Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Internship Program for Undergraduate/Graduate Students 2018 – Rome, ITALY

Application Deadline: 31st December 2017

Eligible Countries: All

To Be Taken At (Country): Rome, Italy

About the Award: The Internship Programme is a learning opportunity aiming to attract talented young women and men who are strongly motivated to share their new perspectives, innovative ideas and latest research experience in FAO’s domains. The programme provides selected students, enrolled in an under-graduate, graduate or post-graduate degree programme or recent graduates with the opportunity to supplement, their academic knowledge with a practical work assignments in a field related to the work of FAO. This will enable them to gain a better understanding of FAO’s mandate and programmes. At the same time, the Programme provides FAO with the assistance of qualified individuals specializing in relevant fields in connection to FAO Strategic Objectives and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Type: Internship

Eligibility: 

• Enrolled in an under-graduate, graduate degree programme in a bona fide (i.e. listed in the IAU/UNESCO data base) educational institution at the time of application, or recent graduates. Applicants pursuing their studies in a country where higher education is not divided into under-graduate and graduate stages must have completed at least three years of full-time studies towards the completion of a degree. Candidates must specialize in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.
• Working knowledge of at least one FAO official language (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian or Spanish). Knowledge of a second FAO official language will be considered an asset. Only language proficiency certificates from UN accredited external providers and/or FAO language official examinations (LPE, ILE, LRT) will be accepted as proof of the level of knowledge of languages indicated in the online applications.
• Be nationals of FAO Member Nations
• Candidates should be aged between 21 and 30.
• Candidates should be able to adapt to an international multicultural environment, have good communication skills and be knowledgeable in the use of basic computer programmes.
• Candidates with family members (defined as brother, sister, mother or father) employed by FAO under any type of contractual arrangement are not be eligible for the Internship Programme.
• Candidates should have appropriate residence or immigration status in the country of assignment.

FAO Core Competencies:

• Results Focus
• Teamwork
• Communication
• Building Effective Relationships
• Knowledge Sharing and Continuous Improvement

Technical/Functional Skills: Relevant academic experience in one of the fields of the Organization.

Selection Criteria: Candidates may be assigned in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.

Number of Awards: Various

Duration of Program: 3 months to 11 months

How to Apply: 

• To apply, visit the iRecruitment website at http://www.fao.org/employment/irecruitment-access/en/ and complete your online profile.
• Only applications received through iRecruitment will be considered.
• Candidates are requested to attach a letter of motivation and the evidence of attendance in a recognised university.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: FAO

Important Notes: Please note that all candidates should adhere to FAO Values of Commitment to FAO, Respect for All and Integrity and Transparency

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Volunteer Program 2018 – Rome, Italy

Application Deadline: 31st December 2017

Eligible Countries: All

To Be Taken At (Country): FAO Headquarters in Rome, Italy

About the Award: The FAO Regular Volunteer Programme provides opportunities for individuals to contribute their volunteer actions, where suitable, to support the work of FAO in connection to FAO Strategic Objectives and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

The volunteer may be assigned in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.

The volunteer will perform the functions specified in the Terms of Reference (TOR) prepared by the hiring office before the beginning of the assignment and agreed by the volunteer

Type: Volunteer (Internships/Jobs)

Eligibility: 

• Must have completed secondary school education.
• Working knowledge of at least one FAO official language (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian or Spanish). Knowledge of a second FAO official language will be considered an asset. Only language proficiency certificates from UN accredited external providers and/or FAO language official examinations (LPE, ILE, LRT) will be accepted as proof of the level of knowledge of languages indicated in the online applications.
• Be nationals of FAO Member Nations
• Candidates must be aged 18 or older.
• Candidates should be able to adapt to an international multicultural environment, have good communication skills and be knowledgeable in the use of basic computer programmes.
• Candidates with family members (defined as brother, sister, mother, father, son or daughter) employed by FAO under any type of contractual arrangement are not be eligible for the Volunteer Programme.
• Candidates should have appropriate residence or immigration status in the country of assignment.

FAO Core Competencies:

• Results Focus
• Teamwork
• Communication
• Building Effective Relationships
• Knowledge Sharing and Continuous Improvement

Technical/Functional Skills: Relevant academic experience in one of the fields of the Organization.

Selection Criteria: Candidates may be assigned in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.

Number of Awards: Various

Duration of Program: Maximum 11 months

How to Apply: 

• To apply, visit the iRecruitment website at http://www.fao.org/employment/irecruitment-access/en/ and complete your online profile.
• Only applications received through iRecruitment will be considered.
• Candidates are requested to attach to the online profile a letter of motivation.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Regional Internship Program for Undergraduate/Graduate African Students 2018

Application Deadline: 31st December 2017

Eligible Countries: African countries

To Be Taken At (Country): Multiple locations in Africa

About the Award: The Internship Programme is a learning opportunity aiming to attract talented young women and men who are strongly motivated to share their new perspectives, innovative ideas and latest research experience in FAO’s domains. The programme provides selected students, enrolled in an under-graduate, graduate or post-graduate degree programme or recent graduates with the opportunity to supplement, their academic knowledge with a practical work assignments in a field related to the work of FAO. This will enable them to gain a better understanding of FAO’s mandate and programmes. At the same time, the Programme provides FAO with the assistance of qualified individuals specializing in relevant fields in connection to FAO Strategic Objectives and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Type: Internship

Eligibility: 

• Enrolled in an under-graduate, graduate degree programme in a bona fide (i.e. listed in the IAU/UNESCO data base) educational institution at the time of application, or recent graduates. Applicants pursuing their studies in a country where higher education is not divided into under-graduate and graduate stages must have completed at least three years of full-time studies towards the completion of a degree. Candidates must specialize in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.
• Working knowledge of at least one FAO official language (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian or Spanish). Knowledge of a second FAO official language will be considered an asset. Only language proficiency certificates from UN accredited external providers and/or FAO language official examinations (LPE, ILE, LRT) will be accepted as proof of the level of knowledge of languages indicated in the online applications.
• Be nationals of FAO Member Nations
• Candidates should be aged between 21 and 30.
• Candidates should be able to adapt to an international multicultural environment, have good communication skills and be knowledgeable in the use of basic computer programmes.
• Candidates with family members (defined as brother, sister, mother or father) employed by FAO under any type of contractual arrangement are not be eligible for the Internship Programme.
• Candidates should have appropriate residence or immigration status in the country of assignment.

FAO Core Competencies:

• Results Focus
• Teamwork
• Communication
• Building Effective Relationships
• Knowledge Sharing and Continuous Improvement

Technical/Functional Skills: Relevant academic experience in one of the fields of the Organization.

Selection Criteria: Candidates may be assigned in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.

Number of Awards: Various

Duration of Program: 3 months to 11 months

How to Apply: 

• To apply, visit the iRecruitment website at http://www.fao.org/employment/irecruitment-access/en/ and complete your online profile.
• Only applications received through iRecruitment will be considered.
• Candidates are requested to attach a letter of motivation and the evidence of attendance in a recognised university.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details – sub-Saharan African students

Visit the Program Webpage for Details – MENA Students

Award Providers: FAO

Important Notes: Please note that all candidates should adhere to FAO Values of Commitment to FAO, Respect for All and Integrity and Transparency

Finland Government Scholarships for International Students (EUR 1500 monthly allowance) 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 15th February, 2018.

CIMO will inform both successful and unsuccessful candidates of the results by June annually.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: The Finland Government scholarships are based mainly on cultural agreements or similar arrangements between Finland and the following countries:

• Australia
• China
• Cuba
• Egypt
• Israel
• Japan
• Mexico
• Mongolia
• Namibia
• Peru
• Republic of Korea
• Turkey
• Ukraine
• USA

To be taken at (country): Finland

About the Award: The Finland Government Scholarship Pool programme is open to young researchers from all academic fields. The scholarship cannot be applied for Master’s level studies or post-Doctoral studies/research. The Finnish Government Scholarship Pool programme application form is not an application for a study/research placement. It is merely an application for funding.

Type: Doctoral Scholarship

Eligibility: In order to be an eligible applicant for the Finland Government scholarships, candidate must first successfully apply for a study/research placement at a Finnish university/public research institute – in other words, you must be at least provisionally accepted either as a visiting Doctoral-level student/researcher, or as a full-time Doctoral degree student. Please see section Doctoral Admissions for information on how to apply for a Doctoral-level study or research placement in Finland.

To be eligible, the applicant must:

• have established contact with the Finnish receiving institution before applying (see section ‘Doctoral Admissions’)
• have a letter of invitation from the academic supervisor in Finland; the invitation should also explain the commitment of the host institution to the project
• have earned a Master’s-level degree before applying
• intend to pursue post-Master’s level studies as a visiting student, participate in a research project or teach at a university or public research institute in Finland; priority will be given to doctoral studies
• not have spent already more than one year at a Finnish higher education institution immediately before the intended scholarship period in Finland
• be able to give proof of sufficient skills in speaking and writing the language needed in study/research*
• be a national of one of the eligible countries listed above

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: The scholarship includes:

• a monthly allowance of EUR 1500. The allowance is sufficient for one person only.
• Expenses due to travel, international or in Finland, are not covered by the programme. Scholarship recipients are recommended to make arrangements for sufficient insurance coverage for their stay in Finland.

Duration of Scholarship: The Finnish Government Scholarship Pool programme can be applied for a study/research period of 3-9 months, 9 months being the maximum time for an individual applicant.

How to Apply: Applications for the Finnish Government Scholarship Pool funding should be made to the appropriate authority in the applicant’s country. The scholarship authorities in each country are invited to present applications for up to 10 candidates for the Finnish Government Scholarship Pool.

You can download the 2018/2019 application form using the below link.

> Finnish Government Scholarship Pool application form 2018-2019

It is important to go through the Application instructions on the Scholarship Webpage (see link below) before applying.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Government of Finland

Coady Institute Global Change Leaders Program for Women in Developing Countries 2018. Fully-funded to Canada

Application Deadline: 7th September, 2017

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): Antigonish, Nova Scotia in Canada and candidate’s resident country

About the Award: Established in 2011, the Global Change Leaders Programme is a seven-week education programme offered by Coady Institute’s International Centre for Women’s Leadership. This programme enables women from developing countries to strengthen their leadership capacities in order to contribute to innovation and change in their organizations and communities. Programme participants engage in learning grounded in real world experiences and focused on Coady’s core thematic areas. Through a shared learning environment with other emerging women leaders from around the world, participants are exposed to a range of experiences and the beginnings of a potentially lifelong network of support.

Offered Since: 2011

Type: Training/Short Courses

Eligibility: This programme is targeted to emerging women leaders from developing countries who are working on development issues. These are women who:

• Possess a minimum of five years of demonstrated leadership experience in a social or economic development endeavor in sectors such as livelihoods or inclusive economic development, food security, environment, access to education and health care, governance, political engagement of women and the rights of girls and women;
• Will be immediately returning to their community and sector following the programme to put their learning into practice;
• Have great drive and passion for their work, demonstrated through their outstanding contributions in their organizations and communities;·
• Are practitioners in civil society organizations including community based organizations and not for profits, or active in public or private institutions, donor/philanthropic agencies, social movements or in a social enterprise/business;
• Hold a university degree or a combination of post-secondary education and experience; and
• Have strong oral and written English language competencies.

Candidates must be from a country eligible for Official Development Assistance.

Value of Award: The Global Change Leaders programme provides successful candidates with a full scholarship that includes tuition, travel, accommodations, and meals. Successful participants are responsible for costs pertaining to acquiring a visa to enter Canada.

Programme participants benefit from the guidance and mentorship of accomplished women leaders from around the world. The programme is led by a core team of staff in the International Centre for Women’s Leadership and supported by other Coady faculty and associates.

Duration of Program: May 2018 – December 2018

How to Apply: Apply here

Remember to read the Application Instructions before applying.

Visit Program Webpage for details

Award Provider: Coady Institute’s International Centre for Women’s Leadership

WindAc Africa Conference Student Sponsorship Program for Students in South African Universities 2017

Application Deadline: 31st August 2017

Eligible Applicants: Students studying in South Africa

To Be Taken At (Country): South African Renewable Energy Technology Centre (SARETEC), Cape Town, South Africa

About the Award: Whilst the primary purpose of this programme is to bring superior wind research knowledge to South African students, the intention is also to reward the students for their excellent work, motivate and inspire them to pursue their academic path in the energy sector, and offer them the opportunity to network with their peers: the future leading experts in wind energy in South Africa.

Type: Workshop/Conferences

Eligibility: 

• Students of any age, gender, race, field of studies and degree enrolled at a South African university.
• It is a prerequisite that the applicant has previously checked his/her eligibility for student travel aid and/or conference support with the financial aid office of the respective university.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• Travel expenses and accommodation covered for students not residing in the greater Cape Town area
• Conference fees waived for 2 days

Duration of Program: 13th-15th November

How to Apply: Please submit your sponsorship application with the following attachments to Matshidiso matshidiso@sawea.org.za before August 31st:
1) WindAc sponsorship application form (filled-out)
2) Terms and conditions of sponsorship (signed)
3) Curriculum Vitae
4) Copy of ID
5) Academic record of the last term
6) Degree obtained, if any
7) Evidence of bursary, if any

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: WindAc Africa

Aspen New Voices Fellowship for Researchers from Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: Ongoing

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Developing countries

About the Award: The Aspen Institute’s New Voices Fellowship is a year-long media skills, communication and leadership program designed for standout development professionals from the developing world. Candidates for the Fellowship are expected to have both a record of significant professional achievement and a desire to share their perspectives on global development with a broader international audience. The Fellowship is open by nomination only.

While the fellowship is non-resident and not full-time, it does require a significant and sustained time commitment as fellows write opinion articles, participate in interviews with local and international media, and speak at international conferences. All expenses related to the fellowship are paid, including certain media-related travel costs.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Candidates for the Fellowship are expected to have both a record of significant professional achievement and a desire to share their perspectives on global development with a broader international audience.

Value of Fellowship: 

• All expenses for the fellowship
• funds for Fellows to participate in media-related activities and conferences.

Duration of Fellowship: 1 year. The fellowship is non-resident and not full-time.  However, there will be two major meetings during the fellowship year, where candidate will be expected to travel and take part in intensive media training. These are usually each about 5 days long. In addition, most fellows estimate spending about 5 hours per week working on fellowship-related activities, including meeting with their mentors, taking part in interviews, and writing opinion pieces.

How to Apply: 

• Ask someone to nominate you. This person could be a mentor, supervisor or professor. We ask that this person know you and your work well.
•  We will review your nomination. If you pass through the first round, we’ll be in touch with you directly, asking you to submit an application. This application involves two essays and a series of questions.
•  Once the New Voices team has reviewed applications, we will ask a small group of finalists to participate in an interview via Skype or phone. From this group, we will choose the final class of Fellows.

Nomination Webpage

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Aspen Institute’s New Voices Fellowship

Important Notes: Please note, this is not a fellowship for journalists or others trained and working in communications.

Carnegie Council “The Living Legacy of the First World War” International Fellowship Program (Funded) 2018

Application Deadline: 15th September 2017

Eligible Countries: All

About the Award: Carnegie Council is creating up to 10 fellowships to conduct projects involving original research, approaches, or methods on the American experience in the First World War and its impact and relevance in the modern world.

With this project, Carnegie Council aims to advance a vision of history that is diverse, dynamic, and inclusive. This approach begins with the selection of fellows of varying ages, backgrounds, and interests. In designing a research proposal, applicants are encouraged to draw on personal passions, integrating unique perspectives and insights into historical debates.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Individuals of all nationalities are encouraged to apply, though articles and interviews will be published primarily in English.

Number of Awards: 10

Value of Award: 

• Selected fellows will research independently over the next year. Fellows will then share their findings and analysis in an article written for publication on carnegiecouncil.org, in Ethics & International Affairs, or through another academic or popular publisher. In the case of graphic or other non-traditional projects, a written report may be substituted for an article.
• To reach a broader audience, the fellows will participate in a podcast interview series on carnegiecouncil.org, where they will discuss their work.
• Fellows may also be invited to speak at other events associated with the centenary of World War I.
• fellows will receive a stipend to support their research.

How to Apply: To apply, please submit a research proposal (1,000 words or fewer), curriculum vitae, and two references to program assistant Billy Pickett at bpickett@cceia.org by Friday, September 15, 2017. Proposals should include the following:

the proposed research topic with background;

the feasibility of the research; and the topic’s bearing on the present, whether in ethical debates, political discourse, governing institutions, demography, law, international relations, or other areas.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Richard Lounsbery Foundation, Carnegie Council

Strangling Puerto Rico in Order to Save It

Mark Weisbrot

The United States invaded Puerto Rico in 1898 and took it from Spain. Although the residents became United States citizens in 1917, the island’s colonial status has been a locus of political debate and struggle for most of its subsequent history.

Just a few months after gaining citizenship, Puerto Ricans were made subject to a United States military draft. But they never got the right to elect a voting member of Congress, despite being governed by -United States law. The island is officially an “unincorporated territory” of the United States, but since the 1950s, it has preferred to call itself an “estado libre asociado” — free associated state — or a “commonwealth.” If the word “colony” was once judged too harsh, at this moment in Puerto Rico’s history it looks like an understatement.

That’s the thing about not having control over your own most important economic policies. It’s not as noticeable when times are good, but when things go south, it can be a long nightmare. The Greeks discovered that in the depression that has swallowed up most of their last seven years; sadly, Puerto Ricans have even less power than Greeks to alter a cruel fate that others have designed for them.

The Puerto Rican economy has already suffered a “lost decade” — no economic growth since 2005. The poverty rate is 46 percent, and 58 percent for children — about three times that of the 50 states. Unemployment is at 11.7 percent, more than two and a half times the level in the states. Employment has plummeted, and about 10 percent of the population has left the island since 2006.

Worst of all, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. As revenues fell with the economy over the past decade, the island’s government increased borrowing in an attempt to maintain levels of economic activity and social spending. Puerto Rico ended up with $73 billion in debt that it couldn’t pay, and officially defaulted in 2015.

In June 2016 Congress passed the terribly misnamed PROMESA act (it means “promise” in Spanish), which created a financial oversight and management board to direct Puerto Rico’s finances. This board, to which President Barack Obama appointed four Democrats and four Republicans, has now approved an austerity regimen that, if things go according to plan, envisions a second lost decade — in other words, no economic growth from 2005 through 2024. But the plan doesn’t take into account the impact of such austerity, which would add more years of decline. And there’s more: All the budget tightening over the second decade, including cuts to health care and education, would pay only about $7.9 billion of Puerto Rico’s $73 billion debt.

That means that creditors’ lawsuits, which have already been filed, could inflict yet additional damage and worsen the quarter century of economic stagnation that is now in the cards. Hedge funds hold much of Puerto Rico’s debt, and since May their claims have been under consideration in a bankruptcy-like proceeding – also under the PROMESA act — that does not look any more promising than the oversight board’s plan.

An economic decline of this duration is rare in modern history, and Puerto Rico’s colonial status appears to be a major reason for the anomaly. If Puerto Rico were an independent country, it could try to make a new start after defaulting on its debt. Although the international financial system still lacks a badly needed bankruptcy mechanism, governments that default are usually able to return to international borrowing after an economic recovery. Even in some of the worst scenarios — for example, a decision by a New York judge in favor of vulture funds in Argentina three years ago — the end results have been vastly better than the purgatory that Puerto Rico is facing.

And even if Puerto Rico were a state, its two senators and four or five voting members of Congress, combined with the more than five million Puerto Ricans in the current 50 states, would give them more of a fighting chance than they have today.

There is a strong case to be made for serious debt relief and a plan that will allow for an economic recovery. Most of the economic decline that led to the debt crisis resulted from decisions made by the federal government or international treaties that it signed. Among these were the rules of the World Trade Organization and China’s accession to it in 2000, which set off an out-migration of pharmaceutical production — a mainstay of the island’s economy — and other manufacturing. Employment in manufacturing, which was a much bigger percentage of jobs in Puerto Rico than in most of the rest of the Americas, fell by more than half from 1995 to 2016. The repeal of a special tax break for American corporations that operated in Puerto Rico helped drive down investment and employment. Between 1999 and last year, investment fell from a peak of 20.7 percent of Puerto Rico’s gross domestic product to 7.9 percent.

Puerto Rico’s international commerce also suffers from a federal law that significantly raises the cost of traded goods and the cost of living there by preventing foreign ships from stopping first at the island before proceeding to a mainland port. Reduced funding for Medicaid and Medicare, when compared to states of comparable per capita income levels, also account for billions of dollars of Puerto Rico’s debt.

For all of these reasons and more, the United States government has a responsibility to contribute to Puerto Rico’s economic recovery. In doing so, it should ensure that the creditors who made foolish loans or bought Puerto Rico’s bonds at a steep discount do not profit from those decisions.

The structural problems — the unfair economic relationships and legal inequities carved out for Puerto Ricans because of their colonial status — will take longer to resolve. But there is no excuse for the prolonged collective punishment of so many American citizens that is currently being prescribed.

Life Under Capitalism: Early Deaths a ‘Silver Lining’ for Corporations

Pete Dolack

Participating in the August 14 demonstration at the Trump Tower in Manhattan, I couldn’t help thinking of the connections between a Bloomberg article proclaiming that people dying earlier contains a “silver lining” because corporations will save pension costs and the ongoing savagery of the Trump administration.

Not simply the naked symbiosis between the Trump administration and white supremacists, neo-Nazis and assorted far-right cranks — all too sadly on display in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend — but the alliance of corporate titans, Republican Party leaders and President Trump himself. The rush by even conservative congressional Republicans to condemn the tweeter-in-chief for his refusal to condemn his so-called “alt-right” allies for two days should not distract us from the Trump administration’s all-out assault on regulations, civil rights laws, health care and the environment. (Let’s please retire the useless term “alt-right” and call them what they are: white supremacists, fascists and fascist wannabes.)

The health care system of the United States is already by far the world’s most expensive while delivering among the worst results. So of course the solution to this, in Republican eyes, is to make it worse. That effort has, so far, failed, thanks to massive grassroots activism. But plenty else is being rammed through under the radar through executive decrees — which is why we shouldn’t hold our breath waiting for Congress to impeach President Trump. He’s much too useful to Republicans and corporate executives. Should that change, of course, all bets are off, but short a Democratic tidal wave in 2018 Republican members of Congress turning on the president anytime soon isn’t likely.

So what does this have to do with an article published by Bloomberg? The headline on this particular article says it all: “Americans Are Dying Younger, Saving Corporations Billions,” complete with a subhead declaring “lower pension costs” a “silver lining.” As not only a proud member of the corporate media, but one specializing in delivering news to financiers and industrialists, extolling a benefit to corporate bottom lines and ignoring the, ahem, human cost of said benefit is only to be expected. The article is not at all atypical of the business press, even if this one is a little more obvious than usual.

But, as a friend who is an activist with a Marxist party but who once ran a chemical industry consultancy by day (if only his clients knew his politics!) once taught me, the business section is where they hide the news. So the point here isn’t the attitude of Bloomberg toward working people (no more hostile and sometimes less so than your average business publication) but the attitude of corporate titans toward employees. The article states:

“In 2015, the American death rate—the age-adjusted share of Americans dying—rose slightly for the first time since 1999. And over the last two years, at least 12 large companies, from Verizon to General Motors, have said recent slips in mortality improvement have led them to reduce their estimates for how much they could owe retirees by upward of a combined $9.7 billion, according to a Bloomberg analysis of company filings.”

Austerity costs human lives

Gains in U.S. death rates had been improving until 2009, Bloomberg reports, citing a Society of Actuaries analysis, but those rates then flattened before reversing in 2015. This isn’t necessarily unique to the U.S. — the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries in the United Kingdom last month reported that U.S., Canadian and British seniors have ceased seeing longevity improvements, suggesting the impact of austerity since the 2008 economic collapse is a primary culprit. The Actuaries report said:

“The rising mortality rates among US working age demonstrates that the historical fall in mortality rates cannot be taken for granted. The pace of life expectancy gains of older ages has slowed down, with some age groups showing signs of increasing death rates. These signs should be taken as warnings that worsened health care, behaviour and environment can reverse decades of success in health and longevity. Actuaries need to have a better understanding of the drivers of longevity to consider how to incorporate recent experience into forecasts of future longevity.”

As welcome as a new quantification of the toll of austerity is, such a notion is far from new, nor is it simply the latest variant of capitalism, neoliberalism, that is at work here. The increased deprivation of capitalism caused a half-million U.S. deaths from 1999 to 2015. Specifically, nearly half a million excess deaths have occurred since 1999 among middle-aged White non-Hispanic United Statesians, according to a paper published in 2015 by two Princeton University researchers, Anne Case and Angus Deaton.

From 1978 to 1998, the mortality rate for U.S. Whites aged 45 to 54 fell by 2 percent per year on average, matching the average rate of decline in five comparison countries (Australia, Britain, Canada, France and Germany). But although, from 1999, other industrial countries continued to see a decline in mortality rates for the middle-aged, the U.S. White non-Hispanic mortality rose by half a percent a year, an increase that is unique, Drs. Case and Deaton reported. African-American death rates have not similarly risen although remain considerably higher than those for Whites.

The authors do not speculate on the reason for White deaths to increase in contrast to the trend of minority groups, but we might reasonably conclude that People of Color have had deprivation and economic difficulty imposed on them in greater numbers and more intensely, and thus are experiencing less of a change in historic circumstances than are Whites. The economic downturn that the world has lived through since 2008 certainly hasn’t bypassed People of Color — far from it — but the decline has not spared Whites, a group not as hardened to lower living standards thanks to their privileges.

Privatization costs human lives

Privatization and intensified reliance on “the market” has already been demonstrated to worsen health outcomes. A 2009 study published by The Lancet concluded that the mass privatization in the former Soviet bloc resulted in one million deaths. Mass privatization caused the average number of deaths to increase by 13 percent from the 1992 onset of shock therapy. An Oxford University press release summarized these findings:

“David Stuckler, from Oxford’s Department of Sociology, said: ‘Our study helps explain the striking differences in mortality in the post-communist world. Countries which pursued rapid privatisation, or ‘shock therapy’, had much greater rises in deaths than countries which followed a more gradual path. Not only did rapid privatisation lead to mass unemployment but also wiped out the social safety nets, which were critical for helping people survive during this turbulent period.’ ”

During Soviet times, we were assured by Western commentators that high levels of alcoholism were a sign of despair in Russia, yet alcohol per-capita consumption rates in 2007 were three times that of 1990.

When a health care system is designed to deliver corporate profits rather than health care — and this is precisely what privatized health systems do — such are the results. Throwing more than 20 million people off the roles of health insurance, as all Republican Party plans would have done, could only have exacerbated poor health outcomes. But doing so is consistent with Republican plans to shred what remains of the U.S. social safety net, sure to lead to further early deaths. As the more reliable instruments of the will of corporate plutocrats (Democrats having to sometimes make concessions to their voting base), Republicans see Donald Trump in the White House as a gift.

The purported disapproval enunciated by the likes of Senator Jeff Flake are a sad joke — the Arizona Republican has reliably voted for all Trump appointees and legislation. What really “embarrasses” members of Congress are the president’s vulgarity and ham-fisted obviousness. He simply refuses to use code words that way that ordinary Republicans have learned to do. Stop being so obvious! But in reality President Trump is the logical product of 37 years of Republican pandering — half a century if we go back to Richard Nixon’s “Southern strategy.”

We can certainly argue over what constitutes fascism, and whether President Trump is properly called a fascist or that he is simply a Republican who is more willing to show the fist behind capitalist rule albeit someone who carries the seeds for a potential fascist movement. The latter is more than scary enough. But as the casual talk of a “silver lining” for shortened life spans illustrates, human life is expendable in the pursuit of profits under capitalism. And as long as the Trump administration is useful to this pursuit, occasional protests from corporate executives will remain no more than hollow gestures.

Farmers Suicides Soar On Freedom Anniversary

Moin Qazi

Even as India celebrated its 70th  year of independence, the number of suicides of beleaguered farmers in Marathwada, the drought prone belt of Maharashtra, touched a new high. In the last seven and half months ending with !5th August ,580 cultivators have committed suicide  .At the end of July, the toll stood at 531 and it has gone up to 580 in just 15 days.

The total suicidal deaths in Marathwada in the entire 2016 were 542, and the figure for 2015 was 354. Thus in seven and half months this year the number of suicides has gone up by 38 in comparison to the figure for the entire last year .The tragedy is all the more serious since 2016-2017 had good rainfall and better agricultural prices to support  a successful  harvest .This is certainly symptomatic of a deep malaise .

Many farmers  drink toxic pesticides as a way out of backbreaking debt, with the government in some cases guaranteeing monetary aid to their surviving families. That provides a perverse incentive for suicide, rewarding people who end their lives by paying family compensation, but only if they die.

In Maharashtra, probably the richest state in India In the past decade, thousands of farmers in India — mostly in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat — have hung themselves or taken pesticide. Over the past few years, Maharashtra has topped the list of “suicide states”.

A 21-year-old student, the daughter of a Maharashtra farmer, Sheetal Yankat decided to end her life by jumping into a village well. In her suicide note, she wrote: “My parents are extremely poor and have been unable to raise money for my marriage. I am committing suicide because I don’t want my parents to come under a debt burden. The economic condition of my family has worsened over the last five years because of the failure of crops. My two sisters got married somehow, with very simple marriage ceremonies. My father is trying his best for my marriage. But since the middlemen are not able to lend money, my marriage got delayed for two years. Therefore, I am ending my life with the hope that my father will not be burdened by any more debt and perhaps my death will also end the dowry practice.”

Several studies have shown that almost 58 to 62 percent farmers sleep on empty stomachs.  . While the policy emphasis has been on increasing crop production, the more important issue of whether this is accompanied by a rise in farm incomes has been simply pushed under the carpet.

The reasons for the gloom on the farm are all there for everybody to see.

The University of California, Berkeley suggests India will see more such tragedies as climate change brings hotter temperatures that damage crops and exacerbate drought. For every 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming above 20 degrees C (68 degrees F) during the growing season in India, there are 67 more suicides on average, according to the findings published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, or PNAS. An increase of 5 Celcius on any one day was associated with an additional 335 deaths. In total, it estimates that 59,300 agricultural sector suicides over the past 30 years could be attributed to warming.

The message “is that farming is an inherently risky occupation, with annual incomes often held hostage to the weather, and it’s getting riskier in the era of climate change,” according to Vikram Patel, an Indian psychiatrist and mental health expert with Harvard Medical School in Boston

Experts said the study’s findings should raise alarms, especially with India’s average temperatures expected to rise another 3 degrees C (5.4 degrees F) by 2050. That will bring more erratic weather events, more drought and stronger storms.

Farming has always been considered a high-risk profession, and a single damaged harvest can drive some to desperation. With agriculture supporting more than half of India’s 1.3 billion people, farmers have long been seen as the heart and soul of the country. But they’ve also seen their economic clout diminish over the last three decades. Once accounting for a third of India’s gross domestic product, they now contribute only 15 percent of India’s $2.26 billion economy.

Former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan used to say that the biggest reforms would be when farmers are moved out of agriculture, to meet the ever-growing demand for cheaper labour for the infrastructure industry.

We believe in “uttam kheti, madhyam vyapar and neech naukri”. India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru said in 1947, “Everything can wait, but not agriculture.” What India is witnessing today is exactly the reverse. All the other sectors in the Indian economy are surging ahead. Agriculture is the only one which is moving in the opposite direction. Within this self-perpetuating cycle of misery, wrapping a noose around the neck are all-too-friendly exits for farmers. While their deaths might bring personal escape, they leave behind crippling emotional, financial and physical burdens, inherited by those left to farm the dust: women who live to re buld ther ilivs and that of their families on the debris left by their broken hearted husbands.