11 Dec 2021

US consumer prices rise 6.8 percent, near 40-year high

Gabriel Black


US consumer prices continue to rise at rates not seen in four decades. The inflation rate—an index used to track the cost of living—rose by 0.8 percent during the month of November, according to data released Friday by the Department of Labor. The cost of goods and services has now risen 6.8 percent since last year—the highest annual rise since 1982.

The rise in costs follows last October’s rise of 0.9 percent. As in prior months, costs have surged in nearly every area. Below is a breakdown of the price increases compared to November 2020.

  • The cost of gasoline has increased 58.1 percent. The national average, according to AAA is $3.34 per gallon, up from $2.16 last year.
  • The price of food items at the grocery store has risen 6.4 percent. The largest increases have been seen in the meat, poultry, fish, and eggs category, which, as a whole, rose 13 percent. Beef, in particular, is up 21 percent.
  • The cost of fast food—which many working people rely on—has increased by 7.9 percent. Generally, eating away from home has increased by 5.8 percent.
  • The cost of gas to heat the home has increased 25.1 percent. While this increase is high, it has increased more rapidly in other parts of the world. In Germany, for example, natural gas prices are up 500 percent year-over-year.
  • The cost of buying a new car or truck has risen by 9.4 percent.
  • The cost of buying a used car or truck has risen by 31.4 percent. Edmunds.com reports that the average cost of a used vehicle is now a record $29,011.
  • Apparel costs have risen by 5 percent.
  • Electricity costs have risen by 6.5 percent.
  • The cost of ‘shelter,’ which includes rent, owners’ equivalent in rent, and lodging away from home, rose 3.8 percent.
Figure 1: Contributions to inflation [White House Council of Economic Advisors, Twitter, @WhiteHouseCEA, December 10, 2021]

These price increases have made a substantial dent into the well-being of tens of millions of people. Any worker on a fixed income, one that does not increase each year, has effectively received a 7 percent cut to their income over the last 12-months.

Comparing wage increases to price increases shows that workers’ incomes are not keeping up. Real average weekly earnings have now fallen 1.9 percent compared to a year ago, according to Bloomberg.

Jason Furman, a Harvard economist, estimated Friday that the average American family is now spending $4,000 more this year on costs. Writing on Twitter, Furman further noted that real wages are 2.9 percent below their historic trend of increase (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: This figure from Professor Jason Furman effectively shows real wages in contrast to its historical trend [Twitter, @Jasonfurman, December 10, 2021]

Rising costs disproportionately impact the working class. The poorest fifth of households, for example, spend between 29 and 43 percent of their income on food, according to a 2016 report by the US Department of Agriculture. In contrast, the richest fifth spend only 7 to 9 percent of their income on food.

Moreover, those in the upper ten percent of American society have their fortunes tied to the stock market. A record 89 percent of the stock market was controlled by the top ten percent of the US in 2021. While inflation has risen, the stock market is rising faster—with the Dow Jones Index up twenty percent from last year, sending the fortunes of the rich soaring.

Trader Robert Arciero works on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, Tuesday, Aug. 10, 2021. [Credit: AP Photo/Richard Drew, File]

The dramatic increase in the cost of living better puts in perspective the growing surge of working-class struggle in the United States. Likewise, it demonstrates why a series of important labor contracts in American industry have been concessionary contracts that leave workers with less pay, despite nominally providing an increase.

  • Kellogg workers recently voted down a contract which would see the highest paid tier of laborers only receive a 3 percent annual pay increase. When adjusted for inflation, Kellogg is effectively asking all workers to take a near 4 percent pay cut.
  • Dana auto parts, in collaboration with the United Auto Workers, barely passed a contract in October which saw wages rises for new hires increase from $17 to $18 an hour over the contracts four-and-a-half-year cycle. This effective 1.5 percent annual increase translates, with inflation, to about a five percent pay cut for these already low paid workers.
  • Sixty-thousand film and television workers organized under the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE) were forced to accept a 3 percent annual pay increase (the majority of workers voted it down, but the union claimed ratification based on its anti-democratic delegate system). This would amount to a near four percent annual decrease in pay.
  • Some 32,000 nurses and health care workers at hospital giant Kaiser were set to strike last month but the two unions representing them, the United Nurses Association and Union of Healthcare Professionals called off the strike, claiming they had reached a favorable agreement. In fact, the tentative agreement included just a 3 percent wage increase the first two years and a 2 percent wage increase the second two years of the contract—a significant pay cut against a seven percent inflation rate.

While multiple factors, including supply chain disruption and worker rebellion against low wage jobs, play a role in price increases, a central cause remains the policies of the US Federal Reserve.

Since the 2008 global financial crisis, the US central bank has injected some $8 trillion dollars into financial markets. Other central banks have followed suit.

This policy was intensified in March 2020 as the pandemic threatened to collapse the house of cards holding up global finance. Since then, the Fed has pumped $120 billion into markets every month. This wave of easy money for the financial aristocracy has driven their wealth to new highs. But it has also driven prices up across the economy, effectively foisting the bill of saving Wall Street onto the working class through higher costs and low wages.

The working class is responding to this with strikes, withdrawing from low wage jobs, and a general leftward shift in outlook. As Bloomberg cautioned, “Rising inflation is eating away at what the average American is taking home… how are workers reacting to this? With strikes across various industries.”

The ruling class faces an impossible situation.

If it stops its policy of providing endless money to financial markets, the unresolved debt and economic difficulties of the economy could implode, tanking the stock market and destabilizing economic growth.

However, if it continues with its policy of endless money, as it is currently, it will drive the working class deeper into poverty, threatening an eruption of class struggle that will directly threaten their rule.

10 Dec 2021

China’s Sputtering Economy

Tom Clifford


China’s economic engines are spluttering as they seek thrust to emerge from a stall.  The property sector is mired in debt. Empty apartment blocks, about 65 million units, dot the landscape. They represent just over 20 percent of homes in urban China. They seem to taunt the many millions in the country who desperately need better housing.  The World Bank estimates that 61 percent of China’s population lives in cities, up from 36 percent at the turn of the century. It is a property-owning society. About 90 percent own their own homes, with at least 20 percent having more than one.

On top of this, it is estimated that about 100 million properties have been purchased but not occupied.

New home prices in October fell by 0.2 percent, the biggest decline since February 2015.

The market is saturated and the population is aging which means the number of newly-built homes was set to decline anyway before this glut. It was the construction of homes that helped propel the economy. With a growing hostility to the US and a shift to state rather than private enterprises economic vitality seems to be draining. Major power cuts in cities and Covid cases are also taking a toll.

Covid has dampened international demand for goods manufactured in China.  And the country is no longer the answer it once was to the question; where will global growth come from? Courier services, delivering everything from hot meals to medicines, with long hours demanded for low wages, are mushrooming in Chinese cities but that means that people are spending less in the actual shops. Consumer consumption is weak.

There is much to admire and cherish about living in Beijing. The streets are clean and safe and for a city of 21 million it is remarkably efficient. But, there is always a but, there are caveats. Pollution is a problem. Less so than say four years ago but still a problem. Bookshops that sell quality tomes have closed. The best, Bookworm in the shopping area of San Li Tun, stopped trading about a year ago. Of course, bookshops are not an obvious economic indicator. But they can serve as the canary in the coalmine.

E-bycycles, those that can only be unlocked by smartphone apps, clog the pavements. This forces pedestrians to walk on the road and dodge the traffic. It is a hazard that causes injury to hundreds of people a year. The badly parked e-bicycles on busy pavements represent the clear and present danger of over-investment. Debt in China has increased 13-fold in the past 15 years  according to the Bank for International Settlements. It has mushroomed to about three times the size of the entire economy. Many of those loans, about 30 per cent, will never get repaid. GDP per capita is $10,500, about one sixth of the US equivalent.

The boys from the Chicago school of economics would be rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of getting their hands on the economy  and letting market forces rampage, not necessarily for the benefit of the people. But even allowing limited economic reform would face stiff opposition from President Xi Jinping who would view this step as tantamount to loosening its grip.

Better a weaker economy and stronger party, from his point of view.

China’s economic miracle was simple. Unleash capitalism, red in tooth and claw.

A state sector, wasteful of both resources and investment, knows that it is Xi’s favorite economic model. Four decades after reform the population is still relatively poor, especially inland.

US export restrictions are beginning to bite. “Self-sufficiency” campaigns hope to replace foreign technology with homemade alternatives. But that, too, could be a drag on the economy.

If China is not on a trajectory to overtake the US economically then Washington needs to recalibrate and respond accordingly.

Xi could also use it to his advantage in another way, a flatlining economy may require a distraction. Growing nationalism? Certainly. A Taiwan crisis? Possibly. A weaker, rather than stronger, country poses challenges not just to the West but to itself.

IREX Community Engagement Exchange Program 2022

Application Deadline:

14th January 2022, at 11:59 pm EST.

Tell Me About IREX Community Engagement Exchange Program:

The CEE Program is a dynamic global network of innovators working with communities to address critical 21st Century issues. CEE equips dedicated visionaries with the expertise, skills, and resources to develop multisector approaches and build healthy and engaged communities in over 100 countries. 

A transformational leadership development experience, CEE is a year-long program designed to enable civil society leaders, ages 21-28, to harness the power of networks, relationships, and information for the public good, specifically on issues related to civic dialogue and peacebuilding, open and participatory government, women and gender, resilience and sustainable development, and youth engagement. 

Fellowship components include:

  • Three-month Practicum in the United States: IREX matches CEE fellows to civil society organizations throughout the United States. Designated supervisors and peers support the fellows through a three-month, hands-on professional practicum.
  • Leadership and Civic Engagement Academy: CEE Fellows explore the program themes through interactive curriculum that includes service learning, face-to-face trainings, mentorship, professional coaching, and inclusion in a global network.
  • Community Engagement Project (CEP): With the help of their U.S. host organization and mentors, CEE fellows design and plan a community engagement project to carry out after they return home. Once the fellows depart the U.S., they put these projects into action in their home communities.
  • Community Engagement Project (CEP) Exchange: Select U.S. hosts and CEE Specialists will travel to a CEE Alumnus’ country and work collaboratively to support the fellow’s project implementation and bring back what they learn to strengthen communities across the United States or their home country. 

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Fellowship

Who can apply for IREX Community Engagement Exchange Program?

Competition for the CEE Program is merit-based and open to emerging civil society and community leaders who meet the criteria below. Applications that do not meet these eligibility requirements will be disqualified and will not be reviewed by the selection committee.

  • You are between the ages of 21-28 at the time of application
  • You are a citizen of one of the eligible countries listed below
  • You have a minimum of two years of professional or volunteer experience at the time of application
  • You are living and working in your home country
    • Individuals with refugee status working on behalf of their home community may be given special consideration
    • You are working on a community engagement initiative in your home country, either in a professional or volunteer capacity, with a vision to pursue a career working to support civil society
  • You have a high level of proficiency in spoken and written English at the time of application
    • Semifinalists will be required to take or submit recent scores for a TOEFL or IELTS English language test
  • You are available to travel to the U.S. for three months
  • You are committed to returning to your home country to complete a Community Engagement Project (CEP)
  • You are not a citizen or permanent resident of the U.S. and have not applied for U.S. permanent residency within the past three years
  • You are eligible to receive a U.S. J-1 visa
    • Applicants who have participated in an exchange program sponsored by the U.S. Government must have fulfilled their two-year home residency requirement by the time of application
  • You are committed to returning to your home country for a minimum of two years after completing the program and
  • You are not a current IREX employee or consultant, or their immediate family member

Which Countries are Eligible?

  • Africa: Angola, Botswana, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe
  • East Asia and the Pacific: Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Mongolia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Vietnam
  • Europe and Eurasia: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Turkey, and Ukraine
  • Middle East and North Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, and West Bank/Palestinian Territories
  • South and Central Asia: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan
  • Western Hemisphere: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay

How Many Scholarships will be Given?

Not specified

What is the Benefit of IREX Community Engagement Exchange Program?

The program covers the cost of most expenses associated with:

  • J-1 visa support
  • Round-trip travel from participants’ home city to the U.S.
  • Monthly allowance to cover housing, meals, and other living expenses while in the U.S. and
  • Accident and sickness insurance

How Long will the Program Last?

12 months

How to Apply for IREX Community Engagement Exchange Program:

APPLY NOW!

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Orskov Foundation Grants 2022

Application Deadline: 31st December 2021

Offered Annually? Yes

Offered Since: 2006

Eligibility for Orskov Foundation Grants: If your application does not meet all the following criteria it will not pass the initial shortlisting for consideration by the Trustees.

  • Applications from students registered at university in a country not classified by the UN as lower middle income, or low-income will NOT be funded.
  • Applications seeking funding for equipment, or attendance at conferences, will NOT be funded.
  • Applications seeking scholarships to cover the costs of complete Bachelor, Masters or Doctorate courses, or parts of Bachelor, Masters or Doctorate courses will NOT be funded
  • Applications seeking funding to cover the costs of Bachelor, Masters or Doctorate research projects will NOT be funded
  • Applications that cannot demonstrate the potential to alleviate poverty and/or provide sustainable environmental benefits will NOT be funded.
  • Applications from students not studying degrees related to agriculture, land use or the environment will NOT be funded.

If you have got this far then keep reading, as the next section contains some important guidance that must be followed for a student application to be successful.

  • The Orskov Foundation Grants are only provided to help support costs of training at a university or similar organisation other than the university/college in which you are registered at the time of the application.
  • Eligible students MUST be registered for graduate degrees and MUST be able to demonstrate that they have full support from the relevant university department/organisation that they are seeking training from.
  • Preference will be given to support training aimed at sustainable land use problems with an emphasis on animal, plant and soil interactions, where it can be demonstrated that, in addition to contributing to knowledge, they will (a) have the potential to alleviate poverty and (b) provide sustainable environmental benefits, including adaptation/mitigation to the impact of climate change. Training out with these areas will not be funded.
  • The Trustees will only consider projects with a budget up to a maximum of £2,500.   This is the upper limit, not an indication that you should request this amount.
  • Applicants will be expected to provide a budget and FULL justification for the funding claimed. Applicants that do not provide an adequate breakdown of the anticipated expenditure will not be shortlisted for evaluation.
  • Please do not send any additional documentation, such as exam results, CVs, letters of support, etc.  These will not be used in the evaluation of your application.  Appropriate references will be sought for student applications that pass the evaluation stage.
  • Orskov Foundation Grants Projects will be selected by an open application process.  Grants will be awarded in March/April.
  • The deadline for receipt of applications is 31st December each year. Applications received after this date will not be considered for evaluation.
  • All applicants will be sent notification that their application has been received.  Applicants will also be sent an email in March or April of the following year to inform them whether they have been successful or not.  We will use the contact email address that you include on your application form, so please ensure that it is the correct address.
  • All successful student applicants will be expected to provide a full report at the end of their funding period.  This report will outline the outcomes from the application and a breakdown of the expenditure made.
  • Applications MUST be submitted using the Orskov Foundation application form and sent as a MS WORD attachment to an email.
  • All applications must be submitted in English.
  • Each section of the application form has been included for a reason.  In order to evaluate your application against all the others received you must include text in each section of the application form, otherwise your application will not be shortlisted.

How to Apply for Orskov Foundation Grants: Due to the evolving global impact and responses to COVID-19, as well as considering the carbon footprint of travel, this year we are inviting applications for either grants for online training, OR for grants for international travel for in-person training.

If you would like to apply for individual support from the Orskov Foundation follow these easy steps:

Visit Programme Webpage for Details 

Award Provider: The Scottish Government Small Grants Scheme

Trudeau Foundation Doctoral Scholarships 2022/2023

Application Deadline: 21st December 2021

To be taken at (country): Canadian Universities

Accepted Subject Areas: Social Sciences and Humanities related studies, preferably one of the following:

  • Human Rights and Dignity
  • Responsible Citizenship
  • Canada and the World
  • People and their Natural Environment

About the Trudeau Foundation Doctoral Scholarships:  The Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation Scholarship Program will help shape researchers into engaged leaders who are conscious of the impact of their research, connected to the realities of the communities in which they work, and open to non-conventional forms of knowledge. The Foundation is seeking candidates who are audacious, original, and forward-thinking.

The program will last for three years and will also provide generous support for Scholars’ doctoral work in the form of a stipend and a research and travel allowance.

While the pandemic will require that the process be much more virtual, the Foundation will seek the brightest emerging Scholars from Canada and abroad to receive this remarkable Scholarship, as has always been the case. Through the Foundation’s leadership development program, these Scholars will learn from a new cohort of Fellows and Mentors, leading lights in their institutions and communities, under the scientific theme beginning in 2021, Language, Culture & Identity. 

The selection criteria for 2021 ushers in important changes rooted in the Foundation’s Strategic Plan 2019-2024. Importantly, these criteria are built upon the definition of diversity outlined in the plan, including the commitment to a diversity of perspectives, now under the banner Plurality of Perspectives. We continue to seek scholars with the greatest intellectual capacity, while also looking for those committed to deep listening, profound curiosity, exploring grey areas, and demonstrating a willingness to engage with a diversity of people, cultures, ideologies, and perspectives. In tandem with this development, the Foundation is pleased its programs will bear the emblem Brave Spaces, accountable and democratic spaces where a multiplicity of ideas may be expressed and debated in an open and welcoming fashion. This commitment to Brave Spaces, privileging robust debates while offering a safety net of policy, empathy circles, and mutual respect, recognizes that challenging and sometimes uncomfortable discussions are important steps on the road to becoming an Engaged Leader. 

Selection Criteria

  • Academic excellence;
  • Leadership experience and abilities;
  • Thematic relevance of research to the Foundation’s themes;
  • Public engagement;
  • Desire to contribute to public dialogue and share knowledge;
  • Communication skills;
  • Desire to belong to a vibrant community made up of leaders from across sectors

The Foundation welcomes candidates embodying all forms of diversity, including but not limited to gender, ethnicity, language, region, and discipline. We encourage First Nations, Métis, and Inuit candidates.

Eligibility: To apply to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Scholarship, you must meet the following eligibility criteria:

  • 1) You must be already accepted into or in year one or two of a full-time doctoral program, and expected to complete your doctoral studies in 2025 or later.
  • 2) Your field of study is broadly related to the humanities or human sciences of direct relevance to the future of Canada; (please refer to the FAQ for more details and read up on past scholarship recipients)
  • 3) Your doctoral work must relate to at least one of the Foundation’s Four Themes: Human Rights and Dignity, Responsible Citizenship, Canada and the World, People and their Natural Environment.
  • 4) Be a Canadian citizen studying at a Canadian or foreign institution, or a non-Canadian (permanent resident of Canada or foreign national) enrolled in a doctoral program at a Canadian institution.

Selection:

  1. Candidates who are committed to a three-year leadership program and who meet the eligibility criteria can apply directly to the Foundation through the application portal.
  2. Universities play an integral role encouraging candidates to apply, recommending candidates (academic referees) and later, confirming the status of their students and other details.
  3. The Foundation reviews all applications and shortlisted candidates are invited to group interviews. Finalists proceed to interviews with the Application and Nomination Review Committee (ANRC) who ultimately recommend their choices to the Board of Directors for final approval.

Number of Awards: Up to 20 Scholars will be selected in 2021.

Value of Awards: If you are chosen as a Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation Scholar, you will receive:

  • Membership in a community of other Scholars, Mentors, and Fellows, all of whom are leaders and change-makers in their respective disciplines and sectors;
  • Leadership training from Mentors and Fellows;
  • $40,000 per year for three years to cover tuition and reasonable living expenses; and
  • Up to $20,000 per year for three years, as a research and travel allowance;

If you are chosen as a Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation Scholar, you must:

  • Attend a community retreat and two Institutes of Engaged Leadership during the first year of your term;
  • Collaboratively plan and participate in a conference event during the second year of your term;
  • Work with other Scholars, Mentors, and Fellows on a creative knowledge sharing and dissemination project during the third year of your term;
  • Work towards fluency in English and French with support from the Foundation;
  • Actively engage and collaborate with the Foundation’s community of Scholars, Mentors, and Fellows; and
  • Submit one research progress report per year.

Duration: 3 years

How to Apply for Trudeau Foundation Doctoral Scholarships:

  1. Are you ready to embark on a leadership development journey rooted in Brave Spaces? : Before beginning, make sure to read more about the Foundation’s programs and Brave Spaces. 
    • Are you willing to learn from peers, Fellows and Mentors? The Foundation’s leadership curriculum, Brave Spaces: The Path to Engaged Leadership, is anchored by six key leadership concepts: audacity & resilience communication & sharing knowledge, creativity & innovation, diversity, collaboration and duty of service, and by fostering these key competencies and values, the leadership program seeks to develop three dimensions of Scholars’ leadership: leadership of self, leadership among others and leadership of systems. Fellows and Mentors support this leadership training as trainers, advisers and mentors.
    • Are you interested to learn more about Global Economies? For the three-year leadership program starting in 2022, this scientific cycle will be focused on Global Economies, a theme that has interdisciplinary dimensions and reflects a timely and significant set of issues for the future of Canada and the world.
    • Are you committed to improving your abilities in the Canadian official language with which you are less familiar and an interest in becoming familiar with Indigenous Languages? The Foundation recognizes that knowledge of multiple languages is a hallmark of leaders and public intellectuals, and is a strength and advantage, both professionally and personally. The Foundation’s Policy on Language: BilingualismPlus outlines the Foundation’s support of its Scholars in Canada’s Official Languages – French and English – and in Canada’s Indigenous Languages. Read more about the Foundation’s BilingualismPlus policy here.
    • Do you believe in academic freedom, respectful dialogue, and open debate? The Foundation fosters a community of bold, cutting-edge researchers and community leaders who hold strong views and stand out in their respective fields, who explore, ask difficult questions, and discover new horizons as they blaze new trails. The Foundation openly encourages the free transmission and dissemination of knowledge and has enshrined this in a Code of Community Engagement . The Code informs successful engagement with a plurality of perspectives and encourage academic and intellectual freedom and open speech, while providing a framework for a positive and healthy environment for such exchanges.
    • Candidates are invited to join the Foundation for virtual information sessions on November 10th, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. EST for the French session and at 12:30 p.m. EST for the English session. These information sessions will take place via Zoom, and you may attend by video or by phone if you prefer. Kindly let us know if you require ASL or LSQ sign interpretation by emailing leadership@trudeaufoundation.ca. We will be happy to provide this service. Kindly note the following connection details: 
      • Wednesday, November 10th, 2021 – 1.5 hour French session for Scholar candidates at 10:00 a.m. EST. Register here!
         
      • Wednesday, November 10th, 2021 – 1.5 hour English session for Scholar candidates at 12:30 p.m. EST. Register here!
  2. Register for an account: When the competition opens, register for an account on the Foundation’s application portal. If you already have an account from a scholarship competition prior to 2021, you will need to create a new application.
  3. Fill out the application: Once your registration is complete, you will be able to create an application for the 2022 Scholarship Competition. In order to complete your application, you will need to provide: 
    • Demographic information on yourself: The Foundation gathers demographic information for statistical purposes, in order to fulfill its commitment to diversity and inclusion. This information will only be used by the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. 
    • Essay Questions: Provide answers (200 to 400 words) to four essay questions.
    • Doctoral Projects and Themes: Provide information on your doctoral project, with answers ranging from 200 to 400 words in length.
    • Referees: Enter the name and email address of two referees in the boxes provided. At least one of them must be an academic referee who is able to comment on your university academic performance. Refer to “Get recommendations” below for more details.
    • Language Skills, Post-secondary Education, Achievements and Experience: Provide information on your language skills, your post-secondary education, your achievements – including scholarships, fellowships, awards, publications, conferences, extracurricular and volunteer activities – as well as your relevant work experience.
    • Upload Transcripts: Upload transcripts for all your post-secondary education, except information related to CEGEP in Quebec, should you have attended CEGEP in Quebec. 
    • Read and understand the Foundation’s policies: All candidates are asked to acknowledge that they have read and understood key policies of the Foundation. Throughout the three-year program, all Scholars are asked to read, understand and comply with these policies: Policy on the Prevention of Harassment and Violence and Code of Community Engagement.  
  4. Get recommendations: Once you have entered the name and email address of your referees in the space provided in the application form, an email will automatically be sent to the referees, asking them to complete a predetermined referral form directly on the Foundation’s application portal. Referees must complete the predetermined referral form, which includes both narrative answers and numerical evaluations. We are no longer asking referees to upload their reference letter in PDF format on our application portal. We advise that you follow up with your referees to ensure they submit the completed form on time, by December 21, 2021 at 5:00 p.m EST.
  5. PETF selection process: All eligible candidates who submit a completed application by December 21, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. EST will go through a rigorous selection process. Shortlisted candidates (Round One) will be contacted in February 2022 and invited to group interviews. Finalists (Round Two) will then be invited to meet for individual interviews with members of the ANRC in March 2022. 
  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Ten Contradictions That Plague Biden’s Democracy Summit

Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J. S. Davies



Thailand Protest
Protest by students in Thailand. AP

President Biden’s virtual Summit for Democracy on December 9-10 is part of a campaign to restore the United States’ standing in the world, which took such a beating under President Trump’s erratic foreign policies. Biden hopes to secure his place at the head of the “Free World” table by coming out as a champion for human rights and democratic practices worldwide.

The greater possible value of this gathering of 111 countries is that it could instead serve as an “intervention,” or an opportunity for people and governments around the world to express their concerns about the flaws in U.S. democracy and the undemocratic way the United States deals with the rest of the world. Here are just a few issues that should be considered

( 1) The U.S. claims to be a leader in global democracy at a time when its own already deeply flawed democracy is crumbling, as evidenced by the shocking January 6 assault on the nation’s Capitol. On top of the systemic problem of a duopoly that keeps other political parties locked out and the obscene influence of money in politics, the U.S. electoral system is being further eroded by the increasing tendency to contest credible election results and widespread efforts to suppress voter participation (19 states have enacted 33 laws that make it more difficult for citizens to vote).

A broad global ranking of countries by various measures of democracy puts the U.S. at # 33, while the U.S. government-funded Freedom House ranks the United States a miserable # 61 in the world for political freedom and civil liberties, on a par with Mongolia, Panama and Romania.

(2) The unspoken U.S. agenda at this “summit” is to demonize and isolate China and Russia. But if we agree that democracies should be judged by how they treat their people, then why is the U.S. Congress failing to pass a bill to provide basic services like health care, child care, housing and education, which are guaranteed to most Chinese citizens for free or at minimal cost?]

And consider China’s extraordinary success in relieving poverty. As UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said, “Every time I visit China, I am stunned by the speed of change and progress. You have created one of the most dynamic economies in the world, while helping more than 800 million people to lift themselves out of poverty – the greatest anti-poverty achievement in history.”

China has also far surpassed the U.S. in dealing with the pandemic. Little wonder a Harvard University report found that over 90% of the Chinese people like their government. One would think that China’s extraordinary domestic achievements would make the Biden administration a bit more humble about its “one-size-fits-all” concept of democracy.

(3) The climate crisis and the pandemic are a wake-up call for global cooperation, but this Summit is transparently designed to exacerbate divisions. The Chinese and Russian ambassadors to Washington have publicly accused the United States of staging the summit to stoke ideological confrontation and divide the world into hostile camps, while China held a competing International Democracy Forum with 120 countries the weekend before the U.S. summit.

Inviting the government of Taiwan to the U.S. summit further erodes the 1972 Shanghai Communiqué, in which the United States acknowledged the One-China policy and agreed to cut back military installations on Taiwan.

Also invited is the corrupt anti-Russian government installed by the 2014 U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine, which reportedly has half its military forces poised to invade the self-declared People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in Eastern Ukraine, who declared independence in response to the 2014 coup. The U.S. and NATO have so far supported this major escalation of a civil war that already killed 14,000 people.

(4) The U.S. and its Western allies—the self-anointed leaders of human rights—just happen to be the major suppliers of weapons and training to some of the world’s most vicious dictators. Despite its verbal commitment to human rights, the Biden administration and Congress recently approved a $650 million weapons deal for Saudi Arabia at a time when this repressive kingdom is bombing and starving the people of Yemen.

Heck, the administration even uses U.S. tax dollars to “donate” weapons to dictators, like General Sisi in Egypt, who oversees a regime with thousands of political prisoners, many of whom have been tortured. Of course, these U.S. allies were not invited to the Democracy Summit—that would be too embarrassing.

(5) Perhaps someone should inform Biden that the right to survive is a basic human right. The right to food is recognized in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights as part of the right to an adequate standard of living, and is enshrined in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

So why is the U.S. imposing brutal sanctions on countries from Venezuela to North Korea that are causing inflation, scarcity, and malnutrition among children? Former UN special rapporteur Alfred de Zayas has blasted the United States for engaging in “economic warfare” and compared its illegal unilateral sanctions to medieval sieges. No country that purposely denies children the right to food and starves them to death can call itself a champion of democracy.

(6) Since the United States was defeated by the Taliban and withdrew its occupation forces from Afghanistan, it is acting as a very sore loser and reneging on basic international and humanitarian commitments. Certainly Taliban rule in Afghanistan is a setback for human rights, especially for women, but pulling the plug on Afghanistan’s economy is catastrophic for the entire nation.

The United States is denying the new government access to billions of dollars in Afghanistan’s foreign currency reserves held in U.S. banks, causing a collapse in the banking system. Hundreds of thousands of public servants have not been paid. The UN is warning that millions of Afghans are at risk of starving to death this winter as the result of these coercive measures by the United States and its allies.

(7) It’s telling that the Biden administration had such a difficult time finding Middle Eastern countries to invite to the summit. The United States just spent 20 years and $8 trillion trying to impose its brand of democracy on the Middle East and Afghanistan, so you’d think it would have a few proteges to showcase.

But no. In the end, they could only agree to invite the state of Israel, an apartheid regime that enforces Jewish supremacy over all the land it occupies, legally or otherwise. Embarrassed to have no Arab states attending, the Biden administration added Iraq, whose unstable government has been racked by corruption and sectarian divisions ever since the U.S. invasion in 2003. Its brutal security forces have killed over 600 demonstrators since huge anti-government protests began in 2019.

(8) What, pray tell, is democratic about the U.S. gulag at Guantánamo Bay? The U.S. Government opened the Guantanamo detention center in January 2002 as a way to circumvent the rule of law as it kidnapped and jailed people without trial after the crimes of September 11, 2001. Since then, 780 men have been detained there. Very few were charged with any crime or confirmed as combatants, but still they were tortured, held for years without charges, and never tried.

This gross violation of human rights continues, with most of the 39 remaining detainees never even charged with a crime. Yet this country that has locked up hundreds of innocent men with no due process for up to 20 years still claims the authority to pass judgment on the legal processes of other countries, in particular on China’s efforts to cope with Islamist radicalism and terrorism among its Uighur minority.

(9) With the recent investigations into the March 2019 S. bombing in Syria that left 70 civilians dead and the drone strike that killed an Afghan family of ten in August 2021, the truth of massive civilian casualties in U.S. drone strikes and airstrikes is gradually emerging, as well as how these war crimes have perpetuated and fueled the “war on terror,” instead of winning or ending it.

If this was a real democracy summit, whistleblowers like Daniel HaleChelsea Manning and Julian Assange, who have risked so much to expose the reality of U.S. war crimes to the world, would be honored guests at the summit instead of political prisoners in the American gulag.

(10) The United States picks and chooses countries as “democracies” on an entirely self-serving basis. But in the case of Venezuela, it has gone even farther and invited an imaginary U.S.-appointed “president” instead of the country’s actual government.

The Trump administration anointed Juan Guaidó as “president” of Venezuela, and Biden invited him to the summit, but Guaidó is neither a president nor a democrat, and he boycotted parliamentary elections in 2020 and regional elections in 2021. But Guaido did come tops in one recent opinion poll, with the highest public disapproval of any opposition figure in Venezuela at 83%, and the lowest approval rating at 13%.

Guaidó named himself “interim president” (without any legal mandate) in 2019, and launched a failed coup against the elected government of Venezuela. When all his U.S.-backed efforts to overthrow the government failed, Guaidó signed off on a mercenary invasion which failed even more spectacularly. The European Union no longer recognizes Guaido’s claim to the presidency, and his “interim foreign minister” recently resigned, accusing Guaidó of corruption.

Conclusion

Just as the people of Venezuela have not elected or appointed Juan Guaidó as their president, the people of the world have not elected or appointed the United States as the president or leader of all Earthlings.

When the United States emerged from the Second World War as the strongest economic and military power in the world, its leaders had the wisdom not to claim such a role. Instead they brought the whole world together to form the United Nations, on the principles of sovereign equality, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, a universal commitment to the peaceful resolution of disputes and a prohibition on the threat or use of force against each other.

The United States enjoyed great wealth and international power under the UN system it devised. But in the post-Cold War era, power-hungry U.S. leaders came to see the UN Charter and the rule of international law as obstacles to their insatiable ambitions. They belatedly staked a claim to universal global leadership and dominance, relying on the threat and use of force that the UN Charter prohibits. The results have been catastrophic for millions of people in many countries, including Americans.

Since the United States has invited its friends from around the world to this ”democracy summit,” maybe they can use the occasion to try to persuade their bomb-toting friend to recognize that its bid for unilateral global power has failed, and that it should instead make a real commitment to peace, cooperation and international democracy under the rules-based order of the UN Charter.

Irish coalition government forced to introduce new restrictions as COVID cases surge

Dermot Quinn


On Thursday, Ireland's National Public Health Emergency Team (NPHET) confirmed a further 4,022 new cases of COVID-19 with 530 patients hospitalised and 115 in intensive care. There were 81 deaths the previous week. In all 5,788 people have now died from COVID in the country. Daily infection rates have been running at around 5,000 for weeks now.

Although Ireland is one of the most vaccinated countries in the world, the country currently also has one of the highest rates of infection. As of December 6, 1,355 of every 100,000 people were infected with coronavirus. Just under 15 percent of all tests are returning positive results. Daily new case rates are twice the average across Europe.

Micheál Martin (credit: Wikimedia Commons)

Faced with the surge in cases, the coalition government made up of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party was forced December 3 to extend COVID-19 emergency legislation until January 9, 2022 and re-introduce minimal restrictions.

From Tuesday this week, home visits were limited to individuals from four households. Social distancing requirements, restrictions on table numbers in restaurants and mandatory mask wearing have also been re-introduced. Nightclubs will close, and indoor sporting events, concerts, cultural and entertainment events have been reduced to 50 percent of capacity. At all these events a person will need “proof of immunity” to enter.

The government has partially restored the Pandemic Unemployment Payment (PUP). This was first introduced in March 2020 for those who had lost employment due to COVID-19 restrictions. New applications to the scheme were suspended in July 2021. Now it is being reintroduced on a graded and miserly basis with the worst-paid workers receiving as little as €150 per week.

At a recent NPHET meeting, Chief Medical Officer Dr Tony Holohan called for government restrictions to combat the virus to protect critical care capacity in the hospital system. As more people come forward for treatment for non-COVID related health issues, the Irish health system, suffering from decades of cuts and staff shortages, is beginning to tear at the seams. Accelerating COVID-19 cases threaten to overwhelm capacity. With an additional five cases of the even more transmissible Omicron variant identified in Ireland Thursday, this brings the total to six.

The Republic of Ireland already has one of the longest waiting times in the European Union for various medical procedures. It has 622,963 people waiting for outpatient procedures. During the first week of November 2,305 patients waited on trolleys due to bed shortages—the highest number since the pandemic began.

NPHET’s minutes from November gave insight into the spread of the virus into care, health and education institutions. In the week to November 6, three nursing homes, two community hospitals, 10 acute hospitals, 13 disability centres, two homeless units, two child residential centres, a prison, an older people’s centre and an addiction unit all reported outbreaks, as did six “other healthcare” services. Cases were also reported in seven childcare facilities, two schools and one university. Twenty-four workplaces, including ten associated with manufacturing, recorded outbreaks.

The rate of infection in children aged 5-12 has risen dramatically. Nearly 20,000 cases were reported in the last four weeks.

Last weekend, it was widely reported that two primary schools in Dublin developed large infection clusters. At Saint Pauls Senior School in Ayrfield, 12 out of 18 pupils in the same class were infected, as well as staff members. The second school reported 10 cases in one class.

Principal of St Paul's Senior School Feargal Brougham appealed for “honesty” from the authorities about what is happening in primary schools. He told broadcaster RTE, “I would ask that public health revisit their assurances that children are not transmitting the virus in schools. When community transmission is at such a height, I don’t believe that any mitigation measures can stop it from spreading in the classroom too.”

Both schools complained of a complete lack of support from the authorities in dealing with the outbreaks. According to the principle of the second, unnamed, school, “They take our query, log it, and then public health ignores it”.

Keeping schools open as child minding facilities so parents can work and keep profits flowing is the overriding concern of the coalition government and the ruling elite it serves. As infections surge, Taoiseach Micheál Martin told the Dáil last week there is “no talk of closing schools”, despite his admitting that cases of COVID-19 among children have gone “through the roof”. With the latest restrictions children will be required to wear masks from nine years up while attending school.

The new restrictions are overall mainly aimed at sporting events, concerts, cultural and entertainment events, restricting social life over the Christmas period. Profits, however, will continue to flow from production and the financial sector over the holiday period. As infections and hospitalisations soar the government has suggested people work from home only “where possible” in the full knowledge that tens of thousands will be forced to continue to labour in dangerous workplaces.

The spiraling case and death numbers bear witness to the criminal policy pursued by the coalition. One year ago, the government opened up the economy for Christmas at the behest of business interests, triggering waves of infections, hospitalisations and deaths. In July, despite much evidence that hasty removal of travel restrictions contributed to waves of infection, the government opened up travel, as deaths from the virus surpassed 5,000 and the Delta variant emerged.

The government is backed by a relentless propaganda offensive mounted by big business, exemplified by billionaire airline boss Michael O’Leary. The Ryanair CEO, speaking for the entire corporate oligarchy, is continually given media coverage to complain that NPHET is disseminating misinformation, “scare stories” and stoking “mass hysteria”. In July, during the summer holiday season, he rubbished NPHET’s warnings about the Delta strain as a “variant scariant” in a letter to government. O’Leary accused NPHET of “making it up as they go along”.

The situation in Northern Ireland is very similar. The Chief Scientific Officer Professor Ian Young warned this week of an incoming wave of infection associated with the Omicron variant. “When it comes will be rapid and potentially the wave will be large compared with previous waves of the virus in terms of numbers of cases”. Both Young and the Chief Medical Officer Sir Michael McBride, spoke of likely restrictions before Christmas but said it was not possible to predict measures necessary to keep the new variant under control. Closing schools would be “the very, very last thing we look at” insisted McBride.

The Northern Ireland Executive, led by Democratic Unionist Party First Minister Paul Givan and his Sinn Fein Deputy Michelle O’Neill, insisted decisions would not be taken in “panic mode”. O’Neill told the BBC that “what we’re doing is enough”. In all, 2,912 people have died of COVID-19 in the north, 329 are currently in hospital, including 38 in intensive care. 1,933 new cases were reported on Wednesday, up from 1,658 the previous day.