Select Page ::

Apple Pay can now be used to spend Bitcoin – CNET

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

Angela Lang/CNET

Bitcoin wallet BitPay's Prepaid Mastercard users in the US can now add their card to Apple Wallet andApple Pay will now allow Bitcoin to be spent online, in stores and in apps, BitPay said Friday.

The BitPay Wallet app supports not only Bitcoin but also cryptocurrencies Ether and Bitcoin Cash as well as the dollar-pegged stable coins USD Coin, Gemini Dollar, Paxos Standard and Binance USD.

Bitcoin cash out: Is it worth using Bitcoin as money? – Marketing Analysis

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

With Bitcoin reaching broader acceptance, theres been a current push to entry funds extra simply. A brand new deal signifies that the choice of withdrawing Bitcoin as money is coming to 16,000 ATMs within the UK.

Ill clarify what this implies for our cash and my ideas on whether or not Id be enticed by this upcoming characteristic on money machines.

These cryptocurrency cash-out capabilities are being launched throughout ATMs belonging to the unbiased money machine operator, Cashzone. Theyre teaming up with London-based cryptocurrency enterprise BitcoinPoint to roll out these new options. What this implies is that Bitcoin holders will be capable to withdraw funds into money at 1000s of various areas across the UK.

There are nonetheless some superb factors that make a case for Bitcoin being a helpful different foreign money:

Bitcoins design does make it a helpful different to common cash. Nevertheless, I receivedt be utilizing Bitcoin ATMs any time quickly and Ill clarify why.

Having the ability to entry Bitcoin funds by way of money machines provides to the argument of it being a helpful type of cash. Its because its changing into extra accessible.

Nevertheless, there are three actually essential issues that put me off the concept of withdrawing Bitcoin and changing it into money:

Having the ability to convert Bitcoin at an ATM could be useful for somebody who has the vast majority of their cash in cryptocurrency and owns mainly no money.

For most individuals, I actually dont assume theres a large use case right here. We dont have ATMs for withdrawing and changing your shares and bonds into money, and I dont assume its actually crucial for Bitcoin proper now.

Following on from PayPals instance, I do assume that extra companies will begin accepting kinds of cryptocurrency like Bitcoin. Nevertheless, I feel cryptocurrency credit score and debit playing cards appear to be a way more wise enterprise than ATMs.

For my part, with the ability to withdraw Bitcoin as money is novel, however not totally helpful. If I wanted instant entry to money, doing it this manner can be a final resort and provided that I had no cash in my debit account.

I dont doubt that cryptocurrency ATMs might be one thing we see extra of because the know-how develops. At this second in time, I feel its simply too costly and form of arbitrary.

Nevertheless, that is one other constructive signal of adoption and provides extra legitimacy to digital currencies. So possibly this will probably be an essential step in direction of extra widespread acceptance.

See original here:

Bitcoin cash out: Is it worth using Bitcoin as money? - Marketing Analysis

Uber wont buy bitcoin with its cash but would consider accepting it as payment, CEO says – CNBC

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi told CNBC on Thursday the company discussed but "quickly dismissed" the idea of buying bitcoin with corporate cash like Telsa.

However, Khosrowshahi said Uber would consider accepting cryptocurrencies as payment.

The comments come after Tesla announced earlier this week that it bought $1.5 billion worth of bitcoin with some cash on its balance sheet and plans to begin accepting the digital coin as payment for its products. Tesla's moves caught Wall Street's attention and some wondered whether the electric-vehicle maker's decision would be a tipping point for further crypto adoption.

In an interview on "Squawk Box," Khosrowshahi was asked whether Uber had considered similar actions to Tesla. "It's a conversation that's happened that has been quickly dismissed," he said. "We're going to keep our cash safe. We're not in the speculation business," he stressed. "The upside in our company is in the business that we've built, not the investments that we invest in."

As of Dec. 31, Uber reported it had $5.65 billion in cash and cash equivalents, along with $1.18 billion in short-term investments.

Khosrowshahi, who took over as Uber's chief executive in 2017, left open the possibility that the ride-hailing and food-delivery provider would accept cryptocurrencies as payment.

"Just like we accept all kinds of local currency, we are going to look at cryptocurrency and/or bitcoin in terms of currency to transact," he said. "That's good for business. That's good for our riders and our eaters. That we'll certainly look at and if there's a benefit there, if there's a need there, we'll do it. We're just not going to do it as part of a promotion."

On Wednesday, Mastercard announced intentions to open up its network to some cryptocurrencies, a move the credit card giant said will allow consumers and merchants "to transact in an entirely new form of payment." Mastercard had already let customers do some transactions with cryptocurrencies, but they took place outside the company's formal network.

The latest financial firm to put its weight behind crypto is BNY Mellon, which said Thursday it's launching a digital assets division later this year. Shares of the oldest bank in America rose Thursday.

Proponents of companies buying bitcoin for their corporate cash argue that despite its day-to-day volatility, the digital coin has appreciated in value over the long term and will continue to do so. For that reason, supporters such as MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor feels it's a more productive investment than keeping hordes of cash on the balance sheet.

Some skeptics worry about the volatility risks of bitcoin, which has enjoyed a massive run in recent months to trade above $48,000 per coin at all-time highs Thursday morning. A year ago, bitcoin traded below $11,000. While bitcoin has seen increased institutional adoption lately, some still believe there's still too much uncertainty about its future.

Like Uber, PepsiCo CFO Hugh Johnston told CNBC on Thursday that the beverage giant has "had the conversation" about buying bitcoin with its cash. "The conclusion we came to pretty quickly was bitcoin is too speculative for the way we manage our cash portfolio," Johnston said earlier on "Squawk Box," shortly after the company reported better-than expected earnings and revenue. PepsiCoreported a fourth-quarter profit of $1.47 per share on revenue of $22.46 billion. Shares dropped Thursday.

As for Uber, its shares fell Thursday following the company's mixedfourth-quarter earnings results. The stock advanced 6% during Wednesday's session heading into the after-the-bell report. Uber said it lost 54 cents per share in the the fourth quarter, a slightly narrower than analyst expectations for a 56 cent loss. Revenue of $3.17 billion was below the $3.58 billion Wall Street had been looking for. The company's overall loss for the quarter was $968 million, an improvement from the $1.1 billion loss in the same period last year.

Uber's two largest businesses offerings ride hailing and food delivery have seen different fates during the coronavirus pandemic. The ride-hailing segment has suffered as people stayed home and traveled less. Conversely, Uber Eats has seen its usage soar as people ordered delivery instead of dining in at restaurants.

See the original post:

Uber wont buy bitcoin with its cash but would consider accepting it as payment, CEO says - CNBC

UK cryptocurrency startups coining the future of fintech in 2021 – UKTN (UK Technology News

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

Bitcoin has been in the spotlight for several months now for various reasons. The digital currency created by the mysterious and pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto has achieved a remarkable rise in 2020 amid the COVID pandemic, Brexit, and much more. Since then, Bitcoin has been on the headlines every day and pushing up the prices of other cryptocurrencies at the same time.

In a recent development in the cryptocurrency industry, Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX announced that his company Tesla invested $1.5 billion in bitcoin and intends to start accepting the currency as payment.

According to the companys filing, In January 2021, we updated our investment policy to provide us with more flexibility to further diversify and maximise returns on our cash that is not required to maintain adequate operating liquidity. As part of the policy, we may invest a portion of such cash in certain specified alternative reserve assets. Thereafter, we invested an aggregate of $1.50 billion in bitcoin under this policy. We expect to begin accepting Bitcoin as a form of payment for our products in the near future, subject to applicable laws and initially on a limited basis, which we may or may not liquidate upon receipt.

Post the announcement, the Bitcoin price soared to an all-time high of $48,034 (15% jump). At the time of writing this article, Bitcoin stands at $46,943.

As a result of the announcement, many analysts have highlighted the extreme volatility of bitcoin, emphasising the fact that investors could be wiped out if the digital currency plunges in the future.

On the other hand, Musk has also made a series of tweets on the alternative cryptocurrency Dogecoin, leading to a rise in the cryptocurrencys value.

New research reveals 2 in 5 crypto investors in the UK are women

Well, its not only Elon Musk and Tesla. Numerous companies and startups in the UK are focusing on cryptocurrencies and Blockchains as this is the next big transformation in the fintech industry. Having said that, heres the list of 10 companies working on cryptocurrencies in the UK you should know.

Founder/s: Evgeny Gaevoy, Harro Mantel, Yoann Turpin

Funding: 17.2M

Wintermute was founded in 2017 with the mission to provide the much-needed liquidity to the crypto markets, thus contributing to the adoption of new decentralised finance.

A sweet Valentines Day for Bumble with February IPO: What about UK dating startups?

Founder/s: Konstantin Zaripov, Sergey Romanovskiy

Funding: 4.5M

This London-based company bridges the gap between crypto and cash, providing people with instant crypto-backed cash services for everyday use. Nebeus offers a host of secure and compliant solutions allowing customers to borrow, earn, send, and receive cash and crypto with full security.

Founder/s: Gabriele Musella, Oleg Giberstein, Zdenek Hofler

Ubamarket scores 2.9M: The Scan Pay Go retail tech app from UK wants to revolutionise hospitality sector

Funding: 941K

Coinrule is the smart assistant for cryptocurrency trading, allowing users to take full control of their trading while being able to fight back hedge funds and automated bots. As per the companys claims, it is simple and with no coding skills required.

Founder/s: Dan Hughes

Funding: 16.2M

Radix DLT, a London-based DeFi (decentralised finance) startup is building a decentralised finance protocol, which provides frictionless access, programmability, and liquidity to any asset in the world. The company aims to solve many of the pain points in todays centralised financial system.

Founder/s: Dmitry Lazarichev, Georgy Sokolov, Pavel Matveev

Funding: 5.7M

Based out of London, Wirex aims to make crypto and traditional currencies equal and accessible to everyone. The companys app and next-gen Wirex card let users buy, store, exchange, and spend a wide variety of conventional and digital currencies quickly and securely, with no hidden fees.

Founder/s: Mark Hipperson, Niall McConnell, Philip Goffin

Funding: 11.4M

Ziglu, the personal money app offers an account with traditional & digital currencies managed seamlessly in one app. The cryptocurrency platform gives everyone easy access to digital currencies including Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ether, Litecoin, and XRP, with zero hidden fees or transaction charges.

Founder/s: Carel van Wyk, Marcus Swanepoel, Pieter Heyns, Timothy Stranex

Funding: 9.9M

Based out of London, Luno is a cryptocurrency exchange platform that lets users to buy, store and learn about cryptocurrencies. The company is on a mission to upgrade the world to a better financial system. Luno operates in 40 countries across Africa, South East Asia, and Europe and employs around 250 people.

Founder/s: Gerald Goldstein, Itamar Lesuisse, Julien Niset

Funding: 11.5M

Headquartered in London, Argent is an Ethereum wallet for iOS and Android. With this platform, users can earn interest and invest; borrow, store and send. The platform also lets users access DeFi and Dapps in a few taps.

Founder/s: Jason Fitzpatrick, Jeff Hancock, Keith Christie-Smith, Paul Tiley

Funding: NA

Coinpass is a UK-based cryptocurrency exchange platform, founded to solve the demand for fast, reliable, professional, and high-quality financial service products for crypto-to-fiat trading in the UK. The company aims to be the global leader in the digital finance space by striving to bridge the gap between traditional finance and digital assets.

Founder/s: Grant Blaisdell, Jakub Fijolek, Maciej Ziolkowski, Pawel Aleksander, Pawel Kuskowski

Funding: 11.5M

Based out of London, Coinfirm offers AML and regulatory technology for blockchain and cryptocurrencies. It offers the industrys largest blockchain coverage, supporting over 1,400 cryptocurrencies and protocols including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Hyperledger, and many more.

The companys solutions are used by market leaders globally, ranging from crypto exchanges such as Binance, and protocols like XRP, to major financial institutions like PKO BP.

Founder/s: Dmitry Tokarev, CEO

Funding: 6.7M

Copper is a London-based digital asset infrastructure provider. The company provides custody and prime brokerage services to more than 200 institutional clients, including traders, wealth companies, private banks, family offices and cryptocurrency funds.

Using proprietary technology including Copper ClearLoop and a Walled Garden Copper facilitates secure, instant and offline transaction settlements for 150+ digital assets, across more than 25 global exchanges.

Coppers fully integrated products are unique in the cryptoasset space. Underpinned by multi-award-winning custody, Copper has built the comprehensive and secure suite of tools and services required to safely acquire, trade, and store cryptocurrencies including access to margin lending trading facilities and the DeFi space.

The rest is here:

UK cryptocurrency startups coining the future of fintech in 2021 - UKTN (UK Technology News

If Dogecoin is a Joke, Why is Elon Musk Pumping This Meme Cryptocurrency? – Value The Markets

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

The cryptocurrency market is now worth over an astronomical $1 trillion! For what started as a futuristic concept around 12 years ago has rapidly come a long way. Bitcoin and Ethereum own the lions share, but there are many more coins making waves in the crypto markets. Some of these will no doubt go the distance while the majority fall by the wayside. One such asset making headlines is the comically named Dogecoin.

Dogecoin features the face of the Japanese Shiba Inu dog which originated as a meme of the dog with internal dialogue printed in rainbow comic sans font and broken English. The meme took off in 2010 and was voted in the top 10 memes of the year in 2013.

That same year the Dogecoin (Cryptocurrency code: DOGE, symbol: ) cryptocurrency was born. It was co-founded by IBM software engineer Billy Markus and Adobe software engineer Jackson Palmer. Its a decentralized peer-to-peer digital currency. They reportedly created it to make a payment system that was instant, fun, and free from fees. So, they took the original Doge meme as its logo and namesake, taking the mickey out of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum.

While its been around for years, its been developing notoriety in recent weeks. The GameStop mania had a part to play in this price surge but Elon Musk took it to a whole other level. The worlds richest man and real-life answer to Tony Stark (Iron Man) has taken a shine to the strange coin. Thanks to his random tweets featuring Dogecoin, its value has exploded in 2021.

Why hes doing this has many speculating: is he going to resign from Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA), is he on a self-destruct collision course, is he invested in Doge, is he taunting the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), is this his way of helping the underdog come out on top? Its since come to light Teslas invested $1.5bn in bitcoin, so it turns out his interest in crypto is genuine, even if with Dogecoin hes simply having fun.

Theres no doubt hes a strange character and its unlikely any of us will fathom how his genius mind works. But all speculation aside, Musk himself said in a Clubhouse discussion last week, Occasionally I make jokes about Dogecoin but they are really just meant to be jokes,.

Joke or not, his tweets move markets. The value of Dogecoin rocketed 800% in 24 hours, spurred on by a Reddit board pushing for Dogecoin to become the crypto version of GameStop.

And further boosted by Musk tweeting a parody Vogue magazine cover featuring a dog and the title Dogue.

And it wasnt just Dogecoin he caused a price surge in. Linking to a r/wallstreetbets post, he also tweeted Gamestonk!! in reference to the GameStop (NYSE:GME) buying frenzy. He also professed his love for Signal, Etsy and Shopify, contributing to share price rises in all of them. The Signal he was referring to is the messaging app, which is not publicly traded, but nevertheless, so many Musk followers jumped into buying shares in a pharma company called Signal Advance (OTC:SIGL), that it led to a 5,675% surge in the otherwise illiquid stock.

Back in 2018 Musk was investigated by the SEC after making speculative tweets about taking Tesla private. His punishment was to resign as chair of Tesla for three years (he could remain as chief executive), pay a $20m fine and stop tweeting about the company. Despite this, it doesnt seem to have scared him off.

When the GameStop battle between short sellers and the Reddit army gathered momentum, it sent shockwaves through the markets. The hedge funds were haemorrhaging money, and what started as highly entertaining quickly took on a serious tone. Then the digital trading apps like Robinhood and its peers began restricting trades on the stocks that were getting too much attention. This caused an outcry because people could sell, but not buy, so the prices of these equities inevitably dropped. It was a sad day for many, as fortunes were lost in minutes.

Cryptocurrency is much less regulated than equities so although the price volatility is insane, some people actually feel safer putting their money in a joke coin than in the public markets. Internet subcommunities in places like Reddit and Discord go a long way to pumping these crypto coins and then when celebrities jump in it adds fuel to the fire. Musk wasnt the only big player to join the Doge Army, rapper Snoop Dog and Kiss frontman Gene Simmons jumped in too.

Other than being good for a laugh, one thing Dogecoin has going for it is its super-fast block time of one minute, whereas Bitcoin has a block time of ten minutes. This means Dogecoin transactions are timed quicker and being less popular than Bitcoin, its also cheaper to use. However, the big reason it cant ever beat Bitcoin is because of its infinite supply. Bitcoin is a deflationary currency that can only ever have a maximum supply of 21 million bitcoins. But Dogecoin is an inflationary currency, which means more are being produced constantly and therefore its not rare.

So, while Musk might cheer for an entertaining universe where Doge is the currency, its not likely to happen here.

The most entertaining outcome and the most ironic outcome would be that Dogecoin becomes the currency of Earth in the future.

So, what are the top cryptocurrencies? The top twelve cryptocurrencies by market cap are Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tether, Cardano, XRP, Polkadot, Binance Coin, Litecoin, Chainlink, Dogecoin, Stellar and Bitcoin Cash.

Bitcoin needs no introduction. Its the mother of them all and is expected to be financially regulated in the real world to some extent soon. Ethereum is a close contender to Bitcoin. It utilises the blockchain to make accountancy and business practices more transparent. Many Fortune 500 companies are now using Ethereum to enhance their workflow. Ethereum has been making all-time highs recently, with its price exceeding $1600 this month.

Tether is whats known as a stable coin, its tied to the United States Dollar, which should supposedly save it from the insane volatility commonplace in the crypto markets. Tether is a centralized coin, its not transparent and its not scarce. Its appeal to investors is its stability.

The Tether market cap is currently around $29bn. Its popularity was soaring but people are becoming suspicious of its true purpose with speculation that it may be a way for large institutions to game the Bitcoin price.

Its even under investigation by the New York attorney generals office to find out if it has simply been created to artificially inflate the value of Bitcoin. Theres a lot of suspicion mounting around the coin, but if Tether collapses, its likely to bring the value of its cryptocurrency peers down with it.

Ethereums number one rival Cardano is another cryptocurrency rocketing in value. Fans say Ethereums fees are too high and Cardano will beat it. Cardanos internal cryptocurrency is called Ada.

XRP, otherwise known as Ripple, was once flying high but has recently been destroyed by regulatory tussle.

Like Doge it enjoyed a momentary spike in the GameStop frenzy but thats since died down.

Meanwhile, Polkadot hopes to be the blockchain that can connect all other blockchains.

Stellar is an open network for storing and moving money. Its designed so all the worlds financial systems can work together on a single network.

Bitcoin Cash is a fork of Bitcoin. That means its a spin-off of the original coin. Otherwise known as an altcoin. In November 2018, Bitcoin Cash split into two cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV to further confuse matters. Its essentially the same thing as Bitcoin, but the point of Bitcoin Cash was to increase the size of the blocks to process more transactions and improve scalability. At the time there were concerns Bitcoin Cash would become more valuable than Bitcoin, but it didnt happen. Its currently worth around $450, whereas one Bitcoin is worth over $39k.

Litecoin is very similar to Bitcoin, but it uses a different algorithm called Scrypt, whereas Bitcoin uses a traditional algorithm called SHA-256. This gives it the advantage of faster transactions. Litecoin has a limit of 84 million coins, so its not as rare as Bitcoin and therefore cant ever be as valuable.

Blockchains are transparent and are becoming popular with real-world businesses. They cant be edited, and everyone can see them, so they provide a new level of trust. A part of this includes smart contracts that automatically execute on the blockchain as conditions are met. For instance, in shipping, there are many steps along the route where paperwork has to be signed and verified through different jurisdictions. Smart contracts on the blockchain can simplify this process and increase trust between parties. Its the main reason for Ehtereums popularity.

Connecting offline information to blockchain smart contracts in a universal language is limiting. Chainlink intends to solve this problem using oracles, which is software that acts as an intermediary. Its complicated but Chainlink attempts to simplify the process using reputation contracts and the transparency of the blockchain.

Aside from the array of cryptocurrencies that hope to go mainstream, there are literally hundreds of altcoins making their way in the world. Some being promoted on Twitter today include Syntropy (NOIA), OriginTrail (TRAC), KardiaChain (KAI), and Klever (KLV). Syntropy hopes to transform the public internet into a secure environment with encryption and speed built in. OriginTrail wants to make supply chains work seamlessly. KardiaChain is using the blockchain to provide infrastructure solutions for enterprises and governments in Vietnam and South East Asia. Klever is a decentralized p2p digital crypto wallet available in the app store.

Its too easy to get caught up in the excitement and energy of a community group, particularly when the promise of great riches appears to be in reach. But unfortunately, its a dog eat dog world and many fall victim to the pump and dump before theyve even processed whats happened. This is when a coin or stock is hyped online and talked up so much that you simply cant bear to miss out, but once the price goes high enough, those doing the persuading sell and it promptly falls leaving those getting in late left holding the bag.

Back in 2017, when crypto hype was at an all-time high, it left many investors nursing massive losses. There was an onslaught of initial coin offerings (ICOs) that got people super excited and then left them high and dry when they went bust. Fundraising in ICOs exceeded $5 billion in 2017!

Then theres the notorious story of Cryptocurrency queen Dr Ruja Ignatova. She persuaded people to invest billions in her Bitcoin rival OneCoin and then disappeared with the money. The story turned dark very quickly, and many ordinary people lost fortunes.

While its always going to be tempting to buy something very cheap, on the chance it will turn into a 100-bagger, thats a sure-fire way to lose your shirt. To sensibly invest in cryptocurrency, it seems sticking with the more widely recognised, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, is the safest route to success.

If Dogecoin is a Joke, Why is Elon Musk Pumping This Meme Cryptocurrency? - Value The Markets

Better Than Bitcoin? 6 Other Cryptocurrencies You Should Consider – InvestorPlace

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

Nobody really knows who invented Bitcoin (CCC:BTC-USD), the most famous crypto of all.

Satoshi Nakamoto is the name used by the developer. But its a pseudonym. We cant be sure of whether Satoshi is a person or a group of people.

Instead of existing in a server in a building somewhere, Blockchain and Bitcoin is a decentralized community. It is a network of thousands of computers that are linked together all around the world.

Nakamoto claims that he started writing the code for Bitcoin in 2007. In August 2008, he created a website and registered the domain name bitcoin.org.

Then in January 2009, Nakamoto released the first version of Bitcoin and launched the network. He worked with other developers until mid-2010. After that, he turned the control and code over to other people within the Bitcoin community.

And then Nakamoto disappeared into obscurity. He hasnt been heard from since.

Bitcoin has become synonymous with cryptocurrency. But that shouldnt be the case. There are now more than 1,000 other cryptocurrencies. Here are just a few to consider:

As you can see on the above chart, Bitcoin recently hit resistance around the $40,500 level in early January. This was an all-time high.

Then in late January, it found support around the $30,500 level. Since then, it has been trending higher.

Some analysts believe that in the long run, Bitcoin wont last. There are some important disadvantages when compared to other cryptocurrencies.

Bitcoin uses tremendous amounts of power. It is estimated that on an annual basis, the Bitcoin network uses more electricity than the country of Chile. The power used for just one transaction could run the average U.S. household for over three weeks. In addition, a transaction could take up to 24 hours to be completed.

Some have said that Bitcoin was designed just to be a blue print and starting point for cryptocurrencies.

Other cryptos could be considered Bitcoin with added or different features. These are called alternative coins or alt-coins.

Ethereum first hit the scene in 2013. As you can see on the above chart, ETH is trading at all-time highs.

This crypto has the same philosophy and blockchain technology as Bitcoin, but it was created for a different purpose.

Ethereum is designed as a decentralized platform that runs smart contracts. These contracts allow users to make agreements almost themselves. There is no middleman. These contracts are then validated by Ethereums blockchain network.

Financial companies like J.P. Morgan (NYSE:JPM), Credit Suisse(NYSE:CS) and other institutions are using Ethereum for certain tasks. Technology companies like Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) and Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) are using it as well.

The Ethereum Enterprise Alliance is an organization whose objective is to promote the use of Ethereum and the Ethereum blockchain technology. It has more than 100 members. The membership consists of established Fortune 500 companies as well as cutting-edge startups.

Litecoin is similar to Bitcoin. It was actually created by a hard fork from Bitcoin. This means that some Bitcoin developers decided to make a crypto that was easier to create and use.

Cryptocurrencies are made by a process called mining. The people who mine Bitcoin need to solve complex cryptological puzzles in order to do so. As a reward for solving the problem and making new coins, the miners are given new coins for themselves.

As the Bitcoin network grows and evolves, these puzzles become increasingly harder to solve. They require extremely strong computers and these computers use tremendous amounts of electricity and power.

Litecoin is much easier to mine. It can be done on regular computers. This means that it probably isnt as secure as Bitcoin. But the network is much faster and it doesnt use nearly as much power.

NEO was launched in June 2014. It is a smart contract system that is similar to Ethereum.

At one time it was the most common cryptocurrency in China, where it was created. It is also the reason why it has been called the Chinese or Eastern Ethereum.

However, the network has more than two million users worldwide, and there are NEO communities in seven countries.

NEO is much faster than Bitcoin. It has the ability to process 10,000 transactions per second. It also just announced that it will be upgrading its network. This could be the reason for the recent rally in the price.

As you can see on the chart, the price of NEO has almost doubled since the beginning of the year.

The market for Stellar Lumens could end up being enormous. It is an open platform for financial products.

It is estimated that about three billion people dont have access to banks or traditional banking services. They cant get credit cards, wire money or have savings accounts.

But more than half of these people have access to cellular phone services. A cryptocurrency could be a viable (and better) alternative to traditional banking for this market.

A crypto like Stellar could also provide services for people who do have access to banking as well. People around the world could make transactions very rapidly without the cost and paperwork that would be needed for traditional banks.

As you can see on the chart, XLM is currently trading around 35 cents. In November it traded as low as 8 cents. The all-time high was in January 2018 at 94 cents.

Bitcoin Cash is a result of a fork, or separation, from Bitcoin. Back in 2017, a group of Bitcoin developers couldnt decide on what the size of a block should be. Some people in the community wanted to increase it.

Each block could hold 1 MB of data. Some developers wanted to increase this to 2 MB. Others wanted to increase the capacity even more. Some wanted it to go to as high as 32 MB.

After a decision couldnt be reached, some of the group decided to break away and develop a new crypto. Thus, Bitcoin Cash was born. While Bitcoin stayed with 1 MB, the new crypto was developed with 8 MB of data capacity per block.

As a result, Bitcoin Cash is much more scalable than Bitcoin. It can process transactions faster and at a cheaper rate.

Ripple has been around since 2012. It is designed to be used by financial institutions. As you can see on the chart, this crypto is very volatile and low-priced.

There are some significant differences between Ripple and Bitcoin. Some people think that Riple isnt a true cryptocurrency. Ripple Labs is a private company, and XRP is its currency. The company provides payment and settlement solutions for financial institutions around the world.

Nevertheless, Ripple is much faster than Bitcoin. XRP can make transactions in mere seconds, while a single transaction in Bitcoin could take hours. In addition, the energy costs used by XRP are minimal.

Because Ripple is a private company, XRP isnt mineable. No new coins can be created. There are 100 billion coins in circulation that are in use by members of Ripples network. This limited supply could cause the price to rise if demand for the crypto increases.

At the time of this publication, Mark Putrino did not have any positions (either directly or indirectly) in any of the aforementioned securities.

Go here to read the rest:

Better Than Bitcoin? 6 Other Cryptocurrencies You Should Consider - InvestorPlace

5 reasons why bitcoin cryptocurrency prices are on the rise – Economic Times

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

The cryptocurrency market has continued to witness a boom despite the global pandemic wreaking havoc on all significant economies on the planet.

Many crypto startups have emerged in the space during this pandemic to cater to the ever-increasing demand for Bitcoin and alike cryptocurrencies.

For instance, CoinSwitch Kuber recently announced the raising of $15 million (Rs 109 crore) Series A funding from leading global fintech investors such as Ribbit Capital, Paradigm, Sequoia Capital India and prominent angel investor Kunal Shah from CRED.

Cryptocurrency market capitalisation fueled by Bitcoins growth recently crossed the $1 trillion mark. Out of which, Bitcoin, has been on a bull run for quite some time and is responsible for roughly 69% of the total market value.

Similarly, many cryptocurrency prices have been on the rise, and investors are wondering why. Here are five reasons why cryptocurrency prices are rising:

Recently, there has been a trend where public companies are converting their cash treasuries into cryptocurrency. Square, an American payments company, bought $50 million worth of Bitcoins. Following this, Microstrategy- a public listed company in the US, converted $425 million worth of cash reserves into Bitcoin, considering it to be a better store of value.

The launch included four majorly traded currencies, namely Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ethereum, and Litecoin. Paypal has also announced plans of allowing transactions to be made using cryptocurrencies.

Paypal is known to have 350 million users who will now be capable of adopting crypto as a payment means. Also, its 30 million merchants will have the option of receiving payments in crypto.

Paypal was one of the critics of cryptocurrency as a sustainable currency. Now it is one of the biggest names jumping on the bandwagon. Along with others and PayPal's support, there has been more demand for the asset class, thus contributing to its price rise.

Apart from Paypal, the company also owns another popular payment platform Venmo which will expose another 40 million users to crypto payment. While these platforms are new to crypto, some other platforms are already making crypto payments wider.

As several private investors seek to adopt cryptocurrency as a means of exchange, many governments are also trying to regulate the market.

Many countries like Japan, USA, Germany etc. have taken a positive stance towards cryptocurrencies.

Bitcoin Halving Driven ScarcityIt is not news that most cryptocurrencies in the market have a limited supply. Bitcoin is also one of them. This year the third Bitcoin Halving took place.

Bitcoin halving is an important event in the Bitcoin network that happens every four years.

The Bitcoin network works because it introduces new bitcoins in the market by a process called Bitcoin mining. Bitcoin miners do this mining by verifying Bitcoin blocks which are simply groups of Bitcoin transactions.

Every 10 minutes, a miner who can verify one block of transactions and add it to the Bitcoin network gets awarded a certain amount of bitcoins as a reward.

Currently, this reward stands at 6.25 BTC per valid block mined. But this reward per block reduces by half roughly every four years, or after every 210000 blocks are mined. This phenomenon of Bitcoin block reward getting reduced by 50% every four years is termed as Bitcoin halving.

It also doubles the stock to flow ratio (total currency available: total currency in circulation) making is highly scarce.

Halving is one of the most critical factors that contribute to the price of Bitcoin.

Since there are only 21 million Bitcoins in total, there is less circulation of the market currency as the reward decreases. And as more people become aware of the asset's scarcity, more demand rises, resulting in a higher price.

Since Bitcoin holds more than half of the market capitalisation, the Bitcoin price variation may affect other currencies.

Easy Accessibility To PublicCryptocurrency is a digital currency that can be used as both - a store of value and a mode of exchange. While it has just started to gain attention as a legit payment method, it has established itself as a new asset class over the past decade.

Even if the public is unwilling to use it for transactions, many want to convert their cash into crypto because they believe that its deflationary nature makes it a better store of value and a hedge against inflation.

Especially in India, after the RBI ban against cryptocurrency was lifted, its investors had a significant surge.

Many platforms have launched and received funding in this space to make crypto investing accessible. One such platform is CoinSwitch Kuber- acquiring over two million users in just six months after it launched.

As cryptocurrency is becoming more accessible to the public, more retail investors want a share of the asset class and are willing to pay more.

Bottom LineIf the rising prices in the crypto market have got you thinking that it is too late to invest in cryptocurrencies, understand that this is just the beginning.

With more countries seeking to regulate the market, cryptocurrencies will become mainstream.

Disclaimer: This above is non-editorial content and TIL hereby disclaims any and all warranties, express or implied, relating to the same. TIL does not guarantee, vouch for or necessarily endorse any of the above content nor is responsible for them in any manner whatsoever. The article does not constitute investment advice. Please take all steps necessary to ascertain that any information and content provided is correct, updated and verified.

VIDEO: Keene Parking Bureaucrat Admits She Prefers to Avoid Court With Activists – Free Keene

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

by Ian | Feb 12, 2021 | Cool, How to, New Hampshire, Noncooperation, Update, Victimless Crimes, Video |

The Shire Free Church recently received notice from a debt collector claiming we owed the City of Keene $60 for an unpaid parking ticket. I knew this could not be the case since I challenge every ticket on behalf of the Church and demand a trial and every time these days they drop the charge rather than go to court over a $10 ticket.

So, I headed down to city hall this week to find out why a collections notice had been sent. I was pleased to hear the bureaucrat report that she likes it that way when we arent in court with them.

Its a validation of the activist approach of challenging all tickets. Be such a burden to the system that they have to drop your charges. If only more people would do this, then more charges would be dropped! If youre in New Hampshire and you receive a ticket for anything at all, try demanding your trial and see what happens!

My Turn: Our biggest threats to free speech – Concord Monitor

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (First Amendment to the Constitution)

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. (Exodus 20:16, KJV)

The first quote is the law of the land, the second is not. Further, the first quote makes it clear that it is up to the individual to decide whether to adhere to the second quote.

To some extent, and in the spirit of free speech, the U.S. Constitution permits the bearing of false witness or lying as a constitutional right. The framers of the Constitution were more concerned about the suppression of speech than the corruption of it. They reasoned that men [and women] of good conscience would outweigh those with no conscience.

But the framers of the Constitution could not possibly envision the power and ability of the internet and mass media outlets to spread and amplify lies to millions of Americans. Worse, that in the two-party system that emerged after the First Amendment was adopted, one party would use mass media and the internet to develop alternative versions of reality; one steeped in populist beliefs augmented by an unscrupulous orator.

Lies and misinformation threaten to destroy our free speech. We have all witnessed that firsthand. In the past three months, we have seen how Donald Trumps lies about a stolen election led to an insurrection against the government and a loss of faith in our election process, the very heart of our democracy.

In the backlash of these lies, several entities, most notably Dominion and Smartmatic, the makers of election software, are suing Trumps lawyer as well as several news sources in multi-billion-dollar lawsuits on charges of defamation. Now the courts will decide how much free speech will be permitted to destroy the reputation of a company, an individual or a states election process.

This appears to be the future direction of free speech in America. An individual, a company or a political party can openly tell lies or spread misinformation and then magnify it in public media and leave it to the courts to decide whether their right to free speech can ruin a persons life or destroy another company or even democracy itself.

Further, since litigation of this magnitude often requires large financial resources, the litigation of slander will often come down to a question of wealth and monetary backing. Free speech in America will exist only for those who can afford to back it up in court.

Even if the Constitution permitted the restriction of free speech against slanderous lies, we would not be able to regulate our way out of bearing false witness. The dividing line between what speech is permissible and what is illegal would be more dynamic than it is now. I believe the framers of the First Amendment understood that.

The United States has grown from a rebellious group of idealistic colonies to the most powerful nation ever to have existed. We are so powerful that the temptation of that power will cause many to trade their integrity to obtain it.

In the end, our democracy depends upon our integrity. Our freedom of speech is our most important heritage. To preserve it, we must speak truth and stand up to those who would pervert it.

(James Fieseher lives in Dover.)

Go here to read the rest:

My Turn: Our biggest threats to free speech - Concord Monitor

Obscure Musicology Journal Sparks Battles Over Race and Free Speech – The New York Times

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

A periodical devoted to the study of a long-dead European music theorist is an unlikely suspect to spark an explosive battle over race and free speech.

But the tiny Journal of Schenkerian Studies, with a paid circulation of about 30 copies an issue per year, has ignited a fiery reckoning over race and the limits of academic free speech, along with whiffs of a generational struggle. The battle threatens to consume the career of Timothy Jackson, a 62-year-old music theory professor at the University of North Texas, and led to calls to dissolve the journal.

It also prompted Professor Jackson to file an unusual lawsuit charging the university with violating his First Amendment rights while accusing his critics of defamation.

This tale began in the autumn of 2019 when Philip Ewell, a Black music theory professor at Hunter College, addressed the Society for Music Theory in Columbus, Ohio. He described music theory as dominated by white males and beset by racism. He held up the theorist Heinrich Schenker, who died in Austria in 1935, as an exemplar of that flawed world, a virulent racist who wrote of primitive and inferior races views, he argued, that suffused his theories of music.

Ive only scratched the surface in showing out how Schenkers racism permeates his music theories, Professor Ewell said, accusing generations of Schenker scholars of trying to whitewash the theorist in an act of colorblind racism.

The societys members its professoriate is 94 percent white responded with a standing ovation. Many younger faculty members and graduate students embraced his call to dismantle white mythologies and study non-European music forms. The tone was of repentance.

We humbly acknowledge that we have much work to do to dismantle the whiteness and systemic racism that deeply shape our discipline, the societys executive board later stated.

At the University of North Texas, however, Professor Jackson, a white musicologist, watched a video of that speech and felt a swell of anger. His fellow scholars stood accused, some by name, of constructing a white witness protection program and shrugging off Schenkers racism. That struck him as unfair and inaccurate, as some had explored Schenkers oft-hateful views on race and ethnicity.

A tenured music theory professor, Professor Jackson was the grandson of Jewish migrs and had lost many relatives in the Holocaust. He had a singular passion: He searched out lost works by Jewish composers hounded and killed by the Nazis.

And he devoted himself to the study of Schenker, a towering Jewish intellect credited with stripping music to its essence in search of an internal language. The Journal of Schenkerian Studies, published under the aegis of the University of North Texas, was read by a small but intense coterie of scholars.

He and other North Texas professors decided to explore Professor Ewells claims about connections between Schenkers racial views and music theories.

They called for essays and published every submission. Five essays stoutly defended Professor Ewell; most of the remaining 10 essays took strong issue. One was anonymous. Another was plainly querulous. (Ewell of course would reply that I am white and by extension a purveyor of white music theory, while he is Black, wrote David Beach, a retired dean of music at the University of Toronto. I cant argue with that.).

Professor Jacksons essay was barbed. Schenker, he wrote, was no privileged white man. Rather he was a Jew in prewar Germany, the definition of the persecuted other. The Nazis destroyed much of his work and his wife perished in a concentration camp.

Professor Jackson then took an incendiary turn. He wrote that Professor Ewell had scapegoated Schenker within the much larger context of Black-on-Jew attacks in the United States and that his denunciation of Schenker and Schenkerians may be seen as part and parcel of the much broader current of Black anti-Semitism. He wrote that such phenomena currently manifest themselves in myriad ways, including the pattern of violence against Jews, the obnoxious lyrics of some hip-hop songs, etc.

Noting the paucity of Black musicians in classical music, Professor Jackson wrote that few grow up in homes where classical music is profoundly valued. He proposed increased funding for music education and a commitment to demolishing institutionalized racist barriers.

And he took pointed shots at Professor Ewell.

I understand full well, Professor Jackson wrote, that Ewell only attacks Schenker as a pretext to his main argument: That liberalism is a racist conspiracy to deny rights to people of color.

His remarks lit a rhetorical match. The journal appeared in late July. Within days the executive board of the Society for Music Theory stated that several essays contained anti-Black statements and personal ad hominem attacks and said that its failure to invite Professor Ewell to respond was designed to replicate a culture of whiteness.

Soon after, 900 professors and graduate students signed a letter denouncing the journals editors for ignoring peer review. The essays, they stated, constituted anti-Black racism.

Graduate students at the University of North Texas issued an unsigned manifesto calling for the journal to be dissolved and for the potential removal of faculty members who used it to promote racism.

University of North Texas officials in December released an investigation that accused Professor Jackson of failing to hew to best practices and of having too much power over the journals graduate student editor. He was barred from the magazine, and money for the Schenker Center was suspended.

Jennifer Evans-Crowley, the universitys provost, did not rule out that disciplinary steps might be taken against Professor Jackson. I cant speak to that at this time, she told The New York Times.

Professor Jackson stands shunned by fellow faculty. Two graduate students who support him told me their peers feared that working with him could damage their careers.

Everything has become exceedingly polarized and the Twitter mob is like a quasi-fascist police state, Professor Jackson said in an interview. Any imputation of racism is anathema and therefore I must be exorcised.

This controversy raises intertwined questions. What is the role of universities in policing intellectual debate? Academic duels can be metaphorically bloody affairs. Marxists slash and parry with monetarists; postmodernists trade punches with modernists. Tenure and tradition traditionally shield sharp-tongued academics from censure.

For a university to intrude struck others as alarming. Samantha Harris, a lawyer with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE, a free speech advocacy group, urged the university to drop its investigation.She did not argue Professor Jacksons every word was temperate.

This is an academic disagreement and it should be hashed out in journals of music theory, Ms. Harris said. The academic debate centers on censorship and putting orthodoxy over education, and that is chilling.

That said, race is an electric wire in American society and a traditional defense of untrammeled speech on campus competes with a newer view that speech itself can constitute violence. Professors who denounced the journal stressed that they opposed censorship but noted pointedly that cultural attitudes are shifting.

Im educated in the tradition that says the best response to bad speech is more speech, said Professor Edward Klorman of McGill University. But sometimes the traditional idea of free speech comes into conflict with safety and inclusivity.

There is too a question with which intellectuals have long wrestled. What to make of intellectuals who voice monstrous thoughts? The renowned philosopher Martin Heidegger was a Nazi Party member and Paul de Man, a deconstructionist literary theorist, wrote for pro-Nazi publications. The Japanese writer Yukio Mishima eroticized fascism and tried to inspire a coup.

Schenker, who was born in Galicia, part of the Austro-Hungarian empire, was an ardent cultural Germanophile and given to dyspeptic diatribes. He spoke of the filthy French; English, and Italians as inferior races; and Slavs as half animals. Africans had a cannibal spirit.

Did his theoretical brilliance counter the weight of disreputable rages?

Professor Ewell argued that Schenkers racism and theories are inseparable. At a minimum, he wrote in a paper, we must present Schenkers work to our students in full view of his racist beliefs.

The dispute has played out beyond the United States. Forty-six scholars and musicians in Europe and the Middle East wrote a defense of Professor Jackson and sounded a puzzled note. Professor Ewell, they wrote, delivered a provocative polemic with accusations aimed at living scholars and Professor Jackson simply answered in kind.

Neither professor is inclined to back down. A cellist and scholar of Russian classical music, Professor Ewell, 54, describes himself as an activist for racial, gender and social justice and a critic of whiteness in music theory.

Shortly after the Journal of Schenkerian Studies appeared in July, Professor Ewell who eight years ago published in that journal canceled a lecture at the University of North Texas. He said he had not read the essays that criticized him.

I wont read them because I wont participate in my dehumanization, he told The Denton Record-Chronicle in Texas. They were incensed by my Blackness challenging their whiteness.

Professor Ewell, who also is on the faculty of the City University of New York Graduate Center, declined an interview with The Times. He is part of a generation of scholars who are undertaking critical-race examinations of their fields. In Music Theory and the White Racial Frame, the paper he presented in Columbus, he writes that he is for all intents a practitioner of white music theory and that rigorous conversations about race and whiteness are required to make fundamental antiracist changes in our structures and institutions.

For music programs to require mastery of German, he has said, is racist obviously. He has criticized the requirement that music Ph.D. students study German or a limited number of white languages, noting that at Yale he needed a dispensation to study Russian. He wrote that the antiracist policy solution would be to require languages with one new caveat: any language including sign language and computer languages, for instance is acceptable with the exception of Ancient Greek, Latin, Italian, French or German, which will only be allowed by petition as a dispensation.

Last April he fired a broadside at Beethoven, writing that it would be academically irresponsible to call him more than an above average composer. Beethoven, he wrote, has been propped up by whiteness and maleness for 200 years.

As for Schenker, Professor Ewell argued that his racism informed his music theories: As with the inequality of races, Schenker believed in the inequality of tones.

That view is contested. Professor Eric Wen arrived in the United States from Hong Kong six decades ago and amid slurs and loneliness discovered in classical music what he describes as a colorblind solace. Schenker held a key to mysteries.

Schenker penetrated to the heart of what makes music enduring and inspiring, said Professor Wen, who teaches at the Curtis Institute of Music in Philadelphia. He was no angel and so what? His ideology is problematic but his insights are massive.

How this ends is not clear. The university report portrayed Professor Jackson as hijacking the journal, ignoring a graduate student editor, making decisions on his own and tossing aside peer review.

A trove of internal emails, which were included as exhibits in the lawsuit, casts doubt on some of those claims. Far from being a captive project of Professor Jackson, the emails show that members of the journals editorial staff were deeply involved in the planning of the issue, and that several colleagues on the faculty at North Texas, including one seen as an ally of Professor Ewell, helped draft its call for papers.

When cries of racism arose, all but one of those colleagues denounced the journal. A graduate student editor publicly claimed to have participated because he feared retaliation from Professor Jackson, who was his superior, and said he had essentially agreed with Professor Ewell all along. The emails paint a contradictory picture, as he had described Professor Ewells paper as naive.

Professor Jackson hired a lawyer who specialized in such cases, Michael Allen, and the lawsuit he filed against his university charges retaliation against his free speech rights. More extraordinary, he sued fellow professors and a graduate student for defamation. That aspect of the lawsuit was a step too far for FIRE, the free speech group, which supported targeting the university but took the view that suing colleagues and students was a tit-for-tat exercise in squelching speech.

We believe such lawsuits are generally unwise, the group stated, and can often chill or target core protected speech.

See the original post here:

Obscure Musicology Journal Sparks Battles Over Race and Free Speech - The New York Times

Letter to the editor: Free speech and politics in Iowa – Little Village

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

As a law professor, I am a strong defender of free speech. Defending free speech as a constitutional principle means defending the right of people to speak even when I disagree with their message.

As a Democratic State Representative from Iowa City, I have heard a lot recently about how Iowa Republicans believe they are victims of First Amendment violations against conservative speech. The Iowa House Government Oversight Committee held hearings to review complaints that the Regents Universities had infringed on conservative students free speech rights. In the University of Iowa case, the College of Dentistry Dean admitted that the College was wrong to schedule an inquiry for a student who criticized the Colleges statement opposing an Executive Order issued by then-President Trump. Republican lawmakers accused the universities of hypocrisy, and said that it is a universitys job to educate, not indoctrinate.

I readily concede that the University made a mistake. Under the First Amendment, a state university should not punish anyone for commenting on a matter of public concern such as an Executive Order. To do so is not only a violation of First Amendment principles; it is also antithetical to the Universitys educational mission to foster robust debate across different points of view. I was glad to see that university officials immediately recognized their mistake, apologized, and reversed course.

But there is another side to this story. Iowa Republicans say they are victims of free speech violations, but they are also perpetrators. Several of them have made statements or introduced bills that blatantly violate principles of free speech and association.

Here are just a few of the more egregious examples from the first five weeks of the legislative session:

Iowa House and Senate leadership should have pronounced these bills dead on arrival. Instead, they breathed life into them by assigning them to committees and allowing them to advance to committee and perhaps even to the floor. Even if these bills dont ultimately pass, they do real damage to our educational system every time they are publicly debated. They also chill free speech, as no one dares to speak against them for fear that they or their employer will be further punished by vindictive legislation.

When conservatives believe their free speech rights have been violated, they are right to call it out. We should all call it out, no matter who is speaking. But our Republican state legislators also need to clean up around their own doorstep. And they should certainly stop playing the victim when they hold all the political power in the state and are wielding it to suppress the free speech of thousands of Iowans.

Original post:

Letter to the editor: Free speech and politics in Iowa - Little Village

University Names New Committees on Free Speech and the Historic Landscape at UVA – UVA Today

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

An important part of University of Virginias ongoing commitment to free expression and to fully and honestly explore UVAs complex history is moving forward this week with the creation of two new committees.

UVA President Jim Ryan and Provost Liz Magill have announced the creation of one committee to articulate the Universitys commitment to free expression and free inquiry, and another to examine naming and memorials on Grounds.

We are working to give voice to our commitment as an educational institution to the free and open exchange of ideas, and to grapple with the complexities of our Universitys history and the names that we honor, Ryan said. These committees will help us forge a path forward as we continue to address these issues as a community and as a nation.

First Amendment expert Leslie Kendrick, White Burkett Miller Professor of Law and Public Affairs and vice dean at UVAs School of Law, will chair the Committee on Free Expression and Free Inquiry. The group will craft a statement that identifies the role that free expression and free inquiry play in UVAs academic enterprise and how they shape engagement with the ideas of others. The statement will reflect the Universitys values, its history and its legal obligations as a public institution.

Free expression and free inquiry are the lifeblood of universities; these principles underpin this Universitys educational missions of producing knowledge, developing citizen leaders, and serving, Magill said.In a moment where the country is experiencing heightened conflict, we believe its essential to concisely articulate those foundational commitments of University life.

The members of the Committee on Free Expression and Free Inquiry are:

University Counsel Tim Heaphy will serve as counsel to the committee, whose work will begin soon.

President Ryan and Provost Magill have assembled a highly accomplished and diverse group of scholars and University representatives to consider these important topics, Kendrick said. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the committee.

Michael Suarez, English professor and executive director of the Rare Book School, will chair the Naming and Memorials Committee, which is a reconfiguration and reconstitution of a previously existing committee. The group is charged with delineating principles and protocols for naming and, under certain limited circumstances, renaming buildings on Grounds. The committee is also tasked with making recommendations about the status and contextualization of memorials.

In each case, the committee will carefully review and develop recommendations that will then be sent to President Ryan for his review and, if advanced, to the Board of Visitors.

Our University, as a public institution of higher education, is not a place stuck in time, but a dynamic community where history is alive and ever-changing, Suarez said. We have a responsibility not only to record that history, but also to interpret it for current and future generations, to give it context and meaning. The Naming and Memorials Committee has been entrusted with an extraordinary educational opportunity: to help the University to continue to tell our long and complex story.

The formation of the committee comes on the heels of the Board of Visitors approval in September of five recommendations from UVAs Racial Equity Task Force regarding changes to UVAs historic landscape.

The members of the Naming and Memorials Committee are:

The committees consultants are:

Go here to read the rest:

University Names New Committees on Free Speech and the Historic Landscape at UVA - UVA Today

Letters: The limits of free speech and the dangers of violence and insurrection – The Advocate

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

There is a fundamental belief among Americans that we have the right to do and say whatever we want because we are protected by the First Amendment. Although freedom of speech exists in America, all speech is not free. There is a cost.

On Monday, the U.S. Senate began debating whether to hold Donald Trump accountable for inciting the Capitol insurrection that resulted in the deaths of five individuals including a Capitol police officer. At issue is a single article of impeachment that accuses the former president of reiterating false claims that he had won this election and that he willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged and foreseeably resulted in lawless action at the Capitol.

In response, Trumps legal team has asserted that the statements he made at the rally were protected by his First Amendment right to free speech. Thus, Trump should not be held accountable for any subsequent actions of the protesters.

In the landmark case of Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Supreme Court, while acknowledging the sacredness of free speech, established that the government can punish what has been defined to be inflammatory speech if that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action producing and is likely to incite or produce such action."

However, the impeachment and trial process as set forth in the Constitution may be viewed as a political process rather than a judicial process. There is a difference. In the judicial process, attorneys dispute the existence of necessary facts to establish that the defendant did, in fact, commit the crime. In this political impeachment process, the law will be argued as opposed to the facts. Because this process is taking place in a partisan Senate, it is not likely that Trump will be found guilty, especially given the retributive nature of party politics.

As Americans, we have become comfortable with the concept of freedom, the ability to determine our own destiny. We have freedom of speech, religion, press and freedom. We are free to peacefully assemble, and we have free elections. It was the idea that all men were created equal that inspired one of the greatest civil rights movements in history where oppressed African Americans demonstrated their humanity in refusing to meet violence with violence.

The Capitol insurrection is much bigger than just a few people getting drunk on Trumpism. We the People must defend our nation against the domestic terroristic ideas that threaten our democracy from within such as partisan politics, classism, elitism and racism. As true citizens of America, we must do our part in protecting democracy. If nothing more comes of this impeachment trial, America should be reminded that ideas, not weapons, are the most powerful tools of revolution.

BLAIR D. CONDOLL, J.D.

political science professor, Dillard University

New Orleans

Read the original:

Letters: The limits of free speech and the dangers of violence and insurrection - The Advocate

COLUMN: Free speech failures of the left and right – Montrose Daily Press

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

For conservatives, free speech has become particularly bewildering in the age of social media. In the years leading up to Twitter forcing Donald Trump to find a new hobby, conservatives railed against cancel culture, suggesting that deplatforming is an infringement on their First Amendment rights as if our Founding Fathers fought to secure your constitutional right to that creepy shared account with your spouse.

As high school civics taught us, censorship requires government action; First Amendment rights generally dont protect you from private actors. Do I have the right to come into your business and say your wife is ugly and your father assassinated John F. Kennedy? I could say that, but you could also throw me out on my butt. (Or, if youre Ted Cruz, praise me and support my presidency.)

Implicit in the right to speak freely is the right to associate freely. To put free association in terms that conservatives should be familiar with, Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey are bakers, your social media accounts are gay wedding cakes, and neither Zuckerberg nor Dorsey have to bake that cake.

Meanwhile, on the left, free speech is reduced to one head-scratching cliche: You cant shout fire in a crowded theater. When I hear this, I want to douse myself in kerosene and take my chances inside the theater.

The bromide paraphrases Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who wrote in the 1919 majority decision for Schenck v. United States, The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. Schenck involved an anti-war activist who was convicted for the dangerous act of gulp handing out leaflets. Turns out a man audaciously suggesting peace during wartime doesnt roll off the tongue as well.

Yes, free speech has limits (e.g., defamation, obscenity, telling your kids that Santa Claus is a Deep State conspiracy). However, this phrase is useless. Imagine finding roadkill while out for a walk with a friend. You ask, What kind of animal is that? Your friend responds, Not all animals are armadillos. Though technically true, this insight wont help crack the case.

Fortunately, this flimsy legal reasoning was overturned in 1969 by Brandenburg v. Ohio, which established a higher standard for censorship. Where Schenck provided the government with a bazooka, Brandenburg traded down for a Red Ryder BB gun with a warped barrel.

And thank goodness. Gifting government with a broad scope to censor is akin to lending a Bowie knife to your toddler for his arts-and-crafts project.

Confusion converges politically with one specific topic: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 shields internet companies from legal liability of whatever nonsense trolls and keyboard warriors post on their websites. Without 230, the internet would not be what it is today. However, spend any amount of time in the comments section and youll find that the current shape of the internet isnt exactly a compelling argument.

The right and left both want to abolish 230 but for different reasons. The right believes 230 grants immunity to Silicon Valley companies, allowing them to deplatform their fellow conservatives with impunity. However, without 230, it is likely that more deplatforming would occur, because most prudent businessmen shy away from being legally liable for some manifesto-writing dude who uses the screen name QAnon4Lyfe1776.

Meanwhile, progressives want 230 gone because they believe it protects hate speech. Unfortunately, they define hate speech like how they identify roadkill: Whatever it is, it aint an armadillo.

We often discuss freedom but rarely the obligation to use it responsibly. Rights and responsibilities are two sides of the same coin. And the best place to invest this coin is within a competitive marketplace of ideas. In the dissenting opinion for Abrams v. United States (another case involving a dastardly anti-war pamphleteer), Oliver Wendell Holmes yes, the same Holmes who worried about fiery theaters wrote, The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.

In this marketplace of ideas, the best investment strategy is to avoid the short-selling hucksterism of those who fail to grasp the long-term value of the freedoms protected by the First Amendment. Freedom isnt zero-sum but rather a multiplier effect that can open up a boundless world of beauty, innovation, and nuance. When embraced responsibly, freedom pays off with dividends.

View original post here:

COLUMN: Free speech failures of the left and right - Montrose Daily Press

U.Va. creates committees on Free Expression and Free Inquiry, Naming and Memorials – University of Virginia The Cavalier Daily

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

The University has announced the creation of two new committees, one focused on free speech and expression and the other examining the names of University institutions and the contextualization and status of memorials on Grounds.

The Committee on Free Expression and Free Inquiry will write a statement identifying the roles of free expression and free inquiry in the University's academic enterprise as well as how they shape engagement with the ideas of others. This committee will be chaired by Leslie Kendrick, White Burkett Miller professor of law and public affairs and vice dean at the School of Law.

We are working to give voice to our commitment as an educational institution to the free and open exchange of ideas, and to grapple with the complexities of our Universitys history and the names that we honor, University President Jim Ryan said. These committees will help us forge a path forward as we continue to address these issues as a community and as a nation.

Additional members of this committee include Dean of Students Allen Groves; Kevin McDonald, vice president for diversity, equity and inclusion; Mazzen Shalaby, fourth-year Batten student and Board of Visitors student member; Susan Kirk, professor, associate dean for graduate medical education and chair-elect of the Faculty Senate as well as various other alumni, faculty and administrators. University Counsel Tim Heaphy will also serve as counsel to the committee.

Ryan addressed the issue of free speech in a statement this fall following controversy over signs posted on Lawn room doors critiquing the University. The signs, which contained profanity such as FCK UVA, generated calls for removal from some alumni and community members. In his statement, Ryan said that after consultation with Heaphy, the University could not remove the signs but would consider placing a ban on all signage on Lawn room doors as early as next year.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education a watchdog group for free speech and other related issues at college and universities previously awarded the University a green light speech code rating, the highest given by the organization. The green light rating indicates there is no University policy that is a serious threat to students free speech rights on Grounds.

Free speech also played a major role in the events of Aug. 11 and 12, 2017, when neo-Nazis and white supremacists held a violent Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville.

The University also announced the creation of a Naming and Memorials Committee, which will serve as a reconfiguration of the Universitys Committee on Names. The new committee will establish protocols for naming and in some cases, renaming buildings on Grounds as well as making recommendations on contextualizing memorials. Recommendations will be sent to Ryan for review and then to the Board of Visitors.

The Naming and Memorials Committee will be chaired by Michael Suarez, English professor and executive director of the Rare Book School.

Our University, as a public institution of higher education, is not a place stuck in time but a dynamic community where history is alive and ever-changing, Suarez said. We have a responsibility not only to record that history, but also to interpret it for current and future generations, to give it context and meaning.

Additional members of the Naming and Memorials Committee will include Shalaby, History and African American Studies Prof. Kevin Gaines and various other faculty, alumni and administrators. The committee will also refer to numerous consultants from both the University and Charlottesville communities.

Following the release of the racial equity task forces final report, which suggested 12 initiatives to promote racial equity at the University, the Board of Visitors voted to adopt five recommendations recontextualization of the Thomas Jefferson statue, removal and relocation of the George Rogers Clark statue, rededication or removal of the Frank Hume Memorial Wall, renaming the School of Education and Human Development and removing Henry Withers name from the name of Withers-Brown Hall.

In anticipation of the Board of Visitors decision, the Minority Rights Coalition is calling on the University to immediately remove the wall and not rededicate it.

Last summer, the Board of Visitors voted to rename Ruffner Hall to Ridley Hall after Walter Ridley, the first African American to earn a doctoral degree from the University. Community members, activists and students have also called into question the name of Alderman Library, which is named after Edwin Alderman, first president of the University and known white supremacist and eugenicist.

Following the renaming of Ruffner Hall, a petition was also circulated over the summer calling on the University to remove names that should no longer be honored on Grounds many buildings are named after known white supremacists.

Here is the original post:

U.Va. creates committees on Free Expression and Free Inquiry, Naming and Memorials - University of Virginia The Cavalier Daily

Letter: The culture of free speech | Letters to the Editor | tillamookheadlightherald.com – Tillamook Headlight-Herald

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

I was shocked to read the many letters in last weeks paper publicly flogging the editor for publishing the article Big Tech Censorship Hits Home. The vitriol that the writers of these letters had for the woman in the article and for the editor who dared to publish her story was alarming.

Politics is downstream of culture. While free speech is currently protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution, I worry that our culture is shifting away from the values that uphold this precious right by calling for censorship. While it is true that Facebook is a private company that has the right to do what they want, it is also true that Facebook acts as a public square for people to share information and have open conversations about important topics. However, it is no longer an open forum when people are shut out of the conversation. If our culture not only accepts, but calls for censorship and profile deletion of anyone that they deem disagreeable, then I fear that our First Amendment rights will also soon be deleted.

It is frightening to think that so many people willingly accept Facebook as the arbiter of truth. Are we willing to allow this company and their algorithms to decide what we see and how we communicate? It might suit your needs today when Facebook is deleting profiles that you find disagreeable, but what about tomorrow when Facebook decides that your profile is the new unmentionable?

The spirit of free speech allows people to speak their mind without the threat of being silenced. Instead of insisting that unfavorable ideas are shut down, lets rise to the challenge of a proper debate in an effort to present a better, more sound idea.

View post:

Letter: The culture of free speech | Letters to the Editor | tillamookheadlightherald.com - Tillamook Headlight-Herald

South Asia’s migrant workers are facing a jobs crisis both at home and abroad – Equal Times

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

In February 2020, PK Valsala, a 45-year-old single woman from Kerala, south India, went to Oman to start a job as a domestic worker. She was sent to Kish Island in Iran by her Omani employer to change her tourist visa into a work visa. She landed on 22 February and was scheduled to return to Oman on 26 February.

I thought that I would be able to change my visa and re-enter Oman in a week or so, she says. But then the coronavirus hit. The very next day, Oman closed it air borders, then Iran too.

At first, she wasnt too alarmed. My employer called me and told me not to worry. He sent some money to the hotel where I was staying, which was enough to cover my expenses for for two weeks. He told me that everything would be fine after that time. But that wasnt the case.

Valsala found herself stranded on Kish Island, a popular tourist resort in the Persian Gulf, for 142 days. She struggled for food and even faced eviction from the hotel where she was staying because she could no longer afford to pay her bills, and neither could her employer.

However, a few social organisations in Oman supported her and she was finally repatriated to India in July, along with 700 Indian fisherman who were also stranded on the Iranian coast in an Indian Navy Ship.

Upon returning to India, Valsala who had previously worked in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait thought that she would be able to return to Oman for work, but her employer was unable to hire her again.

Before the coronavirus there were an estimated 23 million migrant workers in the Gulf region. The twin shock of the coronavirus pandemic and falling oil prices led the IMF to predict that the economies of Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (also known as the Gulf Cooperation Council, or GCC) would contract by a massive 7.1 per cent in 2020.

Valsalas was one of the eight million jobs (or 13.2 per cent of working hours) that the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates was lost across the entire Arab region in the second quarter of 2020.

For the migrant workers who have managed to stay in the countries where they live and work, the Institute for Human Rights and Business says: Many [migrant workers] have been confined to poor living conditions in cramped dormitories, experienced job loss or non-payment of wages, been forced by employers to take unpaid leave or reduced wages, or repatriated back home with few to no alternative work options.

But for those who were forced to return home or who have been unable to leave their home country to start a new job abroad, the situation has been mixed. There is not yet any conclusive data on just how badly the coronavirus has impacted labour migration in South Asia (which is one of the biggest hubs of migrant labour globally) but the few statistics that are available paint a stark picture.

Both India and Bangladesh, two of the biggest sending countries in the region, witnessed a colossal dip in migration outflow in 2020. According to eMigrate, a channel set up by the Indian government to ensure fair migration, 368,043 people migrated abroad through the eMigrate channel in 2019; in 2020, that number was just 88,694, representing a 75 per cent decrease.

Meanwhile, official data from the Bangladesh Bureau of Manpower Employment and Training also reveals a 74 percent decrease in migration outflow in 2020 (181, 218 people) compared to 2019 (700,159 people).

The economic situation in Oman forced Valsala to look for a job in her home state of Kerala. In September, she got a job working 10 hours a day for US$245 a month which is about US$100 less than what she would have earned in Oman. On top of that, the recruitment agency was charging her US$40 a month in commission. The agency is exploitative and doesnt even allow sick leave. Also, due to the Covid-19 restrictions, it is quite risky to go to unknown houses, stay there and do the job. So, I quit in November, Valsala tells Equal Times.

She is desperately trying to get back to the Gulf. But at the moment, there are not many jobs there. Even if there are jobs, the salary is too low. I was offered US$320 in the Gulf in February. Now, agents are telling me that I will get only US$200, she laments.

Moazzem Hossain is a 33-year-old Bangladeshi worker who lost his job as a mason in Saudi Arabia last year. Although he was sent back to Bangladesh due to the economic crisis, he is also trying to return to the Gulf.

I am now working as a construction worker in Dhaka. I get paid just US$170 a month and with that, I have to take care of my six-member family. It is hard to survive. In Saudi Arabia, I was able to earn around US$350 a month, Hossain tells Equal Times.

I have approached an agent in Dhaka. He is telling me that job opportunities are too low in the Arab Gulf now. He is also asking for an increased recruitment fee. When I went in 2017, I paid US$1,700 in fees. Now, I would have to pay US$2,000. But Hussain says that he is willing to pay the extra money if it lands him a job abroad.

When asked whether the fall in migration outflow is likely to continue for the foreseeable future, Shabari Nair, an ILO labour migration specialist for South Asia, said it was too early to tell. Although he notes the gradual resumption of foreign recruitment in some destination countries, Nair says: It would be better to assess this situation along the lines of the demands from the countries of destination, the specific sectors that demand these workers and the skills that the workers possess.

He says he hopes governments and employers will use the disruption caused by the pandemic as an opportunity to build a better recruitment process for migrant workers, one that ensures that workers are protected right from the very start. Nair also predicts that there may be some changes in the sectors that have the most vacancies. Healthcare workers, for example, may be in high demand, Nair says, adding that sending governments may also start looking at new migration corridors in Africa and Europe.

Like many low- to middle-income countries, remittances from migrant workers play a significant role in the countries of South Asia: in India remittances are said to make up 3 per cent of GDP while in Nepal they account for 27 per cent.

It was predicted that the economic downturn triggered by the pandemic could have a massive impact on the money sent home by workers abroad, with an October 2020 report from the World Bank estimating that remittances in South Asia will fall from US$135 billion in 2020 to US$120 billion in 2021.

However, Nair says the impact of Covid-19 on global remittances is still unclear, with some South Asian countries reporting an even higher inflow of remittances than usual.

Shakirul Islam, the founding chair of Ovibashi Karmi Unnayan Program, a grassroots migrants organisation based in Dhaka, Bangladesh, is also assessing the situation carefully. He tells Equal Times that research conducted by his organisaton with potential and returnee migrant workers (those who were forced to return during the pandemic) shows that more than 72 percent of them (among 398 people) are still waiting for the situation to improve before they return overseas.

But this is a ticking time economic time bomb, he warns. Currently these workers are not getting any good jobsif situation doesnt get better in a year, then all migrant sending Asian countries will be facing a very tough time. We shouldnt forget that there are no jobs at home at the moment. If these people cant work in host countries either, then everything is going to be a problem.

See the original post:

South Asia's migrant workers are facing a jobs crisis both at home and abroad - Equal Times

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Muslim Men and Western Women – The New York Times

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

It could also be said to be cut through with bigotry. Hirsi Ali seems to latch onto the trope of men of color threatening virtuous white women, a particular kind of fearmongering with a long and ugly history. European colonists saw their endeavors not simply as extractive, but as civilizing; to make that work, they doubled down on the idea of African and Arab men as sexually aggressive and uncontrolled, and white women their desired victims. European settlers worried about the Black peril of African rapists, which was also used to justify colonialism and the pervasive racist violence that went with it. During the French occupation of Germany after World War I, German newspapers sounded the (false) alarm about a Black plague of mass rapes and murders by Senegalese troops in the French Army. (Hitler, true to form, blamed the Jews for bringing in the Africans.) And Hirsi Ali, who emphasizes the importance of assimilation and now lives in the United States, is surely not ignorant of this countrys own history. Make any list of anti-Black terrorism in the United States, and youll also have a list of attacks justified by the specter of Black rape, Jamelle Bouie wrote in 2015, after Dylann Roof murdered nine people in Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church and reportedly told the Black congregation, You rape our women, and youre taking over our country, and you have to go. Donald Trump, the most xenophobic American president in living memory, often used the threat of white girls being raped by immigrant men to justify his draconian immigration policies.

Hirsi Ali does skew this old narrative just a bit: Instead of being virtuous for their submissiveness, maternity or innocence the usual rendering of white women in need of protection European women in Prey are virtuous for their liberal feminist values, and also vulnerable because of them. But this is where Hirsi Ali gives away the game. After spending much of the book portraying herself as a defender of these very values, by the end, shes ready to give them up if it means keeping certain immigrants out. Her proposed solutions include ramping up policing, harsher criminal penalties and intrusions into personal privacy. Even as she says she has thought deeply about the seeming paradox of using illiberal means to achieve liberal ends, she ultimately decides that the ends indeed justify the means even privacy-obsessed Germans, she posits, could be persuaded to accept the use of video surveillance, artificial intelligence and facial recognition technology in troubled neighborhoods.

Hirsi Ali suggests scrapping the current asylum program, which offers safe harbor to those facing persecution, and instead proposes that European nations adopt immigration policies where the main criterion for granting residence should be how far they are likely to abide by the laws and adopt the values of their host society. In Hirsi Alis estimation, that means assessing whether immigrants have the skills to work for pay a requirement that could curtail granting legal status to a great many female asylum-seekers and refugees, who tend to be less educated than their male counterparts.

Whether Hirsi Ali herself, who wore the hijab as a teenager and supported the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, would have qualified for asylum under her rules is an outstanding question. Yet this is where her illiberalism truly shines through. All liberal institutions are predicated on this idea, she writes approvingly, that the individual, whether male or female, is recognized as a decision-maker responsible for his or her behavior. Central to this concept of liberal individualism is an antagonism to collective punishment, and the idea that individual responsibility means one persons wrongdoing doesnt implicate his family, his entire race or his religious group. No such concept of individual rights and responsibilities exists in the Muslim world, she says, where group identity takes precedence. Its why, she writes, Muslims have a victimhood complex when sex crimes laws, which they believe are invalid in the first place, are enforced against Muslim men: Because the individual is inextricably linked to the group, condemnation of the individual is considered vilification of the group.

Its Hirsi Ali, though, who does exactly this: She finds stories of individual Muslim immigrants who commit heinous crimes, and by suggesting those stories are broadly representative, uses them to justify curtailing the opportunities afforded to the whole group. This is not, as she suggests, a feminism of standing up for the rights of women. It is a feminism of reaction and one that would undermine the very liberal values Hirsi Ali begs feminists to protect.

Europe could face another big migration wave after the pandemic, STEFANOS TSAKIRIS | Kathimerini – www.ekathimerini.com

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

It is not improbable that we will face a second big migration crisis after the coronavirus pandemic, Monika Sie Dhian Ho believes.

Monika Sie Dhian Ho is the general director of Clingendael, the Netherlands Institute of International Relations.

Clingendael is an independent think tank and academy on international affairs and diplomacy which seeks to shape a more secure, sustainable and just world. It has traditionally had an impact on the shaping of foreign policy in the Netherlands whilst Sie advises the Dutch government on security and foreign affairs matters.

In an interview with Kathimerini, Sie warns about a possible incoming migration crisis due to the financial repercussions that Covid-19 will eventually leave behind. She maintains that a closer relationship between the European Union and neighboring Turkey will be beneficial to both parties in dealing with a hard future on migration and, finally, she expresses her belief that the EU is still not ready to intercept new migration waves confidently.

Countries such as Hungary, Austria and the Netherlands have refused to take in any significant number of migrants. The EU hasnt been able politically or legally to enforce a fair distribution of migrants across its member-states. Whats the reason behind such a failure?

We find ourselves in a situation whereby every country has something to complain about. Since the migration crisis began in 2015, we have not managed to reform our institutions, we have not made the EU more resilient to crises. After big crises you would expect that this reform would take place like it did on the economic front. The different interests of EU members have to do with differences in location; at one point the Dutch PM said that its due to geographical bad luck. This will not do on the negotiation table of course you cannot say that in a union you have a geographical bad luck and I hope that our PM knows that by now. Yes, there are differences in where the migrants want to go and in the economic situation of the different EU countries but we have not come up with an intelligent plan yet. The Commissions pact is a positive first step and is responsive to the interests of the different EU members. Our advice is that there is urgency to act now. We need an internal grand deal as well as an external bargain with third countries of origin. We need to build trust that the internal and external bargains are feasible through actively showing that the deals are made out of sincerity and common values.

Weve seen that this geographical bad luck rhetoric and attitude has prevailed on the migration issue. If it persists, will it weaken the EU?

Yes, that the EU will become weaker is the starting point of discussion. What will happen then is that countries in the front line will not be capable or willing to register incoming migrants. I think the Northern countries have come to understand that this fundamental injustice will not hold. If they hold on to this position, they know that they will face waves of secondary movements. So, they understand that a new internal deal is absolutely necessary. The Netherlands is well aware that the Dublin system needs reform and that relocation of migrants is necessary. The pandemic makes this challenge even harder.

How are Covid-19 and migration linked?

In African countries the health consequences of the pandemic have been less intense than in Europe. However, the economic consequences are devastating. Migrants lose their jobs abroad due to the pandemic and send in less remittances. The oil shocks created by the pandemic impose economic obstacles and the aftershocks of the disease pushthese countries into deeper crises. African migration has increased despite the pandemic. For example, irregular departures from Tunisia to Italy have significantly increased. Therere severe economic migrant crises created by the pandemic combined with potential political crises also triggered by Covid-19. It is not improbable that we will face a second big migration crisis after the disease. In 2011, we had the Arabic Spring due to unemployment and in Syria we had a war. This was the runup of the refugee crisis of 2015. The Arab Spring itself was the runup of the 2008 economic crisis. The Covid-19 crisis is expected to potentially be even more severe so Europe needs to become truly robust on migration policy now to overcome a hard future on this front.

Turkey is Greeces neighbor but also the EUs. What is the impact of the quality of our relationship with Turkey on the migrantswelfare?

Turkey hosts almost 4 million refugees. The EU is not willing to welcome those 4 million refugees, they prefer that these refugees remain in Turkey. Turkey is ready to receive them, and there children can go to school and parents can find jobs. The EU members contribute by paying those organizations in Turkey that facilitate these migrant populations. The migrants deserve these funds. Of course, the consequence of this is that countries like Turkey but also Morocco and Tunisia find out that they get leverage in their relationship against EU countries. We have to arrive on a partnership that is based much more on common interest and equality in the relationship. Specifically, what we need to do is twofold: Firstly, we need to continue offering Turkey the financial means to keep on sending migrant kids to school, and secondly, it is of high importance that we build a tracing mechanism to ensure that the funds we offer to Turkey end up benefiting the migrants solely.

It seems that migrant populations integrate better in the US than they do in Europe. We have seen that recently they have wreaked havoc in Austria and in France. How do you explain this reality? Are we witnessing a clash of civilizations?

The emphasis on work in the United States has been a key factor for migrant integration. People are welcome to work and they find work almost immediately after arrival. Work is a crucial aspect to integration. Secondly, what also plays a role is that the EU has not emphasized adequately what the European Way of Life is. The EC, by appointing Margaritis Schinas as VP, has acknowledged that there exists a European way of life which we want to protect, defend and develop. When welcoming a migrant, it is important that you explain to them clearly what this way of life is so that person knows how to behave and integrate. The key values of our society need explanation, therefore work and clarity about the societal model are significant factors for integration. Without rules and transparency, problems are unavoidable.

Link:

Europe could face another big migration wave after the pandemic, STEFANOS TSAKIRIS | Kathimerini - http://www.ekathimerini.com

Explainspeaking: What 2020 taught us about Indias internal migration – The Indian Express

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Danzig

Dear Readers,

It is almost a year since the Covid-induced nationwide lockdowns were announced in India. It may not be an exaggeration to state that the distressing images of migrant workers walking back to their homes often hungry and utterly hassled, often with small children in tow with little support from the government is the most enduring memory of that period. The displacement of people has been described as the second-largest since the Partition of the country.

Eleven months since the March 2020 lockdowns, the situation is considerably different.

Covid caseload has declined sharply. The vaccine is being rolled out across the country. Economic activity is on the mend the Index of Industrial Production has grown and the RBI says capacity utilisation, as well as consumer sentiment, has improved even as retail inflation has finally started receding. Presumably, some, if not all, of the migrant workers have started returning to work.

A couple of key questions, however, remain unanswered.

One, what did India learn about its internal migration patterns in this process and why could we not avoid the disastrous reverse migration? Two, if, god forbid, another similar crisis were to happen again, would we be able to respond better and take better care of migrant workers?

As you might guess, there are no easy answers. But a few things are becoming fairly clear about Indias internal migration.

#1: As of 2020, according to Prof S Irudaya Rajan (Centre for Development Studies, Kerala), India has an estimated 600 million migrants. In other words, roughly half of India is living in a place where it wasnt born. To further put this number in perspective, if one imagines all these migrants as one nation then not only would that nation be the third-largest country on the planet that is, after China and India but also, it would be roughly double the size of the fourth-largest nation on the planet the United States.

#2: But this doesnt mean that 600 million Indians were crisscrossing between Indian states in 2020. Thats because the bulk of the internal migration in India is within one district itself. An estimated 400 million Indians migrate within the district they live in. The next 140 million migrate from one district to another but within the same state. And only about 60 million that is, just 10% of all internal migrants move from one state to another.

#3: From a Covid perspective, the 400 million that migrate within the same district were less of a worry. But 200 million were broadly affected by the Covid disruption. Even within these 200 million, only about 140 millions migrated for earning a livelihood. The balance is family members who migrate with the bread-earner.

#4: There are other misconceptions as well. Typically, it is thought that most migration happens when people from rural areas move to urban areas. That is incorrect. The most dominant form of migration is from rural to rural areas. Only about 20% of the total migration (600 million) is from rural to urban areas.

#5: That is not to suggest that urban migration is not important. In fact, 20% of the total migration is from one urban area to another urban area. As such, urban migration (rural to urban as well as urban to urban) accounts for 40% of the total migration.

#6: But even at these staggeringly high absolute numbers, Indias proportion of internal migrants (as a percentage of the overall population) is much lower than some of the comparable countries such as Russia, China, South Africa and Brazil all have much higher urbanisation ratios, which is a proxy for migration level. In other words, as India adopts a strategy of rapid urbanisation for example, by building so-called smart cities and essentially using cities as centres of economic growth levels of internal migration will increase further.

#7: Coming back to the Covid impact, however, the reality of a migrant workers existence is much more complicated than those sharply defined numbers. Not all migrants were equally affected. The worst-hit were a class of migrants that Prof Ravi Srivastava (Director, Centre for Employment Studies, Institute of Human Development) calls vulnerable circular migrants. These are people who are vulnerable because of their weak position in the job market and circular migrants because even though they work in urban settings, they continue to have a foothold in the rural areas. Such migrants work in construction sites or small factories or as rickshaw pullers in the city but when such employment avenues dwindle, they go back to their rural setting. In other words, they are part of the informal economy outside agriculture. And, thanks to the precarious nature of their existence they constitute 75% of the informal economy outside agriculture most shocks, be it demonetisation or GST or the pandemic disruption, tend to rob them of their livelihood.

#8: According to Srivastava, close to 60 million moved back to their source rural areas in the wake of pandemic-induced lockdowns. That number is roughly six-times the official estimates. That estimate also gives a measure of the sense of labour shock that Indias economy faced as migrants moved back.

So, the answer to the initial query why couldnt we take better care of our migrant workers in 2020 lies, in the words of Alex Paul Menon (Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh), in Indias approach to its labour class. Ignorance fuelled by indifference, says Menon. Be it academia, bureaucracy, or the political class, we have to accept that we are ignorant about our labour class and especially about migrant labourers. And this ignorance is borne out of indifference in my understanding, he says.

The truth is that even now all the estimates mentioned above are individual estimates. The official data be it the Census or the National Sample Survey is more than a decade old. In fact, Census 2011 migration data was made publicly available only in 2019.

In the absence of any real measure of understanding about our labour class, it is any surprise that so many suffered when India enforced one of the strictest lockdowns anywhere in the world with just a few hours of notice to the migrant workers who had no resources of their own or any immediate help from the government?

What can be done in terms of policymaking so that this is avoided in the future?

Watch the first in a series of eight webinars that The Indian Express and Omidyar Network India organised last week to find out the answers.

Take care

Udit

Excerpt from:

Explainspeaking: What 2020 taught us about Indias internal migration - The Indian Express

Select Page ::