Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

Pravidla fóra
Toto je veřejné fórum, které nesděluje politická stanoviska či názory Pirátské strany. Dodržujte prosím jeho pravidla.
Do vnitrostranické diskuse se mohou naši příznivci zapojit, pokud vstoupí do příslušné skupiny registrovaní příznivci.

Odeslat odpověď

Odpoveď na tuto otázku je nutná pro rozlišení automatizovaných pokusů o registraci.
:D :) ;) :( :weep: :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek: :fet:

BBCode je zapnutý
[img] je zapnutý
[flash] je vypnutý
[url] je zapnuté
Smajlíci jsou zapnutí

Přehled tématu

Rozšířit náhled Přehled tématu: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od davkol » 14 črc 2019, 11:37

How U.S. Tech Giants Are Helping to Build China’s Surveillance State

An American organization founded by tech giants Google and IBM is working with a company that is helping China’s authoritarian government conduct mass surveillance against its citizens, The Intercept can reveal.

The OpenPower Foundation — a nonprofit led by Google and IBM executives with the aim of trying to “drive innovation” — has set up a collaboration between IBM, Chinese company Semptian, and U.S. chip manufacturer Xilinx. Together, they have worked to advance a breed of microprocessors that enable computers to analyze vast amounts of data more efficiently.

Shenzhen-based Semptian is using the devices to enhance the capabilities of internet surveillance and censorship technology it provides to human rights-abusing security agencies in China, according to sources and documents. A company employee said that its technology is being used to covertly monitor the internet activity of 200 million people.

Ryan Gallagher
July 11, 2019
The Intercept

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od Janka.Michailidu » 14 črc 2019, 11:11

Revealed: This Is Palantir’s Top-Secret User Manual for Cops
Palantir is one of the most significant and secretive companies in big data analysis. The company acts as an information management service for Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, corporations like JP Morgan and Airbus, and dozens of other local, state, and federal agencies. It’s been described by scholars as a “secondary surveillance network,” since it extensively catalogs and maps interpersonal relationships between individuals, even those who aren't suspected of a crime.

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od Janka.Michailidu » 14 črc 2019, 10:14

Money’s no object for Facebook, so hit it where it hurts
This is a landmark moment. It’s the biggest ever fine imposed by the FTC, the body set up to police American capitalism. And $5bn is a lot of money in anybody’s language. Anybody’s but Facebook’s. It represents just a month of revenues and the stock market knew it. Facebook’s capitalisation went up $6bn with the news. This was a fine that actually increased Mark Zuckerberg’s personal wealth.

But what it has exposed once and for all is a company that is out of control on a global scale.

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od Janka.Michailidu » 12 črc 2019, 12:09

Human workers can listen to Google Assistant recordings
The company acknowledged that humans can access those recordings after some of its Dutch language audio snippets were leaked. Google product manager David Monsees acknowledged the leak in a blog post Thursday, and said the company is investigating the breach.

"We are conducting a full review of our safeguards in this space to prevent misconduct like this from happening again," he wrote.

More than 1,000 recordings were obtained by Belgian broadcaster VRT NWS, which noted in a story that some contained sensitive personal conversations—as well as information that identified the person speaking. Google says no user account information is associated with the recordings, and reviewers are instructed not to transcribe background conversations.

But VRT reporters could hear spoken home addresses in some of the recordings, and were able to track down the speakers. Some of these conversations were not directed at Assistant and happened either as background noise or as a mistaken recording when Assistant thought it was being spoken to, but wasn't.

taky na guardianu: ... rs-privacy

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od davkol » 11 črc 2019, 22:47

Iowa Crops Look Like Food — But No One’s Eating Inside a system that traps farmers and screws up the planet.

Iowa has its beauty: It’s not flat, as many seem to believe, and although the scenery is not especially dramatic, this time of year it’s lush, with free-flowing waterways everywhere. Iowa farmers generally do not irrigate, which distinguishes the state from California, of course, as does the astonishing dominance of the almost exclusively two-crop economy based on corn and soybeans.

Yet Iowa is unrecognizable from centuries ago, when Europeans took the land for themselves. What were prairie and wetlands are now neatly partitioned grids of intensely cultivated land: the model for the farm as factory. Through a system of underground “tiles” (pipes, really) in the northern half of the state, most of the water has been drained from swamps, prairie potholes, and lakes into creeks and rivers, which in turn have been engineered to maximize flow.

Thus, much of the landscape has been reshaped to make large-scale mechanical farming as productive as possible. Twenty-three million acres are planted in corn and/or soybeans; that’s 63 percent of all the land in the state, and more than the land area of each of 20 states. Nor is Iowa alone. An area the size of Montana is planted in corn every year in the United States; less than 1 percent of that is sweet corn eaten by humans.

The farmers I spoke to don’t seem to know or care where their crop goes: Ethanol? Chicken feed? (Fifty-nine million mostly invisible chickens produce 16 billion eggs annually, statewide.) Cheetos? It’s all the same.

Iowa is not just a two-crop state: There are several million cattle, those 20 million hogs, and at least twice as many laying hens, not to mention 12 million turkeys. The excrement produced by these animals, if it were an amount produced by humans, would make Iowa the most populous state in the country.

The state’s oil-based economy and its contribution to the climate crisis; the pollution caused by the runoff of chemicals and manure; the public health crisis that has resulted from the production of horribly raised animals and sinister, sickening junk food; the smaller farms that have been absorbed and the diminished communities that formerly thrived as networks of farm families…all of this has been written about well, elsewhere, and extensively.

Still, let me remind you that four companies control north of 60 percent of global proprietary seed sales. And in “Addressing Monopolization in America’s Food System,” the Open Markets Institute reports that “Monsanto has patented traits found in 80 percent of U.S. corn and over 90 percent of U.S. soybeans and has acquired more than 60 independent seed companies since the late 1980s.” Four companies sell three-quarters of the soybean seeds. The top four pork processors control two-thirds of the market; something like 50 million pigs are raised annually in Iowa, many in torturous confinement. I could go on.

To address the climate, environment, animal welfare, and public health crises, we need decisive and radically different government action. Right now, almost all government programs and subsidies favor the corn-and-soybean obsession, and that’s what “the market” — Big Ag and Big Food — wants.

There are incentives and disincentives: Carrots and sticks to encourage crop rotations (instead of “corn on soybeans” or “corn on corn,” the two most common patterns) would begin to change things fast. So would encouraging the growing of actual food by getting land into the hands of a new wave of farmers who want to do things differently, which also would necessitate addressing the issue of land distribution. More positive changes would include the reintroduction of grazing animals in a mixed agriculture setting while banning or at least strictly controlling confined animal feeding operations, or CAFOs. So would setting up markets to sell local and regional food, and using the power of government to break up monopolies. These changes would make the impossible suddenly seem less so.

Mark Bittman
July 11, 2019

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od Lukas.Dolezal » 09 črc 2019, 11:18

Maďarsko potřebuje Piráty.
Janka.Michailidu píše:
09 črc 2019, 11:04
Hungarian government takes control of research institutes despite outcry
After months of struggle between Hungary’s research ministry and its scientific community, the nation’s parliament ratified a law on 2 July that gives the government control over the 40 or so institutes belonging to the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS).

The government says that its aim is to make research more innovative. But the law, which also transfers ownership of the institutes’ properties to the new government-run Eötvös Loránd Research Network (ELKH), has prompted international outcry and raised concerns about academic freedom in Hungary.

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od Janka.Michailidu » 09 črc 2019, 11:04

Hungarian government takes control of research institutes despite outcry
After months of struggle between Hungary’s research ministry and its scientific community, the nation’s parliament ratified a law on 2 July that gives the government control over the 40 or so institutes belonging to the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS).

The government says that its aim is to make research more innovative. But the law, which also transfers ownership of the institutes’ properties to the new government-run Eötvös Loránd Research Network (ELKH), has prompted international outcry and raised concerns about academic freedom in Hungary.

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od Lukas.Dolezal » 09 črc 2019, 09:53

Von der Leyen struggles for Green light from MEPs ... from-meps/


The environmentalist party's two top MEPs, Ska Keller and Philippe Lamberts, damned the German nominee with faint praise Monday | Michele Tantussi/Getty Images

German nominee for top EU job needs the Greens, but lacks environmental credentials.

By Maïa de La Baume, David M. Herszenhorn and Paola Tamma

7/8/19, 10:30 PM CET

Updated 7/8/19, 11:20 PM CET

The Greens will exact a high price for backing German conservative Ursula von der Leyen as European Commission president, judging by their first encounter.

The environmentalist party's two top MEPs, Ska Keller and Philippe Lamberts, damned the German nominee with faint praise Monday, on her first attempt to secure their votes for her surprise candidacy for the EU's top job.

The German defense minister came across as "a very able politician," Keller told reporters afterward. "But from my own point of view, that's not enough."

Unlike von der Leyen, who emerged from last week's emergency EU summit as the compromise candidate to succeed Jean-Claude Juncker as Commission president, Keller was a Spitzenkandidat — one of the "lead candidates" who would supposedly compete for the job in a democratic contest.

The Greens made significant gains in May's European election and their policies — especially on climate change — resonate deeply among young EU voters.


Von der Leyen needs the backing of at least 375 MEPs at next Tuesday's plenary vote in Strasbourg | Omer Messinger/Getty Images

The Greens are "very disappointed" at the European Council's decision to kill that process, Keller said. "Now we end up in the situation where the Council comes up with someone no one had on their piece of paper ... So for us, this is really a major problem because it's a step back in democracy."

For von der Leyen, who hails from the center-right European People's Party, to win an absolute majority in the European Parliament confirming her in the post, the backing of Greens is crucial, given the opposition of many Social Democrats. If the Parliament rejects her, the Council has a month to submit another nominee.

Von der Leyen needs the backing of at least 375 MEPs at next Tuesday's plenary vote in Strasbourg. The full backing of the three largest groups — the conservatives, socialists and liberals — would secure her 444 votes. However, given the likelihood of defections and holdouts, she would welcome support from among the 74 Green MEPs as a cushion — and a boost to her democratic mandate.

“This was a tough meeting. She is clearly searching for the Green support, but not sure she can find a substantiated balanced approach in one week,” said Dutch Green MEP Bas Eickhout, Keller's co-Spitzenkandidat. “This just shows why the [lead candidate] process is so important. It offers an entire campaign to know where someone stands.”

The meeting with the Green leaders is part of a rushed charm offensive among MEPs that von der Leyen began almost immediately after she emerged as the unexpected compromise candidate, in place of fellow German conservative Manfred Weber who was blocked by France's Emmanuel Macron, among others.

She meets the full group of Green MEPs later this week, as well as MEPs from the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats and the centrist-liberal Renew Europe group.

Green ambition

EU leaders nominated von der Leyen for the Commission presidency last Tuesday in a package that included Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel to head the Council (which gathers EU national leaders), Christine Lagarde (who runs the International Monetary Fund) as president of the European Central Bank and Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Borrell as EU foreign policy chief.

Since her nomination, von der Leyen's has posted several tweets but avoided any public statement, and has not taken any questions from the press. That pattern continued on Monday at Egmont Palace in Brussels where she met Michel, with photographers invited to take pictures of her arrival.

"Mrs. von der Leyen, it has been a week since you were appointed, do European voters deserve to hear more than tweets?" a POLITICO reporter shouted as she entered the building. Von der Leyen did not even turn her head.

After the meeting, Michel issued a statement saying they "discussed the future priorities of the European Union."

"Europe is facing huge challenges in the coming months such as Brexit, the next European budget and climate change," the statement added. "Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel agreed that European institutions will have to work in close cooperation to address these issues."

To get to that stage, there's a whole lot of Green reservations to overcome first.

The Greens don't head any national government in the EU and were therefore not part of the leadership deliberations among EU national leaders. However, they made significant gains in May's European election and their policies — especially on climate change — resonate deeply among young EU voters.

Last week, European Council President Donald Tusk told parliamentarians in Strasbourg he backed the idea of a Green candidate for a Commission post.

“I am fully confident that cooperation with the Greens and their presence in the EU decision-making bodies will benefit not only the governing coalition, but Europe as a whole,” Tusk said at a plenary session on Thursday.

Tusk promised to “appeal to all my partners to involve the Greens in the nominations, even though there is still no European Council leader from this party. I hope that the newly-nominated Ursula von der Leyen will also listen to my appeal, in fact, I will pass her this message directly later today.”

'Content demands'

One way to overcome the Greens' complaints about the selection process may be to offer them policy concessions and top-level representation — including, potentially, a Green commissioner. Or, as Keller put it: "Green people in positions who can carry out the implementation" of their policy program.

Von der Leyen's talks with Keller and Lamberts Monday didn't include any "specific program proposals," Keller said. "That will come later."

One sticking point — apart from the veteran German Cabinet minister's lack of historic support for (or opposition to) environmental goals — is the failure of von der Leyen's EPP to back boosting the EU’s 2030 emissions reduction goal.

According to a draft document seen by POLITICO that lays out where the parliamentary groups have managed to find agreement, the goal of increasing the current 40 percent goal to 55 percent is supported by the Greens, S&D and RE, but not the EPP. The EPP is also a holdout on phasing out fossil fuels, the future of the Common Agricultural Policy, and the recalling of polluting cars.

“The Greens want von der Leyen to come up with names and compromise on content,” said Eickhout, the Dutch Green MEP. “She knows what our content demands are and she can figure out what we need in positions.”

Kolmekymppinen itävaltalaisjuristi on piikki Facebookin lihassa – tänään alkaa oikeudenkäynti, joka voi myllätä ...

od Marek.Necada » 09 črc 2019, 07:08

Dnes začíná Schremsův proces u ESD o tom, zda smějí společnosti předávat osobní data do USA. Držme Maxovi palce.

Kolmekymppinen itävaltalaisjuristi on piikki Facebookin lihassa – tänään alkaa oikeudenkäynti, joka voi myllätä tuhansien yhtiöiden bisneksen
EU:n tuomioistuin päättää, saako Facebook luovuttaa käyttäjätietoja Yhdysvaltoihin.
Kahdeksan vuotta sitten itävaltalainen oikeustieteen opiskelija Max Schrems järkyttyi. Hän oli pyytänyt Facebook-yhtiötä lähettämään häntä itseään koskevat tiedot osana yliopiston kurssitehtävää.

Facebookilta saapuikin CD-levy, joka sisälsi peräti 1 200 sivua tietoa Schremsin Facebook-elämästä: mistä hän oli tykännyt sivustolla, mihin tapahtumiin hän oli osallistunut ja mitä yksityisviestejä hän oli lähettänyt, Forbes-lehti kertoo. (siirryt toiseen palveluun)

Viimeistään tuossa vaiheessa Schremsistä tuli yksityisyyden suojaa ajava aktivisti. Hän on haastanut somejätti Facebookin menestyksekkäästi eurooppalaisissa tuomioistuimissa ja perustanut Euroopan laajuisen None of Your Business -kansalaisjärjestön. (siirryt toiseen palveluun)

Tänään tiistaina Euroopan unionin tuomioistuin alkaa käsitellä 32-vuotiaan Schremsin toistaiseksi merkittävintä kannetta. Jos hän saa tahtonsa läpi oikeudessa, Facebook ja jopa sadat tuhannet muut yhtiöt joutuvat mylläämään tapansa käsitellä asiakkaidensa yksityistietoja.
Schremsin mielestä tietoja ei pitäisi lähettää Yhdysvaltoihin

Schremsin kanne koskee pääasiassa EU:n komission hyväksymiä mallisopimuslausekkeita (siirryt toiseen palveluun). Lakitekninen termi viittaa yritysten välisiin vakiomuotoisiin sopimuspykäliin, joiden ansiosta Facebook ja muut yritykset saavat siirtää asiakkaidensa tietoja EU:n ulkopuolelle esimerkiksi Yhdysvaltoihin.

Lähtökohtaisesti EU on kieltänyt tietojen siirron maihin, joissa yksityisyyden suoja on EU:ta heikommalla tolalla.

Schremsin mielestä (siirryt toiseen palveluun) nämä mallisopimuslausekkeet sekä Yhdysvaltain ja EU:n välinen henkilötietosopimus Privacy Shield (siirryt toiseen palveluun) eivät riitä suojelemaan EU-kansalaisia Yhdysvaltain tiedustelupalveluiden vakoilulta.

Siksi tietojen siirto Yhdysvaltoihin pitäisi hänen mielestään lopettaa. Facebook on luonnollisesti asiasta päinvastaista mieltä, Techcrunch-sivusto kertoo. (siirryt toiseen palveluun)

Schrems nosti kanteensa alun perin jo vuonna 2013. Tuolloin tietovuotaja Edward Snowden paljasti, että Facebook, Google ja muut Yhdysvalloissa toimivat yhtiöt joutuvat luovuttamaan etenkin ulkomaalaisten käyttäjiensä yksityistietoja tiedustelupalveluille.

EU on kiristänyt yksityisyyden suojaa paljastusten jälkeen. Viime vuonna astui voimaan EU:n yleinen tietosuoja-asetus eli GDPR, (siirryt toiseen palveluun) joka asettaa tietojen käyttäjälle entistä enemmän velvollisuuksia.
Vuonna 2015 Schrems kaatoi kansainvälisen sopimuksen

Schremsin kannetta on palloteltu jo kuusi vuotta EU:n tuomioistuimen ja Irlannin välillä. Irlanti on vastuussa Facebookin valvonnasta EU:ssa, koska yhtiön kansainvälisten toimintojen pääkonttori sijaitsee siellä.

Schremsin mukaan Facebook on käyttänyt miljoonia euroja upottaakseen hänen kanteensa. Kanne on silti menestynyt hyvin.

Vuonna 2015 EU-tuomioistuin oli samaa mieltä Schremsin kanssa siitä, että tuolloinen EU:n ja Yhdysvaltain välinen henkilötietosopimus oli laiton. Päätös pakotti Facebookin ja tuhannet yhtiöt uusimaan sopimuksiaan, jotta ne eivät rikkoisi EU:n lakeja.

Yhdysvallat ja EU puolestaan joutuivat solmimaan uuden, aiempaa kireämmän Privacy Shield -sopimuksen.
Voisi vaikuttaa miljardibisnekseen

Jopa sadat tuhannet yhtiöt pankeista autonvalmistajiin siirtävät ihmisten henkilötietoja EU:n rajojen yli mallisopimuslausekkeiden turvin, arvioi uutistoimisto Reutersin haastattelema (siirryt toiseen palveluun) Tanguy Van Overstraeten. Hän johtaa lakiyhtiö Linklatersin kansainvälisiä toimintoja.

Jos EU:n tuomioistuin päätyy jälleen samalle kannalle kuin Schrems, yhtiöt joutuisivat miettimään tietosuojaansa uusiksi. Päätös vaikuttaisi miljardien eurojen arvoiseen maailmanlaajuiseen bisnekseen.

Henkilötietojen siirrot eivät silti pysähtyisi. Van Overstraetenin mukaan Schremsin haastamille lakipykälille on GDPR-asetukseen perustuvia vaihtoehtoja, mutta niitä on paljon hankalampaa soveltaa käytännössä.

Vaikka Schremsiä ei tällä kertaa onnistaisi, hänellä on myös muita rautoja tulessa. Hän on haastanut Facebookin oikeuteen myös kotimaassaan Itävallassa, koska hänen mielestään palvelun käyttöehdot ovat tietosuojalainsäädännön vastaisia, Fortune-lehti kertoo.

Re: Zajímavé aktuální zahraniční články

od davkol » 06 črc 2019, 17:23

With Record Numbers of Displaced People, Deterrence Policies to Stop Their Movement Are Mass Murder

The European Union killed Alan Kurdi; the United States killed Valeria and Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez. The 18,000-plus migrant deaths in the Mediterranean Sea since 2014, as well as the over 7,000 deaths around the U.S.-Mexico border since 1994, were state-sanctioned murders. This isn’t hyperbole: Last month, the International Criminal Court submitted an indictment, claiming that the EU and its member states should be prosecuted for the deaths of thousands of migrants fleeing Libya who drowned in the Mediterranean. The Mediterranean stretch between northern Africa and Italy is only treacherous if you have to travel on an overcrowded smuggler’s dinghy, without the possibility of a rescue boat saving you if the vessel capsizes. The U.S. border crossing isn’t deadly unless you are on foot for days without water, shelter, or sustenance, hiding from law enforcement, cartels, and militias.

Proponents of deterrence policies recognize that “no one puts their children in a boat, unless the water is safer than the land”; they just choose to make the water more perilous still. Consider President Donald Trump’s tweet in the wake of reports about horrific conditions at migrant detention centers, including those intended to hold children: “If Illegal Immigrants are unhappy with the conditions in the quickly built or refitted detentions centers, just tell them not to come. All problems solved!”

Europe’s deterrence program has worked insofar as the number of illegal entries to the EU have dropped to the lowest levels in five years. But here is what deterrence “working” really looks like: Thousands of refugees have been turned away and sent back to be held en masse in Libyan detention camps, rife with torture and abuse, and over 143,000 refugees stuck in camps in Turkey, many more struggling to live day to day outside the official camps. Individuals and families have not opted against migration; so-called deterrence has only been possible through programs of militarized removal, mass detention, and, indirectly, murder.

As journalist Patrick Kingsley, author of “The New Odyssey: The Story of Europe’s Refugee Crisis,” wrote, “Politicians repeatedly ignored the reality of the situation—namely, that whether they are welcomed or not people will keep coming.” Indeed, despite Europe’s ferocious efforts to make migrant entry impossible, refugees in their thousands are still risking everything to reach safety there. Of the nearly 2,000 refugees who have attempted the treacherous Mediterranean route from northern Africa to Europe in 2019 so far, over 15 percent have died. It should be obvious to anyone paying attention to the harrowing journeys so many thousands of people continue to make that the logic of deterrence relies on a willingness to accept state-sanctioned mass murder.

Mass migration cannot be stopped. As of last year, according to new statistics from the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, the population of people on Earth displaced by conflict or persecution reached 70.8 million — more than double the number recorded in 2012. Disasters fueled by climate change were responsible for at least 18.8 million internal displacements in 2017, as well as bolstering cross-border migration, according to Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. In another report released last week on climate change and poverty, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, warned of a “climate apartheid” in which “even if current targets are met, tens of millions will be impoverished, leading to widespread displacement and hunger.”

The rhetoric of the American and European far-right, too often parroted by the liberal center, might lead one to believe that the weight of this global migration crisis is bearing down on the EU and the U.S. It is not.

In 2015, at the height of Europe’s so-called migrant crisis, over 1 million asylum seekers reached Europe. Yet the population of the EU is over 510 million. I’m not suggesting that the swift welcoming and integration of an additional one five-hundredth of a population is no challenge, but a challenge is not a crisis. Meanwhile, 396,579 undocumented people were apprehended after entering the U.S. illegally in 2018 along the southwest border; the number equals around 0.0012 percent of the U.S. population. The 10.5 million undocumented immigrants estimated to be currently living in the country is not a crisis for the United States; it is a crisis for the undocumented, vulnerable to economic exploitation, stigmatization, and, ever increasingly, deportation. Last year, the U.S., with a GDP of nearly $20 trillion, took the fewest number of refugees in 40 years in 2018: only 22,491 people. As a point of comparison, in 2015, Lebanon housed around 1.2 million Syrian refugees in its population of 4.5 million people; one in five people.

To understand the vicious consequences of successful migration deterrence, we need only look to Europe. German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s all-too-brief willingness to open her country’s doors to refugees in 2015 offered a glimpse of what a reasonable response to mass migration could look like. “We’ll manage it,” the famously pragmatic leader said. And she was right: Germany, a wealthy nation of 82 million, could manage the 800,000 refugees registered in 2015. Yet, like the rest of Europe, German policy swiftly turned away from “welcome culture” toward swift deportations and harsh deterrence efforts; the paranoiac xenophobia of Europe’s far-right won the day.

As I argued at the time, Merkel’s short-lived open policy was not saintly: It was no more than a reasonable response to a global migration crisis that the world’s wealthiest nations are indeed best positioned to manage. A redistribution of hoarded resources away from the world’s wealthiest toward the working classes would make the challenge of mass resettlements – and, again, it is no doubt a challenge — more manageable still.

When Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders stated earlier this year that he was against open borders, he said, “If you open the borders, my God, there’s a lot of poverty in this world, and you’re going to have people from all over the world. I don’t think that’s something we can do at this point.” With hope, his use of the qualifier “at this point” is operative and movable. As unlivable portions of the planet continue to grow, a refusal to open borders, or at least make them considerably more porous, will produce a powder keg of further conflict and a mass genocide. This point is fast upon us. One could argue we are already there.

Natasha Lennard
July 6, 2019
The Intercept