, when we see more of these agroecological practices in play, we see higher levels of vitamins, minerals, beta carotene, etc. and lower levels of heavy metals.

The Nutrient Density Initiative works with Edacious, a nutrition analysis food lab. We had a number of our members, who use these practices, send in samples of their produce and meat products and had Edacious compare them to the conventional versions of the same product.

Peaches tested from Frog Hollow Farm had over 200% higher vitamin C compared to the conventional peaches, much higher iron levels, much higher alpha carotene, and a number of other vitamins and minerals were much higher. While we may not be able to say definitively that we will always get the same results, data like this suggests a link between the positive benefits of soil health and the nutritional density of plants.

The regeneratively grown citrus that we tested had higher amounts of flavones, and higher total value antioxidant levels when compared to conventionally grown samples.

We also looked at dairy. An Alexandre Family Farms dairy product, when compared to a conventional product, had a much more favorable omega 6 to 3 ratio which is very important for inflammation and other immune functions. It also had higher protein and higher levels of certain nutrients such as calcium, B2, and phosphorus.

The Rodale Institute did a side-by-side trial comparing butternut squashes grown conventionally and with regenerative methods and found that regenerative butternut squash had higher total polyphenols, and higher levels of carotenoid levels.

We conducted a pilot protein project. Nutrient Density Initiative members sent in chicken and beef products, and once again compared them to conventionally grown counterparts. We found higher amounts of omega 3s, lower amounts of overall fat including saturated fat, more balanced omega 6 to 3 ratios, more protein per serving, and no heavy metals detected in the products raised with the regenerative practices.

These are small trials, there’s always going to be variation depending on environment, depending on species or varietal of food, etc. I want to make sure that, at this point, I am not making grandiose claims, but that data we have collected so far is clearly demonstrating that when the soil is healthy, we’re going to produce crops with higher nutritional density.

So when and if possible, we can be citizen eaters. Support organic and regenerative farmers who are using the practices that I mentioned, let your grocer know that you want nutritious food, choose minimally processed food, if you can. Let your politicians know food nutrition is an issue you care about. Ask them to support a Farm Bill that actually protects soil health and biodiversity, and rewards the farmers for doing regenerative practices.

The post The Path to Good Health is Made of Soil appeared first on Bioneers.

Dan Kittredge is an organic farmer in Massachusetts following in the footsteps of his parents who are organic farming movement pioneers. As a farmer, he became interested in the flavor and aroma of food, and turned his attention to researching the complexities of food quality and nutrient density. Dan has worked with researchers, NGOs, and farmers in India, Russia, and Central America. In 2010, he founded the Bionutrient Food Association to educate and empower people to make healthy food choices based on research and science. This article is an edited transcript of Dan’s talk at a recent Bioneers Conference.

My parents were back-to-the-land homesteaders starting in the early 1980s. They bought land and built a farm. Their day job was running the Northeast Organic Farming Association, commonly referred to as NOFA. They wrote some of the first organic standards in the country and produced a conference; that was their day job, but their lifestyle was the farm.

After working on their farm through my teens and 20s, I got married and realized I needed to make a living. Like a lot of farmers, I wasn’t able to because the farm suffered with pest pressure and disease pressure. So I started studying beyond the organic rubric because organic was not providing me the success I was looking for. I looked to nature and saw plants flourishing, but didn’t see plants flourishing in my fields.

I did a lot of research and shifted my farming practices, still staying within an organic framework. I got to a point where pests were dissipating, diseases were dissipating, yields were going up, flavor was going up, shelf life was going up, cost of production was going down, and I was making a living farming, working 20 hours a week. At that point, I felt obliged to start talking about what I was learning. I knew the permaculture, biodynamic and agroecology communities, but none of them were focusing on the nutritional caliber of food, so in 2010, I founded an organization called the Bionutrient Food Association, focusing on the nutritional quality of food as the objective.

By quality, I’m talking about flavor, aroma, and nutrient value, not aesthetics and uniformity, which is how a lot of food is defined by the industry today. Our initial work for a number of years focused on education: conferences, courses, workshops, etc. We found a lot of success in educating people about how nature evolved things to grow, as opposed to a narrow focus on NPK fertilizers and soil pH, which are the things that people are taught in universities about agronomy. We decided to teach people how nature has been growing plants for hundreds of millions of years, and as we did that, we found success across multiple ecosystems, with various scales, and with different crops, and tried to figure out a way to bring that to scale.

Economics is a powerful force in today’s age. Our goal was to figure out how to align economic incentives with ecological benefits and human health benefits. If we could provide a dynamic where people buying food could differentiate between a higher and lower nutritional content of, for example, carrots, our supposition is that people will choose the higher and leave the lower quality on the shelf. The work we’ve been doing for the last eight years from a research standpoint is characterizing that variation, identifying what causes it, and developing ways to assess it.

Dan Kittredge

From a foundational standpoint, our vision is to go beyond labels and certifications. It’s not about if you are organic or not, if you are regenerative or not, if you are local or not. We want to give people the ability to actually measure the nutrient levels of the food in real time, and the science with which you would do that is called spectroscopy. That’s how the Hubble space telescope works. It’s how the James Webb telescope works. We can read the atmosphere of a planet 10,000 light years away and determine that it has methane in it. If we can do that, we should be able to tell what a carrot a few millimeters away is made up of.

We built our first handheld meter in 2017 and our first lab a year later. We had people send in carrots and spinach from across the U.S., from grocery stores, farmers’ markets and farms, organic, and non-organic. We wanted to survey the supply chain, to find out how much nutrient variation there is. In 2019, we set up our second lab in California at Chico State University. That year in both of our labs in Michigan and Chico State, we had farmers send in crops from the field in triplicate. They would harvest the crops, they would pull samples of the soil, and they would answer management data questions: What was the variety? When did you plant it? How did you prepare the soil? What’s your fertility program? So we could overlay nutrient variations in food against managing practices and causal factors against soil metrics to see what patterns we could find.

In 2020 we set up our third lab in Europe. Farmers sent in crops from their fields for testing and citizen scientists sent in crops from grocery stores and farmers’ markets. We tested samples for four years – 10,000 crop samples, 25 different crops, hundreds of farms, from four continents – to understand the nature of the supply chain and what causes nutritional variation in foods. All the data is available on the Bionutrient Food Association website and is in the public commons.

As an example, let’s look at sulfur, which is an element or nutrient the body needs to function. In carrots, the lowest level we found was 8.41mg per 100g. The highest level was 33.19. That’s a 4x variation. If we assign 100 to the highest level, the vast majority of the samples were between 20 and 40 out of 100. Most carrots have relatively low levels of sulfur in relation to what they could have.

Phosphorous in carrots, we found an 8x variation. Most carrots tested in the 27th percentile. The vast majority of the sample sets were below the 50th percentile. Most crops have relatively low levels of nutrients in them in relation to what they could have. There is a presumption that all food is uniform. We have found that that is absolutely not the case.

What about antioxidants? Antioxidants are known to protect cells against free radical damage and help prevent disease. Antioxidants are measured in FRAP (Ferric Reducing Antioxidant Power) units. In carrots, 4.92 FRAP units per 100 grams is the lowest we found, 195 is the highest we found. That’s a 40 to 1 variation.

In the old days, before they invented pharmaceuticals, medical practitioners talked about medicinal plants, which have intense flavor and aroma that are associated with compounds such as polyphenols, terpenoids, and alkaloids which promote good health.

Humans have evolved with a capacity to discern relative nutrient levels in food through flavor; a whole bunch of our DNA is associated with discerning nutrient levels with our noses and our tongues. It’s the high flavonoid compounds that are understood to be anti-cancer, anti-diabetes, and protect against heart disease, etc.

Our testing showed a 20x variation in flavonoids. Most samples were in the 7th percentile. The vast majority of the samples were below the 20th percentile. Almost everything out there in the supply chain is relatively poor in relation to what’s possible.

What causes that variation? Some people say genetics. We tested different carrot varieties–Napoli, Bolero, Nantes, Mokum. We found a wide range in nutrient levels in the same crop variety, and have not found any connection between genetics and nutrient levels.

Then we tested soil type and have not seen any connection between soil type, bioregion, or climate zone, and nutrient levels.

Some people say point of purchase: we tested crops from farm stands, CSAs, farmers markets, home gardens, and stores and saw quality variation in all categories. We see variation everywhere. None of these dynamics is sufficient to predict quality.

Based on our testing, regenerative, organic, biodynamic, and permaculture also do not seem to, from a scientific standpoint, connect to increased nutrition. None of these various individual factors seem to correlate with increased nutrient levels.

The first question we started with was: What is the spectrum of nutrient variation? We found that the spectrum of nutrient variation was large. Second question: What causes it? What seems to cause it is functionality of the biological system, not individual practices or certifications. Third question: Can you build a handheld, consumer priced, flash-of-light nutrient meter at a consumer price point?  

We published the answer to that question in a peer-reviewed journal called Nature: Scientific Communications. The Bionutrient Food Association developed a handheld spectrometer, which is open source technology, to prove the concept. You can flash a light in the store on a vegetable or fruit and get a reading of its nutrient density and discern relative quality. Because nutrient density is associated with flavor, that may be helpful in encouraging your children to eat more fruits and vegetables.

From our research we now know that nutrient variation exists. And we can go beyond labels, certifications, and claims to measure it on a continuum of 1 to 100. That way consumers can make choices based on the nutritional quality of the food.

The challenge is to arrive at an accepted definition of nutrient density for different foods. We focused on beef first because it has a larger ecological footprint than any other food on the planet. More acres of land are used to produce beef than anything else. The hypothesis is if cows eat what they have evolved to eat rather than an unnatural diet of grains, they will be healthier, the land will be healthier, and the people who eat them will be healthier.

Agriculture has a significant effect on climate and ecosystem function, and if we can inspire a shift in the way the land is managed to improve its function that will have beneficial impacts for everyone. In researching beef, we looked at a number of different metrics: in the soil, management practices, feed stocks, and assessments of the microbiome of the animals. Our thesis is that there’s going to be patterns between soil function, ecosystem function, animal welfare, and human health. We are using a scientific method to look for the patterns of nature.

Finally we did human trials. Feed humans this meat and see what happens to them. Take the data from the meat, and the microbes, and the management, and the human health trials, give it to statisticians, and see what patterns they can find.

This is where we’re at right now. It looks like there are eight biomarkers that predict overall system function. Those eight biomarkers are measured and scored 1-100 and that information becomes public. Our understanding is that sensors to measure nutrient density can be built into phones; the cameras in your phone could be a spectrometer. Chinese phone companies have already built spectrometers into the backs of phones. Consumers will be able to test the food at point of purchase. Food can be tested by the grower or in the supply chain. We can have a completely open dataset sharing and learning, where the market can be incentivized to focus on nutrition as opposed to volume and aesthetic.

We feel that this project is important enough that one small NGO should not be doing it solely. A broad coalition of allies should be working on this globally. We’ve proposed a treaty on the definition of nutrient density. We engaged in a listening tour on six continents, and met with nutritionists, agronomists, chefs, corporations, government people, farmers, and eaters and asked them to tell us what you think about our plan. This is a process we think could potentially have a massive impact on the planet, and we welcome peoples’ engagement.

The feedback I’m getting from some of the biggest global food corporations is they want help to transform their supply chain before the public knows about this. They want to get ahead of this before they are threatened by it. We’ve done our market research, we understand that consumers want flavor, nutrition, and are concerned about the well-being of their children. So this is an economic advantage for any food company that is a first mover in the space.

Working in harmony with nature seems to be the best way forward to accomplish the goal of optimizing nutrient density in food. The question is how do we align economics with that, and how do we empower the transition. Most people have been trained in a reductionist paradigm, but they need to be supported in that transition to a holistic perspective. Some of the simplistic talking points such as if you cover crop, all will be well, is detrimental. It is incomplete and it is reductionist. You have to optimize soil health, which is all the levels of life in the soil. There are many tools in the toolbox, cover cropping is one, minimal tillage is one, biochemistry is one. Farmers must be empowered with a full toolbox, without dogmas and empiricism to support them in the process.

We are in the process of collecting the metadata to share and learn together in a mycelial fashion.

Our organization has been educating farmers for 18 years about how to work with nature. We’ve got hundreds of hours of content on our YouTube page, freely available. Now we teach courses. It takes a shift of consciousness required to understand that you are serving nature, you are in right relationship with nature, not that you’re applying practices. If you think that you can go out and do one practice and that’s all it takes, you’re missing the point. The biggest issue is understanding your role in the process.

It’s a shift in paradigm from recommending practices to humble, gentle listening and service. It’s a shift of perspective from a colonized approach to a more Indigenous perspective. The colonized perspective is thou shalt grow a cover crop; thou shalt use compost. In contrast, the Indigenous perspective is: I’m in service to the land, what does it need now? And only when we can get into that place of humility should we expect to be proper stewards.

The post Not All Food is Created Equal appeared first on Bioneers.

As extreme weather worsens, FEMA Review Council recommendations weaken federal disaster response and shift costs to states

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. —  The Trump Administration’s FEMA Review Council released yesterday its final report of recommendations to overhaul FEMA. These recommendations, which include privatizing the National Flood Insurance Program, increasing qualifying thresholds for disaster aid, and responding to fewer major disasters, leave states, localities, and tribal governments to navigate climate-fueled catastrophes with fewer federal resources.  

FEMA is the backbone of the nation’s disaster response system. As the climate crisis drives more frequent, unpredictable, and destructive disasters, the need for preparation and response from all levels of government and vulnerable communities has never been greater. At this critical moment, communities need lawmakers to strengthen FEMA’s capacity to prepare and respond to emergencies, not weaken or restrict the very resources that save lives and help communities recover. 

Gabrielle Walton, the Federal Campaigns Coordinator at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, issued the following statement: 

“The FEMA Review Council’s proposed changes fail to offer the needed certainty that the government will provide aid when Americans need it most.  As drought grips the county, hurricane season approaches, and the climate crisis worsens, extreme weather events, communities need a government that commits to enhancing safety and preparedness, not one that proposes restricting access to critical, life-saving resources. The Council’s proposed reforms would leave states, localities, and disaster survivors with less funding and fewer resources to prevent, mitigate, and respond to disasters. Congress must take the lead in creating comprehensive FEMA reforms that will protect our communities as the climate crisis worsens.”

###

Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. Founded in 2002, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, Washington, DC and beyond.

The post Trump’s FEMA Reform Proposal Would Leave Communities to Face Climate Disasters Alone appeared first on Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

Maryland Public Service Commission asked staff to conduct further analysis despite evidence that ending gas line extension allowances would provide $1 billion in savings to gas customers over next decade

 

BALTIMORE, MD —The Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) today delayed finalizing regulations to end gas line extension allowances (LEAs), preventing gas customers from having to pay for the expansion of the gas system to new homes and businesses. When finalized, the new rules are expected to save Baltimore Gas & Electric (BGE) and Washington Gas Light (WGL) customers nearly $1 billion in the next decade. The Commission asked staff to conduct further analysis, with an unclear timeline for when the Commission will make a decision, adding to advocates’ concern that regulator delays from the PSC are putting customer savings at risk.

“The analysis is already in: allowing gas utilities to pass on the cost of new gas lines to their existing customers unfairly drives up energy bills and locks us into polluting fossil fuels for decades to come. Maryland gas customers shouldn’t have to wait a day longer for regulators to take action to address rapidly rising gas delivery rates,” said Emily Scarr, Senior Adviser at Maryland PIRG Foundation. “Whether it’s finalizing rules to save customers $1 billion or ending multi-year ratemaking, the Commission is creating a habit of unnecessary delays that harm customers and benefit utilities.”

Under the draft regulations, new customers and developers can still choose to connect to the gas system, but will be responsible for the cost of doing so. The hearing comes just weeks after the Maryland General Assembly rejected attempts by housing developers and gas utilities to prevent the PSC from finalizing rules to end LEAs.

“Today’s decision by the Public Service Commission is disappointing and continues to place burdens on front-line communities and Marylanders already struggling to pay costly energy bills,” said Sari Amiel, Staff Attorney at Sierra Club’s Environmental Law Program. “Ongoing reliance on costly gas infrastructure impacts our health and financial well-being, while utility companies reach record profits. We will continue advocating for the state to move away from reliance on fossil fuels and towards more affordable and efficient clean energy.”

Initially petitioned for by the Office of the People’s Counsel (OPC), the rulemaking is the first to come from the “future of gas” proceeding, a venue for short and long-term gas planning. The proceeding aims to protect customers from skyrocketing costs by smoothing the transition away from gas heat and appliances and the outsized infrastructure costs that come with it. 

“Seeing the commission delay such an important consumer protection at the 11th hour is exceedingly disappointing. Gas utilities use line extension allowances to boost their profits while locking in decades of pollution and costs,” said Bryan Dunning, Senior Policy Analyst at Center for Progressive Reform. “Each day we delay, utilities are incentivised to further build out the gas system, undermining state climate goals.” 

For decades, existing gas customers have covered some or all of the costs to extend gas lines to new customers, driving up delivery rates and adding to utility profits over a decades-long payback period. Connecting a home to the methane gas system hooks it onto fossil fuels for years, contributing to climate pollution in the state and creating new risks for deadly explosions.

“Maryland gas customers shouldn’t be incentivising housing developers to build housing with dual fuel sources, when electric heating is safer, cleaner, and more affordable for renters,” said Monica O’Connor of Grassroots Maryland Legislative Coalition’s Climate Justice Wing. “Today’s decision by the PSC to delay the end of incentives for new gas lines not only fails to align regulatory policy with fiscal prudency, but sets back our state climate goals.”

In 2025 alone, BGE planned to spend $103.5 million on gas pipeline expansion, costing customers $397 million, while Washington Gas Light (WGL) planned to spend $56.25 million, costing customers $238 million.  Utility spending on gas pipelines has caused energy bills to rise in Maryland. Since 2010, Baltimore Gas & Electric and Columbia Gas customers have seen their delivery rates more than triple, far outpacing the rate of inflation, due to excessive gas utility spending. This rise in delivery costs is why BGE gas customers now pay $2 to BGE for delivery for every $1 they spend on gas. A recent analysis found that gas delivery charges account for more than 60% of the average Maryland customer’s gas bill.

“We’re very frustrated to see the Commission needlessly delay a clear action to align state climate goals, consumer protections, and lower gas ratepayer costs,” said Brittany Baker, Maryland Director of Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “We need strong leadership from the PSC to act in the best interest of ratepayers and transition Maryland off the gas distribution system. Today, they missed the mark.”

The Upgrade Maryland campaign is calling on the PSC to swiftly finalize regulations to end LEAs, both to protect customers from the rising costs of the gas system and to ensure utility regulation is in line with state climate policy.

###

Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. Founded in 2002, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, Washington, DC and beyond.

The post Advocates Warn Utility Regulators’ Decision to Delay Puts Customer Savings at Risk appeared first on Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

This article Mothers are the most underestimated force for change was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

When Trump won the first time in 2016, I drank shots of tequila in front of my computer and then passed out in anguish. When Trump won in 2024, I couldn’t do that. This time around, I was a mom. 

By afternoon on election day, the red shifts on the map became overpowering — and yet I still had to pick up my son from childcare. I had to get him dinner, sing songs in the bathtub and make up stories for his stuffed animals. I still had to create a world that was joyous, delicious and full of love even though I was horrified by the political present.  

This is a very particular muscle I have had to build since becoming a mother. It’s different than building a practice of hope. It’s beyond feelings and all about the tangible needs of life. It’s being able to turn hope into something physical even when deeply worn down. Moms, aunties, grandmothers and other caretakers — we have to pull ourselves off the couch and make the sandwiches and brush the hair. 

Every day, in the face of whatever the greater world holds, we build our own pockets where injustices are righted, love is given and joy is present. We calm down tantrums with love and humor. We teach lessons on sharing and taking turns. This complicated dynamic mothers must hold, of nurturing children while social injustice rages, is something I’ve seen resonate across social media recently, with many women commenting on the realities of keeping children loved and happy while the world burns. 

#newsletter-block_db5d6e13576654b814731e9e87d0b022 { background: #ECECEC; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_db5d6e13576654b814731e9e87d0b022 #mc_embed_signup_front input#mce-EMAIL { border-color:#000000 !important; color: #000000 !important; } Sign Up for our Newsletter

We’ll send you a weekly email with the latest articles.

Mothers are the everyday weavers of utopia. Philosophers, journalists, tech experts, Hollywood writers and pundits may throw up their hands and proclaim that our species is doomed, and yet in millions of homes around the world, mothers and caregivers are ensuring that on the contrary, we do live in a world of joy where resources are shared. The past few years of being a new mom have taught me we need to do more than survive; the real magic comes with what we co-create with our children — the evidence that a better world is possible. 

One of the unique aspects of motherhood is that, even while you’re dealing with the immediacy of food, shelter, joy, love, raising a human also means having one foot in the future. The writer and healer Prentis Hemphill said in a recent podcast episode, “Children as Sacred,” that “our culture actually seems to be anti-children and to me therefore anti the future. … What a child compels you to do is create, what a child compels you to do is nurture, to plant a seed, to think about what will grow beyond your life.”

This is no small feat, and might be one of the most underexamined sources of social change out there. Mothers are inherent futurists, just as gardeners are. Even when our children are in the womb, we have to be mindful of every chemical we come in contact with and what it could do to their development down the line. When our kids are growing up, we are constantly aware of how much of their future self is molded from the compendium of all the lessons we teach them. 

“Almost all of parenting is digging really deep for reserves when you are out of it,” said Jenny Zimmer, the co-executive director of the group Mothers Out Front. “Like you’re out of energy, you’re out of time, you’re out of patience, you’re exhausted, and you’re still finding the reserves to set [your kids] up for success.” 

It is this deep commitment to not just hoping for a better future, but knowing that it is formed through the actions we choose today, that directly links what we do now to what will become.

A better future is being built by the everyday work of caretakers to instruct the next generation that love and goodness can exist.

There’s nothing quite like the early years of motherhood for forcing people to realize they can’t do it all on their own. If you try to do all the things yourself, you will quickly break. It is with the village, the community that life gets a bit easier. “Mothers can do more because we know how to work together,” Zimmer noted. 

My formative activist years were working with the Burmese pro-democracy movement, and I remember witnessing women’s meetings where heavy discussions were held on moving aid to refugee camps, or monitoring elections — all while someone’s baby was being passed around from woman to woman. A group of women would chop up fruit to share, and others would help clean up. Communal care was the fundamental driver that allowed more women to step into leadership and peace-building. 

In Minneapolis and other cities besieged by ICE recently, it’s regularly mothers who are organizing food to deliver to those in need, raising money for affected families, forming safety patrols at kids’ schools and participating in ICE watches. Ashley Fairbanks helped start the group Stand with Minnesota, which is a center point of a lot of the mutual aid. In a recent interview with The Guardian, she said “We’re building a helper reflex where, instead of encountering a problem and saying that we can’t do anything, we’re just trying to do it.” 

There is so much to learn from mothers in Minnesota who are showing that the future can be better — by moving their anguished bodies to attend protests, deliver diapers and pick up their neighbors, and showing our children and our communities that we can operate with more humane ways of being. 

America does not have the best track record with positive visions of the future. The vast majority of films set in the future are dystopian, with a stalwart hero making their way through techno-fascism. In fact, when I tried to find films with a positive vision of the future, where humanity was able to come together and create something better — it’s pretty much just the “Star Trek” movies and “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure,” and even in those the vision of the future Earth is limited (“Star Trek” mostly takes place off Earth, and “Bill & Ted” gives us just a  few minutes’ glimpse of the peaceful future). 

What we need are the mother-filled stories of creation. How from small seeds, wondrous things can be born. Constructing a better future won’t come from some miracle technology that propels us forward. It comes from the everyday work of caretakers to instruct the next generation that love and goodness can exist.

Two directly opposed worldviews vying with each other in America right now are the much-publicized, hyper-individualized ideology of pseudo-macho tech oligarchs, and the quieter reality of mothers leaning into collective movements for a better world. A patriarchal worldview tells us that social change comes through highly publicized “wins” or technological silver bullets. 

#support-block_6755166bd5a36b22256423e0f2f8fa2a { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

Waging Nonviolence depends on reader support. Make a donation today!

Donate

In my conversation with Zimmer, she spoke about how working with mothers has shifted her understanding of what social progress looks like. “I had to reframe victory in my mind from a big win to basically like a journey. There’s always going to be opposition,” she said. “And so when I think about bringing my kids into organizing spaces with me, it’s less that I want them to see my team win something. And it’s more that I want them to see that a good life is spent in a collective project of trying to make things good for everybody.”

A mother’s commitment is incalculable. Rebecca Solnit wrote to me that the concept of motherhood comes down to the idea that “there is a superpower in being absolutely unshakably committed to something/someone morally and in every other way, to your last breath, and because that commitment wants to see goodness all around, doesn’t it manifest goodness?” The future of this planet is being deeply shaped every day by caretakers moving forward with love and an unfeigned commitment to a better future. Once we recognize this for the superpower it is, we can build more systems that embrace its potential. 

If we start accepting that mothers are a powerful force for good, then we need to support systems that can scale their engagement. Mexico City has built 15 “Utopias,” large community centers aimed to take some of the burden off of low-income caregivers. Bogota, Colombia is experimenting with manzana del cuidado, or care blocks, which support caregivers by clustering services together. Many other countries are enacting policies like extended maternity and paternity leave, subsidized child care and health care benefits that help mothers be more able to engage with public life. 

It would be hugely beneficial to society if instead of isolating and limiting people who have a “helper reflex” superpower, we instead built more ways to expand the utilization of this skillset. Mothers are a crucial force for change, not only in our homes and communities, but on a much wider scale — if they have the support they need to unleash their superpowers.

This article Mothers are the most underestimated force for change was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

In a filing made public on Friday, ABC accused Federal Communications Commission regulators of violating its free-speech rights and called out FCC Chairman Brendan Carr for attempting to punish the broadcaster for airing political content that displeased the Trump White House.

The FCC had reportedly ordered Houston station KTRK-TV, which ABC owns and operates, to file a formal request asking whether The View qualified for the Equal Time Rule exemption when it booked an interview with Texas senatorial candidate James Talarico. The request wasn’t warranted as the FCC had specifically granted The View this exemption in a 2002 order.

The Equal Time Rule, under Section 315 of the Communications Act, requires that broadcast stations provide equal access and airtime to all legally qualified political candidates if they permit any one candidate to use their facilities. The rule does not apply to bona fide newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries or on-the-spot news events (like political debates).

“The Commission’s actions threaten to upend decades of settled law and practice and chill critical protected speech, both with respect to The View and more broadly,” reads ABC’s filing. “It is therefore imperative that the Commission act quickly to assure broadcasters that it will uphold its long-established standards protecting broadcasters’ good faith news judgment in including political candidates in bona fide news programming.”

ABC has not always defended its free-speech rights. In December 2024, the company paid $15 million to resolve a meritless Trump defamation lawsuit against the network and its anchor George Stephanopoulos. In September 2025, Disney decided to temporarily suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night program after Chairman Carr threatened to take action following comments the comedian made during his opening monologue.

Free Press Co-CEO Jessica J. González said:

“I’m pleased that ABC has finally learned that bullies don’t stop when companies cower in a corner. The FCC chairman has blatantly and repeatedly abused his power to silence speech that displeases Trump. This doesn’t just violate the First Amendment rights of broadcasters on the receiving end of Brendan Carr’s tactics; it also harms the broadcasters’ audiences. People deserve access to diverse viewpoints over the airwaves, and the ways in which ABC and other broadcasters have repeatedly capitulated to the administration has chilled free expression and access to information.

“Chairman Carr’s overreach is startling and unpopular across the political spectrum. After Donald and Melania Trump demanded that ABC fire Jimmy Kimmel for making a joke they didn’t like, Carr announced that he would conduct an early review of ABC’s broadcast licenses — an abuse of power that Senator Ted Cruz and people of all political stripes condemned. I urge ABC and its parent company Disney to continue fighting for free speech. Doing anything less deprives audiences of the diversity of viewpoints that are critical to the health of a democracy.”