Daily Archives: May 17, 2017

How the latest Trump headlines played out in conservative, liberal media – USA TODAY

Posted: May 17, 2017 at 2:19 am

President Trump's national security adviser says a Washington Post report that says Trump shared intelligence with Russia "is false." USA TODAY

A great deal has been written and said about the media divide in the United States or how Americans tend to follow news organizations that reinforce their political beliefs and that divide was clearly in evidence Monday in the wake of a Washington Post story alleging President Trump shared classified information with Russian diplomats during a meeting at the WhiteHouse.

For example, a glance at the three major cable news networks at 8:20 p.m. ET revealed the following banners on the bottom of the screen:

While CNN and MSNBC focused on the report from the Post and the reaction from Trump's opponents, Fox News focused on a perceived hysteria among liberals a tactic the network also employed in the wake of the firing of former FBI director James Comey.

Just under an hour later, Fox News ran a banner reading, "McMaster: Washington Post story on Russia meeting is false," while CNN's banner read, "Sources: Trump shared classified info with Russian foreign minister."

On the Fox News website, the top story at 9:30 p.m. ET was about Hillary Clinton and the launch of her "Onward Together" PAC. The story about Trump was programmed beneath that under the headline, "'It didn'thappen': WH denies report Trump revealed classified info."

Read more:

Lawmakers slam reports Trump revealed classified intel to Russians

5 unanswered questions from latest Trump-Russia intelligence leak

Trump's tweets on mishandled classified info come back to haunt him

'Post' scoop on Trump's Russia leak sets new reader record

On Breitbart, the top headline read"Deep State Strikes: Leaks Classified Info To Washington Post To Smear Trump, LOL: Reporters Negate Oversold Headline In 7th Paragraph."

The "deep state" refers to a theory repeatedly propagatedby Breitbartsince Trump took office, which says a cadre of government officials loyal to former President Obama have been working behind the scenes to undermine Trump.

The 7th paragraph from the Post story that theBreitbart headline refers to reads,"As president, Trump has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that his disclosures broke the law." The headline implies since the president did not break the law, the story is of little importance.

Read more:

Is it legal for Trump to share classified intelligence? Yes, but risky, experts say

The second headline on Breitbart was, "McMaster: WAPO Story 'False' 'I Was In The Room, It Didn't Happen'."An accuratesummation of the denial issued by Trump's national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster.

On The Washington Times website, the top story was "Officials dispute report Trump revealed classified information to Russians."

By contrast, CNN led after obtaining their own unnamed sources with a wide, banner headline reading, "Sources: Trump shared classified info with Russians." Four other stories critical of the White House preceded a video of McMaster's denial.

On the Fox News showHannity,host Sean Hannityopened by attacking the sources of the leaks to the Post.

"No White Housecan sustain these types of constant leaks," he said. "So, if you're in the White House, and you're this, if you're not there to serve your country and all you're doing is hurting the country, well, then you might want to get out of the way."

Hannity proceeded to report on the Comey firing and "the worst liberal media feeding frenzy in American history" that followed. He went on to explain why he believes Comey deserved to be fired and why Clinton should have been prosecuted for her handling of classified material on a private emailserver.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2rkm8Y5

Go here to read the rest:

How the latest Trump headlines played out in conservative, liberal media - USA TODAY

Posted in Liberal | Comments Off on How the latest Trump headlines played out in conservative, liberal media – USA TODAY

The Democrats’ Liberal Lemmings – HuffPost

Posted: at 2:18 am

Next month Im returning to Marthas Vineyard. Its a lovely place and, for progressives, the ultimate safe space. It sometimes seems that Republicans need a green card just to visit, and that the island only issues 10 per year.

But this creates a problem: What passes for political wisdom can become, shall we say, insular. As a journalistic eminence murmured after enduring a dinner party where, in his view, progressive piety strangled reality by the throat: As Marthas Vineyard goes, so goes Cambridge, Berkeley, and the upper West Side of Manhattan.

Which puts me in mind of certain Democratic liberals and lemmings.

Hold the outrage, please. I like to think Im as progressive as the next guy, including ardent support for voting rights, LGBT rights, reproductive rights, racial justice, and preventing dangerous people from slaughtering innocents with guns. Over the years, Ive devoted considerable energy to these issues. But, for me, the current ideological fratricide among Democrats evokes the mythic rodents who commit mass suicide by jumping off cliffs.

This years contest for DNC chair in essence, a tiresome rerun of the fight between supporters of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders featured lemmings galore. Among them were the raucous activists who booed the liberal Tom Perez for beating the even more liberal, and more controversial, Keith Ellison, perpetuating the ongoing divide between the merely progressive and the truly pure.

Inescapably, this spectacle raised questions. What slice of the populace do these folks represent? At this critical juncture, were Perez and Ellison the best choices Democrats had? What about Pete Buttigieg, the young and appealing mayor of South Bend, Ind. who, having succeeded in a red state, emphasized expanding the partys appeal in middle America? And what does all this fractiousness portend for the Democrats ability to reverse their electoral fortunes?

Nothing good. To heal the wounds, Perez and Sanders launched a unity tour. Quickly, it foundered on their support of the Democratic candidate for mayor of Omaha, Neb., Heath Mello who, it transpired, had taken anti-abortion positions as a state legislator. Quickly, abortion-rights groups pounced, asserting that the partys support for Mello was unacceptable.

Progressives like Sanders and Elizabeth Warren defended the right of a local candidate to hold views at odds with theirs, sensibly distinguishing between a would-be mayor of Omaha and, say, a Supreme Court nominee. But the head of NARAL denounced this as politically stupid. Swiftly, Perez capitulated, asserting that Democrats commitment to abortion rights is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state.

Lets be clear. The Democratic Party firmly embraces reproductive rights and should. And, yes, the anti-abortion movement is tainted with misogyny, patriarchy, and fundamentalism. But, unavoidably, the debate over abortion includes a genuine ethical issue regarding how we define life. And, as a practical matter, a significant minority of Democrats oppose abortion; some are women who support maternal leave, better child-care policies, and wage equity.

Abortion rights should not, in itself, be a litmus test of decency or of who gets to be a Democrat in Nebraska.

But doctrinal purity is contagious. Shortly, Sanders stumbled, when asked if Jon Ossoff a Democrat opposing an antiabortion GOP zealot in a bright-red Georgia congressional district was a progressive. I dont know, Sanders flatly stated. Really? When did Georgia become Vermont? And when did progressive orthodoxy become so rigid and exclusionary?

But among Democrats, this ideological Stalinism is all too common. A few years ago, a friend and leader in the gun-control movement refused to support the incumbent Democratic senator from Arkansas, deeming him too compromised on guns. He lost to a Republican who opposes everything my friend cares about. Now Republicans control the Senate, and Neil Gorsuch sits on the Supreme Court.

This illustrates the complex relationship between moral urgency and political actuality. The civil rights movement was not driven by political exigency, but by the uncompromising commitment of brave men and women who transformed our national conscience. But translating civil rights into law required a Democratic president working through a Democratic Congress.

Too many activists fail to grasp this or that their desire to thwart Donald Trump exceeds their partys ability to do so. Thus some on the left threaten primary challenges against Democrats they perceive as insufficiently militant.

This is political self-immolation. The Democrats are defending Senate seats in red or purple states like Montana, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania all of which Trump carried. Do these petulant purists really think that a Warren-style Democrat could win in Montana? Or care that they risk losing the last bastion of legislative resistance to Trump even, perhaps, the filibuster?

Already, Democrats are ceding most of America with alarming celerity. Since 2006, the party has lost 10 percent of its seats in the Senate, 19 percent in the House, 20 percent in state legislatures, and 36 percent of governorships. The 16 percent of counties won by Hillary Clinton resemble, demographically, a cocktail party on Marthas Vineyard urban, affluent, well-educated, and, increasingly, politically homogenous and sociologically isolated. In such circumstances, political antennae rust, litmus tests flourish, and a vision of deplorables sets in that mirrors the intolerance of the right.

No surprise, then, that many middle-class and blue-collar Americans including former Obama voters feel that national Democrats favor the wealthy. Programmatically, this simply isnt so. No doubt this misperception owes much to the GOPs rank dishonesty. But ideological rigidity and cultural condescension surely do not help nor, frankly, do enormous speaking fees from Wall Street.

So what should Democrats do? Some think the party should focus on turning out its core demographic well-educated whites, women, young people, and minorities; others on winning back some of the voters it lost to Trump. But this is a false choice. Nor is it sufficient for Democrats to define themselves merely by opposing Trump. Instead, the party needs to prioritize engaging voters rather than excluding them.

This requires what went missing in 2016: a compelling and unifying vision of how Democratic policies improve the lives of more Americans, helping unleash the potential of every person wherever and whoever they are to lift themselves and their country. This message of inclusion and economic opportunity transcends geography and demographics and, as well, any single issue or constituent group no matter how important. It says, rather, that every American is not merely worthwhile, but valuable.

That is what a national party looks like.

Richard North Pattersons column appears regularly in the Boston Globe. His latest book is Fever Swamp. Follow him on Twitter @RicPatterson.

See the article here:

The Democrats' Liberal Lemmings - HuffPost

Posted in Liberal | Comments Off on The Democrats’ Liberal Lemmings – HuffPost

American Institutions Strike Back – The Atlantic

Posted: at 2:18 am

The bad news is that Donald Trump is the most incompetent president in modern American history. The good news is that Donald Trump is the most incompetent president in modern American history.

He was too incompetent to understand his own health care bill, or accurately describe the direction in which the armada designed to intimidate North Korea was heading, or restrain himself from disclosing highly classified information to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak. But hes also too incompetent, it appears, to destroy liberal democracy.

When Trump fired James Comey a week ago, many Republicans denied that he had done so to shut down the FBIs inquiry into his campaigns Russia ties. Trump, they said, could not have been that stupid. He could not have been stupid enough to believe that firing Comey would quash the Russia investigation.

But, increasingly, it appears that Trump was. Rather than building a high-minded pretext for firing Comey, Trump, according to the New York Times, invited Comey to dinner in January and demanded his personal loyalty. If that wasnt incriminating enough, in February he baldly asked Comey to end the investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Then, after Comey asked for more funding to investigate the Trump campaigns Russia ties, Trump fired himessentially asking the man he had handed a loaded gun to fire it at his head.

In the hours after Comeys firing, the Trump cant be that stupid caucus globbed onto Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosensteins memo, which offered justifications for Comeys firing that did not reek of self-interest. But in an interview with NBC News Lester Holt, Trump admitted that he was thinking about the Russia investigation when he made the decision to fire Comey, thus discarding Rosensteins fig leaf and exposing his political nakedness for all to see.

Thank goodness. The Kremlin, it turns out, is not the only institution able to outwit Donald Trump. American law enforcement and the American press can too. Comey, who unlike Trump knows the art of political CYA, reportedly kept a record of the Presidents efforts to obstruct justice. Trumps own White House is sabotaging him daily through massive leaks. And at both the Times and the Washington Post, the best reporters of their generation are participating in the journalistic equivalent of a dunking contest.

In retrospect, it was predictable. During the campaign, Trump advertised his hostility to liberal democratic norms. But he advertised his incompetence too. He slandered judges for their ethnicity and vowed tax investigations into the publishers of newspapers that criticized him. But he also let Texas Senator Ted Cruz give a prime time speech at his own convention that did not include an endorsement.

As a result of his own ineptitude, Trump is politically weaker than he was on Inauguration Day even though the economy is stronger. And its harder to mount a populist assault on the rule of law when youre not even that popular.

Yes, Trump can still do grave damage. Yes, hes exposed the fragility of Americas system of liberal democracy. But that system has one key advantage: The people protecting it are good at their jobs.

Go here to read the rest:

American Institutions Strike Back - The Atlantic

Posted in Liberal | Comments Off on American Institutions Strike Back – The Atlantic

12 states in for freedom: Missouri votes for Convention of States – Conservative Review

Posted: at 2:18 am


Conservative Review
12 states in for freedom: Missouri votes for Convention of States
Conservative Review
SCR4, sponsored by Senator Mike Kehoe, R-Jefferson City, calls for an Article V Convention of States to propose constitutional amendments that impose fiscal restraint on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal ...

Here is the original post:

12 states in for freedom: Missouri votes for Convention of States - Conservative Review

Posted in Fiscal Freedom | Comments Off on 12 states in for freedom: Missouri votes for Convention of States – Conservative Review

Budgetary Impact Analysis for Executive Order Entitled Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty – The White House (blog)

Posted: at 2:18 am

Statement from OMB Director Mick Mulvaney:

Budgetary Impact Analysis for Executive Order Entitled Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty

This executive order directs Federal departments and agencies to take certain steps to ensure that the freedom of persons and organizations to engage in religious and political speech is respected and protected. Implementing this executive order would have a de minimis impact on costs and revenues to the Federal Government. The benefits of this executive order include reorienting executive branch policy towards vigorously protecting religious freedom. Implementing this executive order would have a de minimis impact on mandatory and discretionary obligations and outlays, as well as on revenues to the Federal Government, in the 5-fiscal year period beginning in fiscal year 2017. The agencies anticipated to be impacted by this executive order include the Departments of Treasury, Justice, Labor, and Health and Human Services.

Read the original here:

Budgetary Impact Analysis for Executive Order Entitled Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty - The White House (blog)

Posted in Fiscal Freedom | Comments Off on Budgetary Impact Analysis for Executive Order Entitled Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty – The White House (blog)

Can the US Fix Afghanistan? – Townhall

Posted: at 2:18 am

|

Posted: May 17, 2017 12:01 AM

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden had been living in Afghanistan, where the radical Islamist Taliban regime gave him sanctuary.

The U.S. sought to end that regime, capture or kill bin Laden and other al-Qaida terrorists, and prevent Afghan territory from being used to harbor and train terrorists who could attack the United States in the future.

But President George W. Bush ultimately proposed a post-9/11 strategy that went beyond national defense.

"We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in a peaceful Palestine," Bush said on May 1, 2003.

"The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world," he said. "Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope. When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life. American values, and American interests, lead in the same direction. We stand for human liberty."

When Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, the U.S. still had about 32,500 troops in Afghanistan, according to the Congressional Research Service. By the second quarter of fiscal 2011, Obama had increased those forces to 99,800. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2016, as he prepared to leave office, there were still 9,800 there.

But have we eliminated the threat al-Qaida, and those who share its ideology, pose to the United States?

The most recent inspector general's report on the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan indicates the Taliban and al-Qaida are still active there and the Islamic State has established a presence.

"Insurgent attacks continued across Afghanistan this quarter with the Taliban remaining the greatest threat to the Afghan government," said the report.

'U.S. counterterrorism operations this quarter disrupted al Qaida's ability to attack the U.S. and Afghan forces by reducing its numbers to under 100 fighters and killing 3 of its top leaders," said the report. "However, al Qaida in Afghanistan remained affiliated with the world-wide al Qaida organization and, according to (U.S. commander) General Nicholson, 'these groups together have the intent and capability to conduct attacks outside Afghanistan.'"

And how is freedom doing in Afghanistan?

Human rights problems in the country, according to the State Department's 2016 report on that issue, "included extrajudicial killings by security forces, ineffective government investigations of abuse and torture by local security forces; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention, including of women accused of so-called moral crimes; prolonged pretrial detentions; judicial corruption and ineffectiveness; violations of privacy rights; restrictions on freedom of speech, press, religion, and movement; pervasive governmental corruption; underage and forced marriages; abuse of children, including sexual abuse; trafficking in persons, including forced labor; discrimination against persons with disabilities; discrimination and abuses against ethnic minorities; societal discrimination based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and HIV/AIDS status; and abuse of workers' rights, including child labor."

The Worldwide Threat Assessment that Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats presented to the Senate intelligence committee last week did not paint an optimistic picture for Afghanistan.

"The overall situation in Afghanistan will very likely continue to deteriorate, even if international support is sustained," said the threat assessment. "Endemic state weaknesses, the government's political fragility, deficiencies of the Afghan National Security Forces, Taliban persistence, and regional interference will remain key impediments to improvement."

"The fighting will also continue to threaten US personnel, allies, and partners, particularly in Kabul and urban population centers," said the assessment. "ISIS's Khorasan branch -- which constitutes ISIS's most significant presence in South Asia -- will probably remain a low-level developing threat to Afghan stability as well as to US and Western interests in the region in 2017."

The same threat assessment pointed to a terror threat to the "homeland" that is now "homegrown."

"US-based homegrown violent extremists (HVEs) will remain the most frequent and unpredictable Sunni violent extremist threat to the U.S. homeland," said the assessment. "They will be spurred on by terrorist groups' public calls to carry out attacks in the West. The threat of HVE attacks will persist, and some attacks will probably occur with little or no warning."

"In addition to the HVE threat, a small number of foreign-based Sunni violent extremist groups will also pose a threat to the U.S. homeland and continue publishing multilingual propaganda that calls for attacks against US and Western interests in the US homeland and abroad," it said.

The ultimate strategic aim of the United States in responding to the terrorist threat exemplified by al-Qaida and the Islamic State should not focus on establishing freedom in Afghanistan or any other distant land but rather on maintaining the God-given rights of life, liberty and property here.

Key to that is preventing terrorists from entering this country and depriving us of those rights here.

In the coming months, Republicans in Congress working with a Republican in the White House will have the opportunity to take concrete acts to secure our border and more aggressively vet those we let legally cross it.

If they want to keep America secure and free, they need to do it.

Visit link:

Can the US Fix Afghanistan? - Townhall

Posted in Fiscal Freedom | Comments Off on Can the US Fix Afghanistan? – Townhall

New IRC report: Financial inclusion critical for refugees, other new Americans – Rescue

Posted: at 2:18 am

San Diego, CA, May 16, 2017 Today, the International Rescue Committee launched a new report, funded by JPMorgan Chase, entitled Financial Capability for New Americans: Lessons from Early Interventions with Refugees. The event consisted of an an address from IRC economic empowerment experts on the key findings in the report followed by a panel of thought leaders in the field of financial inclusion and coaching.

Read the full report here.

The report analyzes data from more than 2,400 refugee households as well as learnings drawn from the IRCs work in refugee resettlement and economic empowerment throughout 28 cities. This information was compiled in an effort to shed light on the financial dynamics of refugee households within their first years of entering the U.S. It examines how financial capability programming impacts refugee economic outcomes, and offer insights that encourage more effective and responsive approaches to building financial capability and economic independence for new Americans.

The first year in the U.S. is a critical window to positively impact the financial lives of new Americans, to avoid missteps and lay a solid foundation for financial independence. said Ellen Beattie, Senior Director with IRCs US Programs.

Refugee families undergo accelerated financial change and learning during their first years in the U.S., making this period ripe for financial capability interventions, according to the report. It states new American families that receive early financial capability services, the better the economic outcomes are for the household.

The report proposes six key recommendations to aid practitioners in helping new American families achieve and sustain self-sufficiency:

Intervene Early: Though it may be too early for a refugee to be interested in long term savings, their first few years is the right time to help navigate initial challenges and making ends meet.

Intervene Frequently: Service providers should not assume that refugees will be self-motivated in reaching out for financial education and coaching, they should explore multiple avenues for increasing the likelihood of refugee access to financial capability programming and coaching.

Explore Ways to Offer Integrated Financial Products: Whether through internal channels or by building partnerships with other financial institutions, helping refugees access financial products tied to their specific goals can accelerate progression towards that goal.

Pay Special Attention to the Needs of Women: Refugee women face unique challenges and barriers and programming needs to be designed and implemented with these things in mind.

Keep Goals Realistic: Service providers and refugee families need to set realistic goals for what can be achieved in the short, medium and long term.

Use Data: Service providers need to commit to collecting and tracking data over time about financial coaching participants to assess whether their implementation of these models, services and approaches is working within their local population.

Please email communications [at] rescue.org to arrange an interview with an IRC spokesperson.

###

About the IRC

The International Rescue Committee responds to the worlds worst humanitarian crises, helping to restore health, safety, education, economic wellbeing, and power to people devastated by conflict and disaster. Founded in 1933 at the call of Albert Einstein, the IRC is at work in over 40 countries and 28 offices across the U.S. helping people to survive, reclaim control of their future, and strengthen their communities.Learn more at http://www.rescue.org and follow the IRC on Twitter & Facebook.

Read the original post:

New IRC report: Financial inclusion critical for refugees, other new Americans - Rescue

Posted in Financial Independence | Comments Off on New IRC report: Financial inclusion critical for refugees, other new Americans – Rescue

Needle Action Activity Spotted in Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) – Pearson Press

Posted: at 2:17 am

Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) shares are moving today onvolatility48.57% or $0.17 from the open.TheOTCBB listed companysaw a recent bid of $0.5200 and9615shares have traded hands in the session.

Digging deeping into the Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) s technical indicators, we note that the Williams Percent Range or 14 day Williams %R currently sits at -58.89. The Williams %R oscillates in a range from 0 to -100. A reading between 0 and -20 would point to an overbought situation. A reading from -80 to -100 would signal an oversold situation. The Williams %R was developed by Larry Williams. This is a momentum indicator that is the inverse of the Fast Stochastic Oscillator.

Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) currently has a 14-day Commodity Channel Index (CCI) of 100.18. Active investors may choose to use this technical indicator as a stock evaluation tool. Used as a coincident indicator, the CCI reading above +100 would reflect strong price action which may signal an uptrend. On the flip side, a reading below -100 may signal a downtrend reflecting weak price action. Using the CCI as a leading indicator, technical analysts may use a +100 reading as an overbought signal and a -100 reading as an oversold indicator, suggesting a trend reversal.

Currently, the 14-day ADX for Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) is sitting at 15.63. Generally speaking, an ADX value from 0-25 would indicate an absent or weak trend. A value of 25-50 would support a strong trend. A value of 50-75 would identify a very strong trend, and a value of 75-100 would lead to an extremely strong trend. ADX is used to gauge trend strength but not trend direction. Traders often add the Plus Directional Indicator (+DI) and Minus Directional Indicator (-DI) to identify the direction of a trend.

The RSI, or Relative Strength Index, is a widely used technical momentum indicator that compares price movement over time. The RSI was created by J. Welles Wilder who was striving to measure whether or not a stock was overbought or oversold. The RSI may be useful for spotting abnormal price activity and volatility. The RSI oscillates on a scale from 0 to 100. The normal reading of a stock will fall in the range of 30 to 70. A reading over 70 would indicate that the stock is overbought, and possibly overvalued. A reading under 30 may indicate that the stock is oversold, and possibly undervalued. After a recent check, the 14-day RSI for Sealand Natural Resources Incis currently at 54.57, the 7-day stands at 57.91, and the 3-day is sitting at 67.78.

Excerpt from:

Needle Action Activity Spotted in Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) - Pearson Press

Posted in Sealand | Comments Off on Needle Action Activity Spotted in Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) – Pearson Press

On Italy’s Coast, a Forsaken Village Is a Tale of a Paradise Lost – New York Times

Posted: at 2:16 am


New York Times
On Italy's Coast, a Forsaken Village Is a Tale of a Paradise Lost
New York Times
What remains today looks less like a utopia than a paradise lost, a site of abandonment and degradation, and a concentration of southern Italy's abiding troubles: criminality, lax local governance and extreme poverty. The section originally designed ...

Originally posted here:

On Italy's Coast, a Forsaken Village Is a Tale of a Paradise Lost - New York Times

Posted in New Utopia | Comments Off on On Italy’s Coast, a Forsaken Village Is a Tale of a Paradise Lost – New York Times

Crypto Utopia? Defining the Greater Good in a Blockchain World – CoinDesk

Posted: at 2:16 am

Cecile Baird and Simon Chan are founding partnersof Blockchain For Good (BC4G), a think tank that aims tobring together minds from around the world to explore and debate the development of blockchain, for the greater good of humanity, society, economy and the environment.

In this opinionpiece, Baird and Chanargue that weneeda duty of care today, for a humanised blockchain future tomorrow.

Blockchains public interface, at its most basic, is a string of shared data made up of a series of uniquely ordered alphabetical letters and numbers, timestamped and immutable.

Yet, through this, blockchain can fundamentally change existing organisational structures, not merely as an evolutionary development, but potentially as a transformational technology. While it continues to develop, we need explore the opportunities that blockchain technology can offer and the consequences of not getting it right.

To do this, we believe we should zero in on one area that has not yet received the same level of attention or investment: the humanaspect of the blockchain, and how it could underpin the technologies that impact our everyday lives.

Together, we need to identify some guiding principles on how we can shape an underlying duty of care,bringing together greatminds in the fields of entrepreneurship, investing, academia, sustainability, charities and policymaking to tackle this challenge.

We are living in a world where for good has become zeitgeist and is often interpreted as 'social good'. However to set the scene of the discussion it is really important to note that 'for good' is not limited to non-profit activities or the third sector.

There are incredibly varied views of what 'for good' means for creative industries, it is transparency and fair distribution of royalties; for refugees, it is establishing or protecting identity; for charities, it is about accountability; and for government, it is about delivering better services to the public.

But what was interesting is the commonality between the interpretations of 'for good' the notion of creating new value, under a framework of ethics and clear moral intentions. When considering how blockchain can be used for good, it is important that we look at its relationship with creating new value.

Businesses that will continue to thrive tomorrow, will be those with a clear purpose underpinned by a commitment thatbalances the triple bottom line of people, profit and planet.

Where there is a vision of utopia, there is an equal possibility of dystopia. We have already seen cases where bad actors have manipulated projects based on blockchain technology quicker than the community can prevent attacks.

There is a second way where we do not get blockchain right, which can be equally systemic. Unless there is an unambiguous and clearly definedethical system, there can be no ethics.

A lack of an ecosystem and, perhaps worse still, a manipulated ecosystem, would fundamentally undermine the principles on which blockchain has been built: a transparent, immutable and distributed ledger.

The best-case scenario is that we end up with a large number of unconnected, private blockchain networks. But the worst-case scenario is that see the emergence of monopolies that shape the development of blockchain technology that benefit the privileged few at the cost of others.

Blockchain can recast trust relationships between government, people and business. As the Edelmans Trust Barometer, a survey of over 30,000 individuals globally, suggests, there is a widening trust gap between these three groups. Blockchain technology offers a new model thatcan help solve this point of crisis.

We believe we have distilled five areas that should be considered when developing a duty-of-care manifesto:

Distributed power

Blockchain technology does not allow vested interest in any one individual and power is given by consensus. As such, this creates network integrity and enables transparency by design. The principle of users being able to use, but not to manipulate, the system should be an underlying principle for enabling the technology to be used for good.

Authentication and new trust

One aspect that needs to be considered is how a distributed ledger would impact data privacy, data ownership and misuse of data.

Transparency and balance

How can these functionalities be used to enable good? There must be balance and compromise. There is no point using blockchain with the same frame of mind as withour existing economy and system.

Incentivised and accelerated value

The decentralised structure of blockchain technology passes value through to individuals. As such, there is no central authority setting economic policies or regulating the distribution, the incentive for action is open and put in the hands of everyone as there is a fair value exchange.

The role of communications

If were integrating blockchain technology into government infrastructure, it is essential that we focus on deployment in places where it is needed most. It is important that decision makers and policymakers are properly engaged. To safeguard the future of blockchain technology, ensuring it is being used for good and trusted, there is an onus for everyone industry and government, and those communicating on its behalf to do so responsibly.

What is clear is that we do require a federated model a guiding hand, to set the vision and principles to enable its success, for the greater good whilst allowing verticals or countries to govern their specific areas. To be clear, this is not a government, a centralised organisation or even regulation, but policy and principles that document a duty of care for blockchain technology.

The Blockchain For Good white paper and manifesto can be read here.

Hands on a chain image via Shutterstock

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, CoinDesk.

Link:

Crypto Utopia? Defining the Greater Good in a Blockchain World - CoinDesk

Posted in New Utopia | Comments Off on Crypto Utopia? Defining the Greater Good in a Blockchain World – CoinDesk