The quiet exodus from the American dream by Virginia Robertson

For generations the United States stood as the ultimate destination, a place where ambition met opportunity, where reinvention was not just possible but expected. The “American Dream” was more than a slogan; it was a global promise. Yet today a subtle but undeniable shift is taking place. Increasing numbers of Americans are not arriving in search of that dream, they are leaving it behind.

This migration is not driven by a single political figure or one election cycle, even though the era of Donald Trump undeniably accelerated national divisions and forced many Americans to reassess their future. The deeper story stretches across three decades of transformation. The America many citizens grew up believing in feels increasingly distant from the reality they now inhabit.

The most immediate pressure is economic. The cost of living in major American cities has spiraled beyond recognition. Housing, once the cornerstone of middle-class stability, has become an exhausting financial battle. Rent consumes salaries. Home ownership, once an attainable milestone, now feels like a luxury reserved for the wealthy or the lucky few who bought property decades earlier. Even professionals with solid careers, teachers, engineers, nurses, find themselves financially stretched in ways their parents never experienced.

Healthcare remains perhaps the most alarming symbol of this change. In the wealthiest nation on earth, illness can still mean bankruptcy. Americans carry a quiet fear that a medical emergency could undo years of work overnight. The absence of universal healthcare has created a psychological burden as heavy as the financial one. By contrast, many European countries offer systems that prioritize stability over profit, allowing citizens to live without calculating the price of survival.

Education, once America’s proud export to the world, has also shifted. University degrees increasingly arrive alongside lifelong debt. Younger generations question whether higher education still guarantees upward mobility. Public schools struggle with inequality tied to geography and income, reinforcing divisions rather than dissolving them.

Social tensions add another layer to the departure. Political polarization has hardened everyday conversations into ideological battlegrounds. Crime anxiety, whether statistically consistent or amplified by perception, shapes how communities experience public space. Meanwhile, debates around race, identity and belonging have intensified, leaving many Americans exhausted by a culture of constant confrontation. For some, relocation to Europe represents not escape but relief, a chance to live in societies perceived as calmer, safer and less defined by permanent crisis.

Europe, of course, is no paradise. It carries its own economic struggles, bureaucratic frustrations and political uncertainties. Yet many Americans arriving there speak less about perfection and more about balance. Walkable cities, accessible healthcare, public transportation and a slower rhythm of life create an appealing alternative. The attraction is not luxury but livability, a cozy apartment, reliable services, evenings that do not revolve around financial anxiety.

What makes this moment remarkable is its symbolism. For much of modern history, migration flowed toward America. Now, the current moves in both directions. The shift suggests not the collapse of the United States but a recalibration of expectations. Americans are no longer convinced that success must be pursued within national borders.

The American Dream has not disappeared; it has simply lost its monopoly on hope. As citizens pack their lives into suitcases bound for European towns and cities, they are not rejecting their homeland entirely. They are searching for something increasingly rare: stability, dignity, and the freedom to live without constant struggle. In doing so, they force a difficult question back home, when people begin leaving the dream what does that say about the dream itself?


The legacy of barbed wire by John Kato

History rarely remembers political movements for the policy details they debated in committee rooms. Instead it remembers symbols, walls, speeches, images that crystallize an era’s moral choices. For critics of former U.S. President Donald Trump and much of the modern Republican Party, one such symbol has become unavoidable: detention centers filled with migrants, families separated, and a border policy defined less by administration than by deterrence through suffering.

Whether fair or politically charged, the question lingers, will the detention infrastructure built and expanded in the early twenty-first century become the defining legacy of Trump-era conservatism? Trump did not invent immigration enforcement. Detention facilities existed under previous Democratic and Republican administrations alike. Yet his presidency transformed immigration from a bureaucratic challenge into a cultural battlefield. The language shifted dramatically, migrants framed not merely as unauthorized entrants but as existential threats to national identity. Policy followed rhetoric. Family separations, prolonged detentions and the normalization of harsh holding conditions became not unfortunate side effects but visible instruments of political messaging.

Supporters argued that sovereignty requires enforcement. They saw chaos at the border, overwhelmed asylum systems, and communities demanding order. To them, tougher detention policies represented realism rather than cruelty, a government finally willing to enforce laws others hesitated to uphold.

But politics is not judged only by intent; it is judged by imagery and consequence. The photographs of children behind fencing, overcrowded facilities and stories of desperate families traveled far beyond American partisan debates. Internationally, they reshaped perceptions of the United States, a country long accustomed to presenting itself as a moral leader on human rights.

Critics contend that this was not simply immigration policy but moral theater. Detention became spectacle, proof of strength aimed at voters anxious about globalization, demographic change and economic insecurity. In this view, the Republican Party’s embrace of hardline border politics reflected a deeper transformation: from advocating limited government and free markets toward mobilizing cultural fear as a central organizing principle.

The political calculus was clear. Immigration energized a base that felt ignored by elites. Tough enforcement polled well among core supporters. Electoral incentives reinforced escalation. Once detention became a symbol of political resolve, retreating from it risked appearing weak.

Yet legacies are unpredictable. Political movements rarely control how future generations interpret their choices. Policies framed as necessary security measures today may later be remembered as moments when compassion yielded to anxiety. The debate over detention centers is therefore less about logistics and more about national identity, what kind of power America believes itself to be.

For Republicans, the challenge moving forward is whether border enforcement remains synonymous with harsh confinement or evolves into a broader vision balancing security with humanitarian credibility. Parties survive by adapting; legacies harden when adaptation fails.

Trump’s era forced Americans to confront uncomfortable questions about borders, law, and belonging. But history’s verdict will not hinge solely on whether detention worked as policy. It will hinge on whether the images associated with it, barbed wire, crowded rooms, frightened families, come to define an entire political generation.

If that happens, critics may indeed label the detention system the enduring monument of Trump-era politics, not legislation carved in marble, but a memory etched in steel fences and moral controversy.


#eBook The Return of the Cold by Ethan Campbell

 

The winds howled through the jagged peaks of the Carpathian Mountains, a shrieking, unearthly cry that carried with it a suffocating chill, colder than any mortal had ever known.

It was a wind that clung to the skin and gnawed at the bones seeping into every crack and crevice, whispering of forgotten horrors. The sky, once clear and bright, had now darkened, the final embers of daylight flickering out like a dying star. Night fell not with the usual stillness, but with a kind of ominous weight, as though the earth itself was holding its breath.

At the base of these ancient mountains, nestled within the crumbling stone walls of a secluded village, an old man sat by the fire. His name was Lorenz, and in his weathered hands he held a tattered journal. Its pages, yellowed with age, had been passed down through the generations, pages written by those who had sought to learn the truth and had never returned.

He had seen the world change around him, but this truth had remained constant, lurking in the shadows of time.

Ethan Campbell, natural born stand-up comedian who never made it any further from his toilet’s mirror, so he turned into writing fantasy and paranormal stories.

Ovi eBook Publishing 2026

The Return of the Cold

Read it online or download HERE!
Read it online & downloading it as PDF HERE!
Or enjoy reading it online & downloading it as PDF HERE!
All downloads are FREE!

**********************************

Check Ovi eBookshelves HERE!

2nd opinion, quarantined! 26#04 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Seriously, a human hater self-centred agoraphobic in quarantine!
I think you’ll need a second opinion after this.

For more 2nd opinion, quarantined!, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


Litigation and International Arbitration in the Age of Artificial Intelligence by Dr Fernando Messias, PhD

Efficiency, Legitimacy and the Future of Adjudication

Artificial intelligence is no longer an auxiliary technological resource. It has become a structural component of contemporary legal practice. In international arbitration in particular, AI is reshaping not only procedural efficiency but the epistemological architecture of decision-making itself.

In my recent book, The Practice of Law and International Arbitration in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, I argue that AI must be understood not as a substitute for human judgment, but as a cognitive extension of it. From document analysis and predictive modelling to natural language processing and blockchain-assisted contracting, AI tools are redefining the operational reality of arbitral proceedings. Yet efficiency alone cannot justify their integration. The legitimacy of arbitration depends on fairness, transparency, and the preservation of procedural guarantees.

These themes are further developed in my article, Artificial Intelligence and International Arbitration: Ethical, Procedural and Regulatory Challenges under the New CIArb Guidelines, published in the Journal of Internet Law(Wolters Kluwer; February 2026). There, I examine the 2025 CIArb Guidelines as a pivotal normative moment in the governance of AI within arbitration. The Guidelines recognise the inevitability of technological integration while insisting upon principles of human oversight, accountability, data protection and procedural transparency.

The central tension is therefore clear: how can arbitral institutions and practitioners harness AI’s capacity to optimise evidence review, procedural management and decision support, without undermining party autonomy, equality of arms and the right to be heard?

AI-assisted arbitration introduces a fourth structural actor into proceedings: the algorithm. When algorithms assist in identifying relevant documents, modelling reasoning pathways or supporting drafting functions, they influence outcomes — even if indirectly. This raises questions that go beyond technical compliance. Can an award remain fully legitimate if essential analytical steps are shaped by systems whose internal logic may not be entirely transparent? Who bears responsibility when algorithmic tools materially affect legal reasoning?

Beyond efficiency, AI is also transforming the cognitive environment in which arbitration operates. Predictive systems can identify patterns in awards, litigation outcomes, and judicial behaviour, potentially influencing strategic choices long before a hearing begins. While this enhances analytical precision, it may also generate new asymmetries between technologically equipped parties and those with limited digital resources. In this sense, AI not only accelerates arbitration but subtly reshapes its balance of power.

Moreover, the regulatory landscape is evolving unevenly across jurisdictions. While the European Union advances a risk-based regulatory framework for AI and institutions such as CIArb provide soft-law guidance, other regions remain at the policy or strategy stage. This regulatory asymmetry creates additional complexity for international disputes involving multiple legal cultures and technological standards. Cross-border enforceability of awards may, in future, intersect with questions of algorithmic integrity and procedural transparency.

The debate, therefore, is not whether AI should be used in international arbitration — it already is. The true question is how to structure its use in a manner that enhances procedural integrity rather than dilutes it.

At the forthcoming conference Litigation and International Arbitration in the Age of AI (26 March 2026), hosted by the Global Academy for Future Governance – globally operating  consultancy organization with over 850 experts and 360 partners from 100 countries around the world, and its event’s supporters, these issues will be addressed from a multidisciplinary perspective, examining legality, authenticity, morality, trust and compliance in the digital era.

The GAFG half-day conference will particularly emphasize professional responsibility, confidentiality and data protecting whilst dwelling on judicial attitudes towards AI assisted lawyering. It will contextualize how predictive analysis and generative technologies can find their space in the courtroom, in a manner that is both ethical yet futuristic.

The future of arbitration will not be decided by technology alone. It will depend on whether we succeed in aligning innovation with the foundational values of justice. Artificial intelligence can accelerate proceedings, expand access to justice and improve analytical rigour — but only if governed by coherent ethical and regulatory frameworks grounded in human responsibility.

The age of AI is not the end of human adjudication. It is a test of its resilience.


Dr Fernando Messias, PhD is a lawyer, arbitrator and mediator based in Lisbon, Portugal. He specialises in international arbitration, international trade law, corporate strategy and competition law, with extensive experience in complex cross-border disputes and commercial negotiations.

He holds an LL.M in International Trade Law and a Postgraduate Diploma in International Arbitration, a PhD in Tourism, and a Postdoctoral qualification in Psychology. He is a Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb).

Dr Messias is the author of The Practice of Law and International Arbitration in the Age of Artificial Intelligence(Springer, 2025), where he explores the intersection between AI, law and adjudication, with particular emphasis on ethical governance and procedural integrity.


How to Imagine a World of Peace and Human Unity? By Mahboob A. Khawaja, PhD.

Ignorant and Egoistic Leaders are a Menace to Peace and World Order

Are political contradictions covered by tyranny of reason to conceal egoistic dynamics? One wonders if America claiming to be the most powerful nation is really a powerless nation afraid of its own future. Logic has its own truth and truth is one, not many. The traditional colloquium of West Europeans and the US appears on a collision course since coming of President Trump, 2nd unexpected term of office. Peace and humanity unity cannot be achieved with weapons of destruction but with intellect and visionary foresight and that looks rare on the European-American political horizon. In clear violation of international law, America kidnapped Venezuela’s leader at gunpoint and Europeans kept silent as if history was not reversed in its standing. What happened to international law and principle of non-intervention of states? Now, it is Iran to embark on for Israeli security, flow of free oil and domination.

Israel is a nuclear power (50-100 arsenals according to the media), Iran does not have the capacity to make a nuke, but it is under redlines set by America and Israel. Both need wars to distract humanity from the real issue of Palestine and the future of Gaza – a devastated strip by Israeli war machines. The Geneva Conventions and the UN Charter failed to protect 2.4 million civilian population of Gaza from crimes against humanity and genocide. America broke its obligation and promise to follow the Charter. The world is divided along ethnic, nationalistic and strategic dimensions and global humanity is its net victim. Global consciousness synthesizes an awakening call to challenges posed by the US leadership and Israeli crimes against Palestinians. Most oil producing Arab leaders are Western puppets, either they need Trump or Trump needs them to shelter wickedness and tyranny. After genocide in Gaza, Israeli would move to larger conquest as the US ambassador claims Israel has the right to all Middle East land. The cult makes its intentions and strategic plans known to occupy the Arab world.

American and Israeli leaders having unbridled ambitions and power unleash violent assumptions of hatred, secret intrigues and animosities and killings overwhelm the daily thinking process, a society - a nation no matter how normal claims to be, cannot function as normal beings to co-exist with their own self, the surroundings - in the human culture and make any positive contributions to human change and progress. Is the psyche of war ingrained in their DNA? God created the Heavens and Earth as a trust to fulfill all human aspirations and to flourish human generations since time immemorial. It was not meant to be bombed and destroyed by sheer ignorance and wickedness. How do We, the People of Human Conscience make these ugly and disingenuous politicians to understand and learn from history and change the course of events into peace and harmony for all of us? The quality of our intellectual consciousness is lost in the world of time and space. Israel would never honor its Oslo Peace agreement disclosed later Professor Francis Boyle and Edward Said (this author) as they advised Yasser Arafat not to sign the Clinton broker deal of peace between Israel and PLO. Vice and virtue cannot be combined in one character. Israel never stopped bombing and killing people across Gaza and West Bank- Palestine.

The Earth is a Living Entity and We, the People are its Natural Trustees

We live on earth that sustains all forms of living things, yet human ignorance and arrogance are at work to destroy the essential foundation of our own lives. The creation of Earth, Moon, the Sun and all working systems are a trust to humanity. Have We, the People, We, the Humanity honored and protected that natural trust and its obligations? In a recent article (“Conflict Beyond Reason: a dialogue to end the war is desperately needed”) https://www.uncommonthought: thisauthor narrated the truth not for geological or meteorological explanations but for the understanding of fellow human beings that the earth spins at 1670 km per hour and orbit the Sun at 107,000 km per hour. Imagine, if this spinning fails, what consequences could occur to the living beings on Earth. Think again, about the average distance of earth from moon is 93 million miles -the distance of Moon from Earth is currently 384,821 km equivalent to 0.002572 Astronomical Units -(https://www.newscientist.com/question/fastearthspin/#ixzz7C8p37S9X). If this God given system of distance between the Earth-Sun and the Earth-Moon were ever to change or slip, there will be no sign of life, human civilizations or habitats left on Earth.When nations and leaders subscribing to political absolutism start acting like God and challenge the sanctity and limits of the Laws of God; historically speaking they become an object of unthinkable natural calamities- earthquakes, wildfires, floods, deaths and destruction.

Life and wisdom are parables of human existence. Imagine! you as an intelligent being incomparable to others, and “God enrich you all that you ask for. But if you count the favors of God, never you will ye be able to count them. Verily, man is given up to injustice and ingratitude.” ( 14: 34, The Quran). To this author, a cataclysmic nature of human intellect is unleashing a highly irrational and unthinkable world of complexity to come to our consciousness destroying all progress and achievements of any human civilization on this planet. Most human intellect knows the basic imperative: “if you THINK intelligently, you could find workable remedies to human problems.”

In Search of a New World Order and Human Unity for Peace

Canons of rationality call for an urgent action to stop war between Russia-Ukraine and the ongoing instigation of war plans against Iran. To protect the mankind from further dehumanization and annihilation, People of new ideas (Idea Men) are needed to take initiatives for political change - indeed a navigational change at this critical moment: a New UNO with people’s leadership, New Global Political Systems of Governance planned and developed by the people of knowledge and integrity and rejecting Hobbesian “wars of all against all”; and producing a rational rebuttal to the war of insanity, torture, political tyranny, inept global leadership and offer a balanced new vision of a world enriched with learning knowledge of rational policy-making and decision-making, human equality, fairness, protection of life and its natural support systems, and the Universe and equal justice for all the living beings on this planet. Global leaders have no sense of accountability to learn from the Two World Wars.

Surely, We, the People could create a better and more sustainable world of today and tomorrow. A natural sense of piety and political wickedness cannot co-exist in one human character as most of the world leaders pretend to be. We must THINK and ACT outside the global box of political wickedness and cult of political allegiance to the few and sickening political minds of egoistic leadership. Time and history are not going to wait for the few insane outrages, phony statements on human deaths and destruction unless we take this challenge in its time and opportunity to make things happen for change and for the best of all mankind. American historian Harry Elmer Barnes ("Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace: A Critical Examination of the Foreign Policy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and It's Aftermath”), offered this stern warning to American politicians if the US led wars continue leading to man’s annihilation from this planet:

"If trends continue as they have during the last fifteen years, we shall soon reach this point of no return, and can only anticipate interminable wars, disguised as noble gestures for peace. Such an era could only culminate in a third world war which might well, as Arnold J. Toynbee has suggested, leave only the pygmies in remote jungles, or even the apes and ants, to carry on 'the cultural traditions' of mankind."


Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international affairs-global security, peace and conflict resolution and has spent several academic years across the Russian-Ukrainian and Central Asian regions knowing the people, diverse cultures of thinking and political governance and a keen interest in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including: Global Humanity and Remaking of Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution for the 21st Century and Beyond, Barnes and Noble Press, USA, 2025 https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/global-humanity-and-remaking-of-peace-security-and-conflict-resolution-for-the-21st-century-and-beyond-mahboob-a-khawaja/1147150197?ean=9798317619374 and We, The People in Search of Global Peace, Security and Conflict  Resolution. KDP-Amazon.com, 05/2025 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F6V6CH5W


Check Mahboob A. Khawaja, PhD. NEW eBOOK,
Wars on Humanity:
Ukraine, Palestine and the role of Global Leaders
HERE!


Unjust deportation without a country by Edoardo Moretti

There are moments in modern politics when policy stops looking like governance and begins to resemble punishment. The reported decision by the Trump administration to quietly fly nine migrants to Cameroon, a country none of them came from, is one of those moments. It is not merely controversial immigration enforcement; it is a moral question about what happens when power outruns principle.

These individuals were not violent criminals. They were not fugitives hiding from justice. Nearly all had legal protections issued by U.S. courts preventing their return to their countries of origin. Some had asylum claims still pending, grounded in fears of political persecution or discrimination because of sexual orientation. One person had spent fifteen years building a life in America. Yet, instead of due process and transparency, they were reportedly placed on a plane and sent to a nation already struggling with poverty and instability a place with which they had no personal or legal connection.

What does deportation mean when the destination is arbitrary? Immigration enforcement has always been a contentious issue in the United States. Nations have borders and governments have the right to regulate who enters and stays. But enforcement becomes something else entirely when it appears designed not to uphold law but to circumvent it. Courts exist precisely to prevent governments from acting unilaterally against vulnerable individuals. When court protections can be sidestepped through secret arrangements, the rule of law itself begins to look fragile.

The deeper concern is the precedent. If migrants can be expelled to third countries regardless of nationality or personal safety, asylum protections risk becoming symbolic rather than real. The promise of refuge, long central to America’s self-image, depends on predictable legal standards. Without them, asylum becomes a lottery controlled by shifting political winds.

Supporters of aggressive deportation policies argue that strict enforcement deters illegal migration and restores order to an overwhelmed system. That argument deserves consideration. Immigration systems must function effectively to maintain public trust. But deterrence cannot come at the expense of fundamental fairness. Sending people into unfamiliar environments where they lack language, family or legal status does not look like order; it looks like abandonment.

There is also an uncomfortable geopolitical dimension. Wealthy nations outsourcing migrants to poorer countries risks reinforcing global inequality. Cameroon did not create America’s immigration challenges. Turning struggling nations into holding zones for displaced people raises ethical questions about power, responsibility and dignity. It suggests a world where the vulnerable are shuffled across borders simply because they lack influence.

Beyond policy debates lies a human reality. Each deportation represents a life interrupted, families separated, futures rewritten overnight. The language of immigration politics often reduces individuals to statistics, but policies like this expose how easily people become invisible once labeled “removable.”

Democracies are tested not by how they treat the powerful but by how they treat those with the least voice. Transparency, accountability and adherence to legal protections are not bureaucratic obstacles; they are safeguards against injustice. When secrecy replaces openness and expediency replaces fairness, citizens should ask whether security is being pursued at the cost of national values.

Immigration policy will always provoke disagreement. But there is a line between enforcement and exclusion without conscience. Deporting people to countries they do not belong to crosses that line and forces a difficult question, if justice can be redirected so easily for the powerless, how secure is it for anyone else?


The princess of Pyongyang by Mary Long

The idea that a 13-year-old girl could soon become the political heir to one of the world’s most secretive and militarized regimes sounds almost surreal. Yet the growing visibility of Kim Ju Ae, daughter of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, has sparked intense speculation that the next chapter of North Korea’s dynastic rule may already be unfolding before our eyes. Whether this is genuine succession planning or an elaborate performance designed to confuse foreign observers remains the real question.

North Korea has always treated power as family property. Since Kim Il Sung established the state, leadership has passed through bloodline rather than ideology or merit. His son, Kim Jong Il inherited authority followed by Kim Jong Un. In that sense preparing another successor early is entirely consistent with how the regime operates. What feels unusual is not the dynasty itself but the age and gender of the supposed heir.

Kim Ju Ae’s public appearances have been carefully choreographed. She has stood beside her father at missile launches, military banquets and official ceremonies, places traditionally reserved for figures of symbolic importance. In a system where symbolism is political language, nothing happens by accident. Every photograph released by state media carries intention. Every smile, every placement, every uniformed general standing behind a child sends a signal.

But signals in North Korea are rarely straightforward. There are two competing interpretations. The first is literal, Kim Jong Un is genuinely preparing his daughter as successor. From a strategic standpoint, this makes sense. Authoritarian systems thrive on predictability within the ruling elite. By presenting an heir early, Kim may be trying to stabilize internal power structures, discouraging rivals from plotting while reassuring loyalists that continuity is guaranteed. The earlier a successor becomes familiar to the public and the military the smoother a future transition may be.

The second interpretation is far more intriguing and perhaps more believable. Kim Ju Ae may function less as an heir and more as a political shield. By showcasing a child, Kim Jong Un softens his image internationally while complicating intelligence analysis abroad. Foreign governments are left debating succession scenarios instead of focusing solely on weapons programs or strategic ambitions. The narrative shifts from missiles to family.

In this reading, the young girl becomes a carefully crafted distraction. North Korea has long mastered psychological theater, projecting mystery as a defensive strategy. Ambiguity itself becomes power. If outsiders cannot determine who will rule next, they cannot easily predict the regime’s future behavior.

There is also the domestic dimension. Displaying a daughter challenges traditional expectations without actually reforming the system. It allows Kim to appear modern while maintaining absolute control. Elevating a young female figure could signal confidence, the regime is so secure that even unconventional symbolism poses no threat.

Yet one uncomfortable reality remains. Regardless of intention the burden placed on Kim Ju Ae is enormous. A teenager is being positioned, symbolically or literally, within a political system defined by isolation, pressure and absolute authority. Whether she becomes ruler, mascot or myth, her identity is no longer her own.

So is this succession real? Perhaps partially. North Korea rarely lies outright; instead it tells half-truths wrapped in spectacle. Kim Ju Ae may indeed represent the future but not necessarily the immediate one. For now she serves another purpose, reminding the world that in Pyongyang politics is theater and the script is written solely by the man directing the stage.


Fika bonding! #117 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Fika is a state of mind and an important part of Swedish culture. It means making time for friends and colleagues to share a cup of coffee and a little something to eat.

For more Fika bonding!, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


Rudolf Steiner: The Laws of Nature by Rene Wadlow

Man is not a being who stands still; he is a being in the process of becoming.  The more he enables himself to become, the more he fulfils his true mission  - Rudolf Steiner-

Rudolf Steiner, whose birth anniversary we mark on 25 February, was for many years prior to World War I, a leader of the German branch of the Theosophical Society.  One of his best known books is titled Theosophy and the two pillar's of Steiner's approach are in common with other  theosophical writers: the law of karma and evolution through the workings of spiritual energy.  For Steiner karma and spiritual energy , which he called love, are the basic laws of Nature.

In 1913, Steiner left the Theosophical Society finding that its emphasis on Hindu cultural expression of karma and evolution through multiple reincarnations did not fit the German cultural milieu.  He tried to express the same two concepts in a more German style drawing on the writings of Goethe and the German Romantics.  He called his approach Anthroposophy (knowledge of man) rather than Theosophy (knowledge of the Theos which is often  called God).  In both systems, it is the laws of Nature working themselves out in human life which is what knowledge is about.

For Steiner karma - the fact that every action - and thought is an action - produces an impact and will have consequences.  However, without training and close observation  one does not see karma working.  To see karma in operation requires an insight into the working of subtle energies.  He outlines his views in his basic book: Knowledge of Higher Worlds. How is it attained?

Steiner believed that he saw subtle energies at work - saw and not just sensed.  If one sees subtle energies, then one sees how karma impacts individual lives but also the life of a nation.  Steiner stressed that there was a "national soul" and that the action of a country would have long-range consequences such as the First World War which he had experienced.

With a view of the workings of subtle energies, one understands the working of these energies both in the lives of people but also plants, trees and animals.  Thus Steiner also turned his attention to agriculture and the ways that subtle energies such as the phases of the Moon could influence the growth of plants.

For Steiner, these subtle energies that structured the evolution of humans and nature, he called love.  "Love is the creative force in the world".  Within the individual, love creates devotion and selfless veneration.  "Only that which I love will reveal itself to me, and every revelation must fill me with gratitude, for each one makes me inwardly the richer."  This love will gradually widen its love so that it embraces all existence.

There are two main legacies of Rudolf Steiner:

 1) Education with the Steiner or Waldorf schools and the related Camphill educational communities for the mentally retarded or mentally ill

 2) Agriculture with the ‘biodynamic agriculture’, a forerunner of the growing movement for ecologically-sound agriculture.

There are some 500 Steiner schools and their number keeps expanding. It is the largest non-religious private school movement in the world. The Camphill communities for the mentally-retarded were developed by Steiner teachers who left Austria and Germany in the late 1930s for England. Some were Jews, others were under pressure as the Nazi government had closed all the Steiner schools.  As there was already a well developed private school tradition in England (even if they are called ‘public schools’) the Steiner people turned to caring for the mentally retarded as there was little creative work with the mentally handicapped in England. After the Second World War, the Camphill movement then expanded to other countries in Europe, the USA and Israel.

Steiner gave the name ‘biodynamic’ to his proposed methods of agriculture. For  Steiner, the agricultural techniques proposed were based on his supra-sensitive knowledge of the soul forces operative in the soil, plant and animal world. Biodynamic agriculture is increasingly important as an alternative to chemically-dominated farming in Europe and North America and has spread to Australia and New Zealand.  There are yearly courses for farm-related persons given at the Goetheanum in Switzerland, the headquarters of the Steiner work.  There is a large use of astrology and cycles of the moon in biodynamic agriculture, again based on Steiner’s understanding of the influence of the moon and planets upon life on earth.

As with other aspects of the Steiner-related work in education or health, there is the problem of the use of such techniques by people who have no special access to the spirit world. While planting or harvesting related to the phases of the moon is found in many cultures, biodynamic agriculture is more complex and can only be judged by most by the results, not by independent observation of nature spirits and the soul of plants.

Steiner was also concerned with social reform but stressed that one needed a positive view of the future and not a criticism of the present. Steiner held that what is needed in times of crisis is not to harbour  many  thoughts about the surrounding world because such thoughts only strengthen the disorder of the outward world, but one should use meditation — an inner will-permeated work to bring harmony and equilibrium.  Nevertheless, Steiner was well conscious of events of the times — the break up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in which he was born (in what is today Croatia) and the changes in Germany where he had spent most of his working life.  Moreover, in 1922, the first Goetheanum, which was built of wood and whose style represented Steiner’s spiritual insights was completely destroyed by fire, probably by Right-wing German thugs. Thus, he turned his attention to proposals for the reconstruction of society, in particular banking as finance and monetary policy was at the heart of the crisis.

Today, there is a need felt by many that there is disorder in the banking and finance sectors.  There are calls for more government regulation as well as wild conspiracy theories that fly about. While Steiner’s writings are not a blueprint for reforms today, they are an example of spiritual insights being applied to a key ‘material’ question.  We can be inspired by Rudolf Steiner’s efforts even as we develop other ideas and other styles of presentation.

Notes

1. For a revised PhD thesis written by an outsider to the Steiner work see. Geoffrey Ahern Sun at Midnight. The Rudolf Steiner Movement and the Western Esoteric Tradition (Wellingborough: The Aquarian Press, 1984, 256pp.)

From someone writing from within the Steiner movement but published by the same publisher see Bernard Nesfield-Cookson. Rudolf Steiner’s Vision of Love (Wellingborough. The Aquarian Press, 1983,  350pp.)

 ********************************

Rene Wadlow, President, Association of World Citizens


Removing pictures of chains doesn’t mean that you erase history by Timothy Davies

History is rarely comfortable. It is jagged, inconvenient and often humiliating to the myths nations tell about themselves. That is precisely why attempts to soften it, sanitize it or selectively erase it are so dangerous. This week, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ordered the National Park Service to restore exhibits on slavery that had been removed from the former Philadelphia home of George Washington. The ruling was not merely about museum displays. It was about whether truth itself still holds value in American public life.

The removal of exhibits addressing slavery from a site connected to Washington was no accident of bureaucratic oversight. It was a political act. It reflected a broader movement determined to reshape American history into a simplified patriotic narrative where heroes remain spotless and the nation’s founding sins fade into silence. The goal is not historical debate; it is historical amnesia.

George Washington, like many founders, embodied contradiction. He led a revolution grounded in liberty while enslaving human beings. A mature democracy confronts such complexity honestly. It does not hide it behind polished portraits and selective storytelling. To present Washington only as a symbol of freedom while removing the reality of slavery is not education, it is propaganda.

What makes this moment especially troubling is the growing willingness among certain political factions to treat history as a battlefield rather than a shared record. Museums, classrooms and national parks are increasingly pressured to promote comfort over accuracy. The past is being curated not to inform citizens but to reassure them. That reassurance comes at a cost, ignorance.

The attempt to erase discussions of slavery from Washington’s Philadelphia residence carries a symbolic weight. Philadelphia is not just another historic city; it represents the birthplace of American ideals. Removing slavery from that narrative suggests those ideals can exist untouched by injustice. Yet the truth is the opposite. The American story gains meaning precisely because freedom was incomplete, contested, and often denied.

When governments interfere with historical interpretation, they cross a dangerous line. Democracies rely on informed citizens capable of grappling with difficult truths. Authoritarian impulses, by contrast, thrive on simplified narratives. They replace complexity with slogans and replace scholarship with ideology. History becomes a loyalty test rather than an exploration.

The federal judge’s order to restore the exhibits serves as a reminder that institutions still matter. Courts can still act as guardrails against political efforts to manipulate public memory. But the fact that such intervention was necessary should alarm anyone who values intellectual honesty. Cultural institutions should not require judicial rescue to tell factual history.

Supporters of historical sanitization often claim they are protecting national pride. But pride built on denial is fragile. True patriotism does not fear the past; it learns from it. A country confident in its principles can acknowledge wrongdoing without collapsing into self-hatred. Indeed, confronting injustice is what allows societies to grow stronger.

The deeper issue extends beyond one exhibit or one administration. It reflects an ongoing struggle over who controls the national narrative. Will history belong to historians, educators, and evidence? Or will it be molded by political movements seeking validation rather than understanding?

Erasing slavery from historical spaces does not change what happened. It only changes what future generations are allowed to know. And ignorance is never neutral. It shapes voters, citizens and leaders who may repeat mistakes because they were never taught to recognize them.

The judge’s decision restores more than museum panels. It restores a principle: that history is not a branding exercise. It is a reckoning. Nations, like individuals, cannot mature without confronting their contradictions.

America’s strength has always rested on its capacity for self-examination. Attempts to whitewash the past weaken that strength. The question now is whether this ruling marks a tu


The quiet exodus from the American dream by Virginia Robertson

For generations the United States stood as the ultimate destination, a place where ambition met opportunity, where reinvention was not just...