Tik Tok CEO Shou Zi Chew Responds To The Supreme Court Ruling

The US Supreme Court has shown support for the banning of Tik Tok. Based on the First Amendment this could be considered a violation of free speech and press. The legislation has to pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Tik Tok CEO Shou Zi Chew made a video response to the US Supreme Court. The response was more so directed at users. Chew assured Tik Tok users that an agreement can be reached with the US government. The case for the ban is that Tik Tok poses a national security risk related to data. There is no evidence that the CCP is using Tik Tok for espionage. If that was the actual concern, then Google, X, and Meta should be investigated. A bias exists against Tik Tok, because it is a Chinese company. The US government is attempting censorship on the basis of national security. If the Tik Tok ban happens, then a number of social media platforms could be at risk. Shou Zi Chew believes he persuade the in coming Trump administration to shift policy. Considering Trump's anti-China rhetoric, this seems unlikely. Even if a presidential veto is done it could be overridden. Social media has been under attack since the late 2010s. The attempts to ban Tik Tok is an extension of a growing movement to control access to information. 

 

Julian Assange Set To Be Released From Prison

 

The attempts of the US governments persecution of Julian Assange could be coming to an end. The plea deal allows 17 changes against Assange related to espionage to be dropped. Part of the plea deal is that Assange pleads guilty to one charge. The case shows that there is no evidence he was conducting espionage or working on the behalf of a foreign power. Assange is an Australian citizen and the US criminal charges against him would have legal implications with his home country. Prime Minister  Anthony Albanese condemned the US attempt to have him extradited.  Julian Assange has done nothing criminal and was forced into Belmarsh Prison. While incarcerated in the UK Assange was put into solitary confinement. There is enough evidence to show his basic human rights were violated. The Espionage Act charge does not hold. What Assange released on Wikileaks were diplomatic cables. These were not classified documents. A diplomatic cable would not be sensitive information revealing national security related  intelligence.  Chelsea Manning has access to classified documents, not Assange. Wikileaks was able to reveal the war crimes of the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. The extent of murder and violence was largely censored in American mainstream media.  There have not been criminal charges of officials in the Bush or Obama administration related to those crimes. As Assange returns to Australia a growing concern about his safety is felt. Julian Assange has suffered mental and physical health decline related to his imprisonment. It might take a longtime for him to recover from 11 years of being a political prisoner. His release was a triumph for advocates of free press and independent journalism. 

The Attempts To Ban Tik Tok

 

Governments are attempting to ban Tik Tok . The popular social media platform has been accused of disinformation and being a national security risk. These claims are being made based on anti-China sentiment. A number of countries are attempting to ban the application based on a xenophobic nationalism. The European Union has made a ban on Tik Tok to apply to staff devices. This applies to the European Parliament, European Commission, and and EU Council. The measure is unnecessary considering the only application that should be used in offices are for work , not entertainment. France, Canada, Belgium, Pakistan, Nepal, and Australia have adopted similar policies. The US motivation for the ban is because it does not want Chinese competition in the technology sector and wants censorship. Video sharing applications expose concerns that are not discussed by the mainstream media or government. While it is used mostly for frivolous purposes, videos show abuses. Israel's human rights violations and war crimes in Gaza have been exposed on various platforms. The Tik Tok ban is a test to introduce censorship on multiple platforms. The public would never accept this, so false justifications are made. Disinformation, preventing public disturbance, and national security are the common arguments. Intelligence agencies and law enforcement have a good amount of resources to deal with matters of espionage. This is not about protect, rather undermining press and free speech. Afghanistan also imposed a ban on Tik Tok on the basis it was protecting the youth. Governments both authoritarian and democratic want to prevent the public from having independent thought. More social media platforms and video sharing sites could be a target of censorship.     

President Erdogan Wins Another Five Year Term

 

President Erdogan was reelected president of Turkey. Despite the challenges from the earthquake and the civil war in Syria. What the recent developments show is that Erdogan will be a longtime presence in Turkish politics. The concern for Syrian refugees is being deported back to a war torn nation. Kurds still face considerable discrimination and the Erdogan administration has been known to have an anti-Kurdish sentiment. The emphasis on a conservative Islamic society, makes some concerned about the restriction of freedoms. Press freedom has been reduce for the past decade. Islamic nationalism is not enough to solve Turkey's domestic concerns. The earthquakes caused considerable damage and homelessness was a result of that. Infrastructure and economic stabilization should be priorities. Turkey is both a NATO member and has good relations with the Russian Federation. President Erdogan's policy is mediation as a solution to the Russia-Ukraine War. The direction of Turkey's foreign policy has made him a major international figure. Arabs of the Middle East do have a more pressing matter related to President Recep Erdogan's reelection. New Ottomanism shows that Turkey wants to have more influence in the Gulf region. This will not just be in the Middle East, but in North and East Africa. The new Turkish nationalism comes with a religious fervor and refusal to acknowledge past history. Turkey refuses to come to terms with the Armenian genocide. Turkey has long sought to be a part of the European Union, but authoritarian policies in the country prevent that. Considering disagreements related to the recognition of Cyprus and Sweden's entry into NATO EU membership remains stalled. President Erdogan is seeking more power both domestically and on the international stage. 

Jiang Zemin Criticizes The Model of Reporting

 

President Jiang Zemin's leadership further cemented China's transition  to a free market in the  1990s.Economic liberalization did not produce the reforms that some desired. The Chinese Communist Party remained the only political force in the People's Republic of China. Maoism was phased out by the 1980s.  President Zemin in this rare video criticizes a journalist for not understanding the nature of the system. He implies that the questions asked do not consider the complexities of China politics and government. Zemin explains that it is important for a journalist to be knowledgeable and have greater understanding of certain situations. The model of modern reporting is to repeat a certain narrative. The problem with this is that it can normalize bias, without examining other perspectives. While Jiang Zemin's point is valid, but that does not negate the fact the government is a one party state. The absence of free press or political opposition make it difficult for journalism to evolve. The footage demonstrates how leaders in China try to deflect the authoritarian nature of the regime. The modern model of reporting does have flaws, which abusive governments can use to their advantage. They can cite unfair reporting as a foreign plot or disinformation to restrict free speech. Under Zemin's administration the urban-rural wealth gap grew and state owned enterprises closed. Few in China seriously criticized or challenged him on policy.    

The 2022 Qatar World Cup Controversy

 

A growing controversy has emerged about Qatar hosting the FIFA World Cup. The country has been known to put restrictions on press freedom, women's rights, and discriminates against those of the LGBTQ community. Labor practices have been known to endanger workers and leave them with low pay. Migrant labor was used to construct the stadium required for the World Cup. Workers from South Asia and Africa were major contributors to making the event possible. Qatar did not have a large enough labor force to build a stadium with migrant worker help. Qatar is a monarchy ruled by King Tamim bin Al Thani who took over after his father's abdication in 2013. King Tamim has been a major force in getting his kingdom to host international sporting events. Exposing  Qatar's human rights abuses is important, but it should not be ignored that France, the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States still hold diplomatic relations with the kingdom. The European countries do not have a perfect human rights record and at times aid Qatar in the destabilization of other Arab states. Qatar has assisted  a number of armed groups and terrorists in Syria and Libya. Despite this information, that will not stop soccer fans from watching or going to Qatar. Corruption might actually go deeper with accusations of Qatar rigging the host selection process. Professional football is a major business and it is a sport that Qatar wants more influence. The kingdom has protection by the West, because follows particular policies related to Middle East affairs. The governments of North America and Europe have little credibility lecturing about human rights when they have invaded Global South nations. Only human rights activists have the credibility to do so. Trying to raise awareness is difficult with a football fandom,  which does not want to think of their sport contributing to human rights abuses.    

President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Wants To Extends His Rule

 

President Teodoro Obiang Nguema is planning on  extending  his rule. Since 1979 he as ruled Equatorial Guinea. Only two presidents have held office and President Nguema came to power through a coup. Equatorial Guinea gained its independence from Spain in 1968. The first president was Nguema's uncle Francisco Macias Nguema. The country has been under the rule of one family for 43 years. The elections that have happened since have been questioned by international observers. Equatorial Guinea has the benefit of oil reserves and production. Although it oil wealth is known, the population still remains in poverty. Political repression and limited press freedom have left the public frustrated. Nepotism has become another concern as his son might be a potential successor. The political opposition does not have the ability to remove him from office. Simultaneously, the demand for non-Russian oil puts President Nguema in a stronger position. Casting a ballot means little in a regime that is authoritarian, but has democratic institutions. Equatorial Guinea closed its borders ahead of elections. The reason stated by the government was to prevent destabilization from mercenaries or foreign powers.  Closing the border during elections harms commerce which Cameroon, Chad, and Gabon are dependent on. The measure is not targeted at merchants, rather it is designed to control the movement of citizens of Equatorial Guinea. Those who flee the country could spread information about abuses to the world.  Equatorial Guinea is a major force in the Central African Economic and Monetary Community. Over the decades there has been significant investment in infrastructure. However, the limited amounts of wealth distribution have undermined that accomplishment. Many have suspected that most of the profits from oil have gone to enriching the Nguema family. All the accusations of corruption the government has denied. The list of crimes has become more extensive over the years. Torture and violence by the state security apparatus has occurred. This makes protest or armed uprising impossible to do in Equatorial Guinea.    

The End of The Disinformation Governance Board

 

The Department of Homeland Security launched the Disinformation Governance Board. This new agency generated a huge amount of controversy. The agency had the potential to damage free press and free expression. The DGB appears to be shutting down after much criticism from civil liberties organizations. The Department of Homeland Security has been criticized ever since its creation during the Bush administration. The Disinformation Governance Board is not about stopping propaganda or the spread of fake news. The objective is to have the public agree upon one narrative and stop dissent. Nina Jankowicz was head of the DGB until she announced her resignation. Her appointment to the agency also created concern. She has referred to herself as a disinformation expert. The writer and researcher has no background in journalism. Being appointed to a disinformation agency overseeing media makes that even more precarious. A government agency should not determine what the truth is. Nor should it stop individuals from seeking out information. The Disinformation Governance Board could have enabled the government to hinder a citizen's ability to exercise free speech. For now, it is dissolved yet more agencies could be created that would threaten basic rights. The end of this agency was for the best considering the amount of legal challenges that would be directed at it. Every media and news organization could have been threatened by an agency under  the Department of Homeland Security. Many activists and  human rights advocates should seek the abolition of the DHS. The creation of such an department could pose a serious danger to the rights of American citizens in  the US Constitution.    

Russia Today Gets Banned In The EU and RT America Shuts Down

 

The Russian state owned international news network is being banned in the European Union. RT America has shut down after ten years in operation. The American staff was dismissed and programs cancelled. The claim is that RT was being used as a platform for spreading disinformation. The motivation behind this ban is due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The channel does provide a Russian perspective, but is also critical of EU and US foreign policy. The channel has produced documentaries regrading the Iraq War and The Afghan War. The ban on media based on its country of origin is more like xenophobia rather than a concern about disinformation. This goes against the values of press freedom and free speech. Viewers should have the right to access multiple sources of information no matter which country it originates from. The purpose of fact checkers is to expose false information. Prohibiting RT is more of a political gesture to express anger with the Russian Federation. Censorship is a threat to free press and this will reverberate. BBC and Voice of America are restricted in Russia. These were steps in retaliation for the RT restrictions .   Disinformation is being used as an excuse for censorship. Ultimately, the consumers of news around the world are put at a disadvantage. With few sources of information,  it becomes difficult to make sense of  of world events. RT still remains on  Facebook and Youtube. 

Nigeria Bans Twitter

 

Nigeria has banned Twitter. The popular social media site can no longer be accessed by Nigerian citizens. This comes as a blow to people attempting to organize politically or get involved in activism. The ban was put in place when President Muhammadu Buhari's tweet was deleted. The president stated punishment would come to secessionists in the southeast of the country. Twitter  deleted this post causing much anger in the government. The statement he wrote referenced the Nigerian Civil War and Biafra conflict. He claimed those resisting do not understand the past hardship Those Buhari claimed continue insurrection will be treated to language they can understand. The message was interpreted as an attempt to instigate violence. The tweet can be considered a threat. Social media platforms should not be involved in censorship of world leaders. Nor should a government have the power to ban a social media platform. Other sites such as Facebook could also be targeted. Twitter must have a clear policy in terms of bans or the deletion of  tweets. Twitter has done censorship of its own, using disinformation as a justification. The irony is that the social media platform is being banned. Social media and the internet has keeps free speech alive, but there are intense efforts to increase online censorship. Even though Twitter is banned in Nigeria, there is a method to counter it. VPN (virtual  private network )  can allow access by using other servers around the world. Nigerians will not fully cut off from the internet or social media platforms. The ban has also sparked condemnation form the Nigerian Bar Association. Legal action may be taken to reverse the ban. 

Protests Break Out in Thailand

 

Protests have broken out with Thai citizens demanding more protection of rights and accountability in government.  There is a difference in this developing movement. The monarchy appears to getting criticism and constitutional reform may be an objective. The military and monarchy have long been the stable force in Thai government. The structure by nature has been repressive  cracking down on press freedom and basic human rights. Since the military coup in 2014, Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha has been leading Thailand with little to show in terms of reform. The protests he states are endangering the security of the nation. The demand for constitutional reform will not go away as long as the youth remain dissatisfied. The alliance between the military and monarchy has been a hinderance to the political participation of the average Thai. Calls are growing for a general strike. Thailand has had coups before and mass political unrest. Prime Minister Chan-ocha may not be defeated so easily as long as the military supports him. He has pledged his loyalty to the monarchy and so far that collaboration has not been broken. Student groups have become more politically active organizing reform rallies. The demands include ending military influence in politics, a new constitution, ending royal offices, and dismantling the royal guards.  

Law Enforcement, Oppression, and The Abuses of The US Government

The murder of George Floyd has sparked demonstrations across the United States. The response from the Trump administration has been hostile. The White House has threatened to use  the Insurrection Act and mobilize the armed forces against the protesters. The argument has been that it is not directed at peaceful demonstrators, rather looters and members of Antifa. There is not a specific number of how many people are engaging in looting or crime. Antifa really is not an organized movement. It is a small association of anti-fascist leftists who demonstrate. Their numbers are not large enough to be a considerable security issue. The fixation on looters and Antifa are nothing more than excuses to use violence against protesters. The real danger is the military and law enforcement will be used to kill large groups of unarmed citizens on the orders of President Trump. So far the situation has not escalated to that degree. The United States was never a democratic society. The nation was built on the enslavement of African Americans, who were considered property. The working class has never had real representation. The US Constitution has been nothing more than an ignored document, becoming weaker every passing presidential administration. The obsession with security, terrorism, and militarization have culminated in the current crisis. Racial hatred is part of America's ideology, that few citizens are willing to admit. The land that white Americans call theirs once belonged to thriving Indian American civilizations. The US  became a powerful nation through genocide, slavery, and avarice. The violent legacy has reached a critical point. The illusion of freedom, justice, and a stable republic has been exposed. The US could  fall into a state of martial law and authoritarianism. Law enforcement plays an essential role in maintaining a power structure and regime. The nature of oppression in America is that violence and  abuse is presented as a cause for good or public safety . The US government has never been interested in protecting the lives, well being, or rights of its citizens. The violence, police brutality, and murder will continued to be condoned by the state. Law enforcement is the instrument in which an abusive government can hold power. 

        Law enforcement is not about protecting the public or serving communities. Its real function is to ensure that a ruling elite can inflict violence upon the population when needed. The police in America evolved from slave patrols in the 18th and 19th centuries. This was not only designed to prevent the enslaved from escaping, rather to control every aspect of their life. Law enforcement was also used to crush strikes and labor disputes. The Haymarket Square incident in 1886 saw police violence directed at labor activists in Chicago. A bomb was thrown, which sparked a riot. Eight anarchists were charged, but it still remains a mystery who was actually responsible. When emancipation came and African Americans were no longer in bondage,  a new system was created to restrict freedom. The Jim Crow laws were designed to segregate, control, and monitor the African American population. This would not have been possible without law enforcement using violence to enforce a racial caste system. During the civil rights movement activist not only had to worry about hate groups such as the Klu Klux Klan or the American Nazi Party. The biggest threat was law enforcement in both the south and north of  America. Police were absent when white mobs attacked non-violent protesters. Police were sometimes members of the Klu Klux Klan. Law enforcement was not interested in stopping white supremacist vigilantes or  terrorists. The main objective was ensuring the political and social status quo. Today, the police are doing repeating the same behavior.

Selma, Alabama during what would be known as bloody Sunday (1965).

Police firing into the crowd during the Haymarket incident.

Police attack unarmed  protesters during the George Floyd demonstrations.

Journalists and reporters are no longer safe. There have been cases in which reporters have been arrested simply by covering the protests by police. No charges were given and there was no indication reporting was inciting a disturbance. Excuses are used as means of improving public image of a corrupt institution. The claim that it is only a few untrained or  malevolent officers that are responsible for brutality and murder lacks cogency. At some point the majority have engaged in abusive or questionable behavior. The reason that they are more willing to do this to non-white citizens and the poor is because the ability to fight back is limited. Law enforcement tactics are different compared to the types used in the inner city or a suburb. The inner city is rigidly controlled and the residents of the suburbs are given the illusion of security.  Law enforcement is a network of corruption protected by strong police unions including the courts. Any person who likes human rights, freedom, or justice would not support the police. Crime fighting is not their true function if it has gradually increased. Mass shootings, far-right extremist organizations, and hate crimes are on the rise, while law enforcement does not aggressively tackle these issues. Police officers may also be part of certain extremist groups. The exact number is not known, which further complicates the situation.Police will never side with the people. The attempts of some police departments to show solidarity with protesters is nothing more than calculated public relations stunts. Fundamentally, police departments will not change. The only way this can happen is through legislation from the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Democratic and Republican Party will take no such steps seeing as if there were mass insurrection nationwide, police and  the National Guard would be deployed. The social and political conditions in America are rapidly deteriorating to a point in which there may be escalated civil unrest. Unrest gives justification for advocates of authoritarianism to impose limits on basic rights and undermine or eliminate the US Constitution. Since the protests began law enforcement has consistently violated the freedom of assembly and free press. Americans now are seeing the vicious nature of oppression documented in video and eye witness accounts.
        The United States justifies oppression and the elimination of dissent by saying it is for public safety. Since the 9/11 attacks of 2001, American society has become more fixated on security and militarization. The creation of ICE, which continues to abuse detained immigrants with little resistance from congress or the senate. The Patriot Act and National Defense Authorization Act has given the government too much power to violate the rights of  American citizens. The only reason oppression remains in place is by a network of police, intelligence, and federal agencies. The FBI and CIA have been known to spy on a number of protest movements. The NSA continues to monitor US citizens with no criminal record. This phenomenon has been referred to as the deep state. It is not what Trumpist Republicans think it is. Their view is that there is a liberal or globalist conspiracy orchestrating all opposition to them. The military industrial complex and the neoconservative political faction are managers of the deep state. The Trump administration has allied with this political faction and  the results are now being seen in domestic policy. President Trump who threatened to use force on protesters by means of the Insurrection Act, who have no problem murdering them if necessary. The president could be calculating how to induce a military coup with some generals who are loyal to him. Seeing as genuine leftist opposition is weak or non-existent the task would be simple. The response to anti- lockdown protests was different, because it consisted of groups supportive of the administration. Christian fundamentalists, anti-vaccine advocates, and far-right conspiracy theorists were the groups active. President Trump has barriers stopping him from inflicting violence, however supporters can be mobilized. The most violent of these are white nationalists  and second amendment advocates who would be willing to attack protesters. President Trump stated that "when the looting starts the shooting starts" in a Twitter post. He vowed to defend second amendment rights, which was a subtle message to supporters to arm themselves. The Bible photo stunt in which  protesters were forcibly removed from the area was a message to the Christian fundamentalists. Fight against social and political change. Instigating enough anger among these groups make them soldiers in a possible war. The fear is that if Trump loses the presidency,  these supporters will be involved in post-election violence. 

Attorney William Barr may have ordered the forced removal of protesters for the photo op.  

Trump won the presidency by appealing to white America's racism and frustration over the economy. 

The anti-lockdown protesters were never attacked by the police. 

This is common in certain African and Asian countries. Power transition at times is not always accepted. Conservatives have been mostly supportive of Trump's actions so far, with few opposing voices. Silence has become nothing more than a nod of approval. The United States has operated under some form oppression during its 200 year history. From slavery, segregation, and networks of reservations  use to intern the original inhabitants, liberty was nothing more than a fantasy. During the 1930s  some Americans even adopted fascism as a political solution. The American Nazi Party and the Silver Legion of America were the two most notable fascist organizations in the United States. When war broke out in 1941 these organizations membership  declined and disbanded. The call for law and order is coded language for establishing a white nationalist regime under an authoritarian political system. Such a model  would resemble Apartheid South Africa. The changing demographics of the US make whites more willing to accept far-right extremist leaders. Anyone who is not  white or shares their ideology is deemed an enemy. African Americans, Muslims, and immigrants have become targets. The corporate and business elite also have significant investment in oppression. This is related to private prisons. The United States continues to imprison a significant number of people for non-violent drug related offenses. The war on drugs gave birth to the prison industrial complex and targeted African Americans at a time, when segregation was disappearing. The decriminalization of certain drugs such a marijuana can reverse this. The problem is that the prison industrial complex has expanded to include immigrant detainment and roles in fighting terrorism. The US continues to build more prisons not to combat crime, but for the sake of profit and to subjugate the population. When economic and social conditions become more unbearable there will be revolts. Having a network of prisons makes it easier to stop demonstrations, uprisings, or deposing the establishment. President Trump by attempting to designate Antifa as a terrorist organization is setting a path to criminalizing any form of disagreement with the government as criminal. The radical left he claims is a threat to security. The network of prisons, police, and government are the biggest threat to the well being of people living in the United States. 

           The current wave of state violence, should be no surprise considering the US government has a long history of abuse. For decades the power of the executive branch has been immensely expanded. The repercussions of this have been that the US has adopted a law enforcement mentality in foreign affairs. It presents itself as a global enforcer of order smashing any country that dares to object. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen have been subject to aggression by the United States. If the US government is willing to do that to other nations,  the violence by police would be an inevitable consequence. US leaders are more interested in the expansion of  political and police power, rather than the protection of basic human rights. Significant police reform has not progressed since Baltimore or Ferguson incidents. The rise of the imperial presidency, violation of human rights, and police brutality shows that the US government is at war with its own people. American power on the international stage has faced  a decline. Economic and domestic strains, make the elite more fearful about a mass movement against them. To cover their criminal acts and repression scapegoats must be designated to distract the population. China and Russia  fill this function as the justification for the expansion of executive power and the global policing role. Both conservative and centre-left political figures blame these two countries for America's challenges. Susan Rice suggested when appearing on MSNBC that Russia may attempt to manipulate the protests or possibly infiltrate them. Evidence of foreign interference in the George Floyd does not exist. The demonstrations are indigenous and a natural reaction to racism .  Without an imagined existential threat, the US could no longer make an excuse for the military industrial complex and a world policing role. The conservative and liberal political factions have embraced the world policing role since the collapse of the Soviet Union. No matter which party the state of  permanent warfare continues. During periods of war the populace is more likely to accept reduction  in freedoms or more policing  for the idea of feeling safe. The presidency has been able to declare war with formal declarations from congress, enabling government abuse. The global policing  policy has been applied to domestic affairs. 

       The majority of American still hold on to the notion that law enforcement is a positive force in society. The facts demonstrate that it is a representation of a corrupt and decaying system. Their sole function exists to enable a power structure to inflict violence against people who protest or object to government policy. The police are present to enforce a racial hierarchy that has been present since America's founding. Simultaneously, the political status quo must be maintained. The act of protest or dissent is condemned by law enforcement as a disturbance or criminal act. There is an open hostility directed at activists or anyone who openly criticizes police practices. If there is to be fascist or totalitarian regime established in America the police will be a major part of its success. The United States may be getting close to a coup or civil war. The infiltration of hate groups and white nationalists into the military as well as police has been known for sometime. Under a president that is sympathetic to their beliefs a coup and suspension of the US Constitution could be possible. The United States now faces it greatest test. The republic has become fragile under racism, corporate greed, and a national security state. The question remains can such ills be defeated. Under current leadership they cannot. As the conservative movement becomes more extreme and the power of the executive branch grows, sociopolitical  problems are exacerbated. The only solution is an ambitious restructuring of various American institutions. If the White House, congress, and senate are not willing to do this demonstrations will not remain peaceful. Unconventional participation is used when  other methods such as voting, working on political campaigns, or making donations have become ineffective. The Democratic and Republican Party are dependent on corporate donors, which means dramatic change cannot happen under such a financial  condition. If law enforcement is not restrained or regulated people will begin to revolt. To prevent cycles of  violence there needs to be federal oversight of police departments across the country. The freedom of assembly and press must be protected from law enforcement repression. If nothing is done, then the US may cease being a functioning nation-state.  

Prime Minister Abiy Amed Wins The Nobel Peace Prize

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Amed has won the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize for his effort to bring about a solution with the conflict with Eritrea. The two countries have been in long disputes and Eritrea fought a  war of independence from Ethiopia.  Prime Minister Abiy Amed's efforts should be seen as an example to various world leaders in regards to why diplomacy works. There still remains much to be done in East Africa. Ethiopia struggles with ethnic conflict and the discrimination of the Oromo peoples cannot be ignored. The question of wider political freedoms and reducing restrictions on the press should be major priorities. Ethnic conflict and war can easily derail progress, which must be reduced at all costs. Ethiopia and Eritrea must enhance economic and political cooperation for the sake of regional stability.Other African nations can contribute by acting as mediators in disputes. The conflict and destabilization in Somalia could also pose a problem as well as Kenya's involvement. Prime Minister Abiy Amed has accomplished much in a short period,but it is important to keep the political momentum going. Part of this program must include domestic and foreign policy reforms.