Podcasts about princeton school

True grit? Not the movie or book, but a real live individual. I met Laura Bratton about a month ago and realized that she was a very unique individual. Laura was referred to me by a gentleman who is helping both Laura and me find speaking venue leads through his company. Laura is just ramping up her public speaking career and our mutual colleague, Sam Richter, thought I could be of help. Little did I know at the outset that not only would I gain an excellent podcast guest, but that I would find someone whose life parallelled mine in many ways.   Laura Bratton began losing her eyesight at the age of nine years. Like me, she was one of the lucky ones who had parents who made the choice to encourage their daughter and help her live her life to the fullest. And live it she does. Laura attended public school in South Carolina and then went to Arizona State University to secure her bachelor's degree in Psychology. Why ASU? Wait until you hear Laura tell that story.   After securing her degree in Psychology she moved to the Princeton School of Divinity where she secured a Master's degree in Divinity. She followed up her Master's work by serving in a chaplaincy program in Ohio for a year.   Then, if all that wasn't enough, she became a pastor in the United Methodist Church and took a position in South Carolina. She still works part time as a pastor, but she also has taken some other exciting and positive life turns. As I mentioned earlier, she is now working to build a public speaking career. She also does one-on-one coaching. In 2016 she wrote her first book.   Laura shares many poignant and relevant life lessons she has learned over the years. We talk about courage, gratitude and grit. I asked her to define grit which she does. A very interesting and good definition indeed.   I often get the opportunity to have guests on this podcast who share life and other lessons with all of us. To me, Laura's insights are as relevant as any I have encountered. I hope you will feel the same after listening to our conversation. Please let me know what you think. You can email me at michaelhi@accessibe.com.       About the Guest:   At the age of nine, Laura was diagnosed with an eye disease and faced the difficult reality that she would become blind. Over the next ten years she experienced the traumatic transition of adjusting to life without sight.  Laura adjusted to her new normal and was able to move forward in life as she graduated from Arizona State University with a BA in psychology. She then was the first blind student to receive her Masters of Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary.  She is the author of the book, Harnessing Courage. Laura founded Ubi Global, which is an organization that provides speaking and coaching to empower all people to overcome challenges and obstacles with grit and gratitude. Ways to connect with Dr. Laura:   Link for LinkedIn www.linkedin.com/in/laura-bratton-speaking   Website https://www.laurabratton.com/   Link for coaching page on website https://www.laurabratton.com/coaching  Link for book on website https://www.laurabratton.com/book   Link for speaking page on website https://www.laurabratton.com/speaking   About the Host:   Michael Hingson is a New York Times best-selling author, international lecturer, and Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe. Michael, blind since birth, survived the 9/11 attacks with the help of his guide dog Roselle. This story is the subject of his best-selling book, Thunder Dog.   Michael gives over 100 presentations around the world each year speaking to influential groups such as Exxon Mobile, AT&T, Federal Express, Scripps College, Rutgers University, Children's Hospital, and the American Red Cross just to name a few. He is Ambassador for the National Braille Literacy Campaign for the National Federation of the Blind and also serves as Ambassador for the American Humane Association's 2012 Hero Dog Awards.   https://michaelhingson.com https://www.facebook.com/michael.hingson.author.speaker/ https://twitter.com/mhingson https://www.youtube.com/user/mhingson https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelhingson/   accessiBe Links https://accessibe.com/ https://www.youtube.com/c/accessiBe https://www.linkedin.com/company/accessibe/mycompany/ https://www.facebook.com/accessibe/       Thanks for listening!   Thanks so much for listening to our podcast! If you enjoyed this episode and think that others could benefit from listening, please share it using the social media buttons on this page. Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a comment in the section below!   Subscribe to the podcast   If you would like to get automatic updates of new podcast episodes, you can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher. You can subscribe in your favorite podcast app. You can also support our podcast through our tip jar https://tips.pinecast.com/jar/unstoppable-mindset .   Leave us an Apple Podcasts review   Ratings and reviews from our listeners are extremely valuable to us and greatly appreciated. They help our podcast rank higher on Apple Podcasts, which exposes our show to more awesome listeners like you. If you have a minute, please leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts.       Transcription Notes:   Michael Hingson ** 00:00 Access Cast and accessiBe Initiative presents Unstoppable Mindset. The podcast where inclusion, diversity and the unexpected meet. Hi, I'm Michael Hingson, Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe and the author of the number one New York Times bestselling book, Thunder dog, the story of a blind man, his guide dog and the triumph of trust. Thanks for joining me on my podcast as we explore our own blinding fears of inclusion unacceptance and our resistance to change. We will discover the idea that no matter the situation, or the people we encounter, our own fears, and prejudices often are our strongest barriers to moving forward. The unstoppable mindset podcast is sponsored by accessiBe, that's a c c e s s i capital B e. Visit www.accessibe.com to learn how you can make your website accessible for persons with disabilities. And to help make the internet fully inclusive by the year 2025. Glad you dropped by we're happy to meet you and to have you here with us. Well and a gracious hello to you, wherever you happen to be on our planet today, I am your host, Michael Hinkson, and you are listening to unstoppable mindset where inclusion, diversity and the unexpected meet, and we sort of get to tie several of those together today, because my guest, Laura Bratton happens to be blind, so that brings inclusion into it, and we could talk about diversity all day. The experts really tend to make that a challenge, but we can talk about it ourselves, but Laura is blind, and she's going to tell us about that, and I don't know what else, because that's the unexpected part of this, but we're going to have ourselves a lot of fun for the next hour. She knows that the only rule of the podcast is you got to have fun, and you can't do better than that. So Laura, welcome to unstoppable mindset. We're glad you're here.   Laura Bratton ** 02:12 Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity. I'm excited.   Michael Hingson ** 02:15 Well, this will be some fun, I'm sure, which is, of course, what it's all about. Well, why don't we start by you telling us kind of about the early Laura, growing up and all that, and anything about that that you think we ought to know that'll help us as we go forward.   Laura Bratton ** 02:31 So the early Laura was,   Michael Hingson ** 02:34 you know, that was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. But yeah,   Laura Bratton ** 02:38 was was fearless. Was involved in so many different activities, and I didn't have any health concerns or vision problems. And then around the age of nine, after the summer, after my second grade school year, my parents started noticing she's just holding books a little bit closer. She's just sitting a little bit closer to the TV than normal, than usually. So my they decided we'll just make a regular pediatric ophthalmology appointment, take her to the doctor, get the doctor to check her out. You know, if you need glasses, that's fine, and we'll just move on with our our summer and prepare for a new school year. So that June, when I had that doctor's appointment, my eyes were dilated. I'd read the the letters on the chart in the room. The doctors had looked in my eyes, and then the doctor just rolled back in his chair and looked at my mom and said, there's a major problem going on, and we need to address this, and I'm going to send you to a retina specialist. There's something major going on with her retinas. So from that appointment that started the rest of the summer and into the fall of just having doctors, different doctors appointments, meeting with specialists, trying to figure out why this 910, year old was all of a sudden having vision problems.   Michael Hingson ** 04:20 So yeah, go ahead that,   Laura Bratton ** 04:22 yeah. So that started the whole vision loss journey,   Michael Hingson ** 04:27 and what was the diagnosis that they finally came up with?   Laura Bratton ** 04:31 So they finally came up with a diagnosis of rare retinal onset disease. So it's not genetic. It wasn't like another accident, physical accident that calls the blindness. It's most similar to macular. So what I was losing first was my central vision. I still had all my peripheral vision, so it's very similar to macular, but not. Not quite macular or star guards. What's happens in children? So that's the diagnosis, just rare retinal disease.   Michael Hingson ** 05:11 Interesting, and they they didn't have any idea that what caused it. Do they have any better idea today? Or is it just so rare that they don't tend to pay a whole lot of attention. Great   Laura Bratton ** 05:23 question, yes and yes. So I've done a lot of genetic testing over the years, and the gene has not been discovered. That is obviously what they are predicting, is that there had to be some kind of gene mutation. But that gene hasn't been discovered. So far, the genes that are identified with vision problems, those have not been the problem for me so far. So the gene, Gene hasn't been discovered. So testing continues, but not exactly sure yet.   Michael Hingson ** 05:59 Yeah. So do you have any eyesight left, or is it all gone?   Laura Bratton ** 06:04 I don't, so to continue kind of that process of of the the early childhood. So I was diagnosed around nine, but I didn't lose any major vision until I was in middle school. So the end of middle school is when I started to lose a significant part of sight. So I went from very quickly from roller print, large print, to braille, and that was a very quick transition. So basically it was normal print to learning Braille and using Braille and textbooks and Braille and audio books and all that. Then through high school, I will throw more a significant amount of vision. So what I have currently is just very limited light perception, no, what I consider no usable vision, just light perception,   Michael Hingson ** 06:55 so you learn braille. So you learn braille in middle school. Then, yes, okay, absolutely. What did you think about that? Because that was certainly a life change for you. How did you deal with all of that?   Laura Bratton ** 07:10 How did I do with the process of learning braille or the emotional process?   07:14 Both,   Laura Bratton ** 07:16 they're kind of related, so both, they're very much related. So learning Braille was incredibly difficult because I was trying to learn it at the same time. Use it with textbooks in middle school level material rather than normal development. Of you learn braille and start out, you know, with with simple books, and slowly move up. I try, you know, I had to make that adjustment from learning Braille and then algebra in Braille or Spanish and Braille. So using the Braille was very difficult, but I was because I was forced to to learn it, because I had to, just to stay in school. You didn't really have a choice. As far as the emotional perspective. My first thoughts was just the denial, oh, it's not that bad, oh, it won't be forever. Oh, it's not going to get much worse than this. Just that denial of the reality. And then I can say more, if it just kind of that whole how that whole process unfolded, that's kind of the whole emotional process. It   Michael Hingson ** 08:34 certainly was a major change for you, yes, but it sounds like by the time all was said and done, and you did have to immerse yourself, like in learning Braille and so on. So it was an immersive kind of thing. You, You did come through it, and you, you seem to be functioning pretty well today, I would gather   Laura Bratton ** 08:55 Yes, because of focusing on the emotional mindset piece. So once that I've sort of began to move out of denial. It was that, okay, well, I can't this is just too hard. And then what I eventually realized and accepted was, yes, it's hard and I can move forward. So just a practical example, is what you were saying about having to be fully immersed in the Braille. Yes, is really hard to jump from learning braille to knowing Braille and algebra. But also choose to move forward. As you said, I choose to immerse myself in this so that I can continue life, yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 09:42 and you you have done it. Well, how? How do you view blindness today?   Laura Bratton ** 09:49 That is a great question. So today is the balance of acknowledging. Yes, they're difficult moments. Yes, their stressful moments. Moments, and I have the resources to process that. So now, rather than just being a denial or being stuck in that I can't do this, I can say, okay, yes, this is hard. Yes, I am frustrated. Yes, I am overwhelmed in this moment, but also I can move forward with the gifts and purposes that I have in this world and using that as a strength. So for me, it's that acknowledging the rap the reality, but also moving forward with that belief in myself, trust in myself.   Michael Hingson ** 10:39 So how long did you at the beginning really grieve and view all this in a negative way? Because it sounds like you've evolved from that today.   Laura Bratton ** 10:53 Absolutely. So in my experience, the so I'm going to break the grief and the negative apart, because for me, it was two different experiences. So for me in those middle school, high school days, it was more than negative, and the grief just came along with that. Now even, you know, through college and even now, yes, there are moments that I grieve, but that negativity has turned into the mindset of strength, the mindset of trust, the mindset of okay, I can continue forward Again, living out those purposes, my purpose with those gifts as a source of strength, the source of courage. It's a source of just belief in myself. So my experience now is the mindset of holding both intention, holding space for both when I have those moments that I need to grieve, absolutely, giving myself those space and then at the same time, choosing to move forward with that courage, rather than being stuck in what I was in middle school of that negativity. Does that difference? Does that make us make sense of what I'm trying to separate the two?   Michael Hingson ** 12:19 Well, yeah, they overlap, but I understand what you're saying, Where, where and how were your parents in all of this?   Laura Bratton ** 12:28 So that was the incredible gift, that that was a deep source of strength, that as that middle school child who was in that negative place of denial and I can't, I can't. That was the source of strength. So immediately, when I was diagnosed, even though I didn't have major vision loss, I was diagnosed in elementary school, they wanted to send me to school for the deaf and blind, and so my parents had to fight to keep me in regular school. Again, I wasn't experiencing major vision loss, but just having minor vision loss, the school said, Okay, you're at a public school and going to a different school. So my parents were a source of strength, because they knowledge what was happening, what was going to happen, but also held me to the same standards.   Michael Hingson ** 13:25 And there are some schools, I don't know how much today, but in the past, there were some schools for the blind, and I'm not sure about schools for the deaf and blind, but we'll put them in the same category. But there were some schools that really did have very high standards, and and did do a great job. The Perkins School was one. Tom Sullivan, the actor, went through Perkins and and I know other people who did, but in general, the standards weren't the same, and I had the same issue. I remember my parents. We were in the office of the school principal of Yucca school where I went kindergarten through third grade here in California, okay, and I remember a shouting match between my father and my mother on one side, and Mr. Thompson, the principal on the other. And by the time all was said and done, he decided that it was he was going to acquiesce, because they were not going to let me go to the school for the blind, which would have been like, 400 miles away.   Laura Bratton ** 14:38 Okay, okay, so, so you can relate to that experience.   Michael Hingson ** 14:42 I can absolutely relate to that experience, and I think that it's for kids one of the most important things to hope comes along that parents deal with blindness in a in a positive way. Yes, and don't view it as something that's going to hold you back. I. 100% Yeah, because if they do, then that creates a much more difficult situation. Yes. So it's it's great that you had some parents who really stood up for you and helped as you went   Laura Bratton ** 15:15 Yes, and I was also deeply grateful that they all they held those standards at school, and they also held those standards at home. So they didn't just say, oh, you know, our expectations are lower for you at home, you don't have any more chores. You just kind of do whatever you want, get away with whatever you want. They kept those things standards. I still had chores we just made, you know, the accommodations are adapted if we needed to adapt anything. Yeah, a story that I always, always remember, just like you talking about you vividly remember being in that principal's office. I remember one day my the specific tour was unloading the dishwasher, and I remember thinking, well, oh, I'm not really, I don't really want to unload the dishwasher today. So I just kind of thought, Oh, the blindness will get me out of the situation. So I was like, Mom, I can't unload the dishwasher. I can't see exactly where to put all the silverware in the silverware of her door. And I still, I can still see this in my mind's eye. She was standing in the doorway the kitchen and the hallway, and she just turned around and just said, Laura, unload the dishwasher, put the silverware in the drawer, and just walked away. And that told me she was still holding me to the exact standards. She wasn't saying, Oh, honey, that's okay because of your blindness. Yeah, you don't have to do it. That was such a huge teaching moment for me, because it pulled me I can't use my blindness as an excuse. That was incredible experience and I always think back on and remember,   Michael Hingson ** 17:04 yeah, and I remember growing up, there were chores I did, there were chores My brother did, and there were things that we had to do, but we had, and my brother was cited two years older than I, but okay, but we had very supportive parents for both of us. And one of the things that the doctors told my parents when they discovered that I was blind, was that I was going to take all the love that the family had, even for my older sibling. Oh, my parent and my parents said that is just not so, and they worked really hard to make sure that my brother got all the things that that he needed and all the support that he needed as well. Wow. When he was still in high school, I remember they got him a car, and I don't remember when he got it. Maybe, I don't know whether he was already a senior in high school, but he got a car. And, you know, I didn't want a car. I right. I didn't want that, but, you know, that was okay. I would have driven it around if I got one, but, you know, that's okay, but, but parents are such an important part of the process, yes, and they have to be ready to take the leap, yes, that blindness isn't the problem. It's attitudes. That's really, that tend to really be the problem, right? 100%   Laura Bratton ** 18:24 and thankfully, thankfully, I had that. I had that experience another, another example that I always think of all the time, still such a vivid memory, is as as a family. We were a big sports family, and loved to go to different sporting events, and so we would always go to high school and college football games. And as I was in those middle school, high school years, those first, early days of experiencing difficult vision loss, where obviously I'm sitting in the sands and can't see the field clearly, rather than my parents saying, Oh, you're just going to stay home. Oh, you're not going with us. To be part of this, my dad are really, literally. Remember my dad saying, Here's a radio. I just put new batteries in. Let's go. So I would just sit there and, you know, with with my family, listening to the game on the radio. And that was such a gift, because, again, they didn't say, is what you're saying about the leap. They didn't say, okay, you can do this anymore. They just figured out a way to adapt so that I was still part.   Michael Hingson ** 19:34 Yeah, I've been to a number of baseball games, and the same thing, I've never been I've been to a high school football game, but I've never been to a pro football game, and I've never been to a basketball game, and while I think it would have been fun, I'm a little bit spoiled, and I think that the announcers today aren't as good as the announcers that we used to have, like Dick Enberg doing sports out here, who did. Football chick, Hearn, who did basketball, who could talk as fast as, I mean, he was, he was he taught me how to listen fast. That's great. He he talked as fast as many times books I read talk. He was just incredible. But that's okay. But still, I've been to games, and it is a lot of fun to be able to go and listen. It's even if you're listening on the radio, the point of being at the game is just the sounds and the experience of being at the game and hearing and interacting with all the sounds, because you're not hearing that as much through the radio as you are listening to the fans as they yell, or as the Yes, as the foul balls coming at you. You know, yes 100%   Laura Bratton ** 20:50 and just to feel the energy, you know, and your team's doing well, your team's not doing well, just to feel that energy, and there's to also to be there and have that, that fun experience with your family or friends, or you know, whoever you're with, that is such a fun experience. So yes,   Michael Hingson ** 21:08 so when you went into high school, did, what did you study? Or what did you do there?   Laura Bratton ** 21:15 What were your interests? So in college, when I   Michael Hingson ** 21:18 was thinking high school, but you can do college. So   Laura Bratton ** 21:21 High School, honestly, I didn't have specific professional interests, because it was just so much focused on the blind surviving and all the surviving, just the New Black, because the blindness was literally happening during high school, right? So my only focus was just survival passing because it was all of my energy was focused on the the learning Braille and just completing the assignments. Fast forward to college. My focus was definitely. My major was psychology. My focus was on psychology. A lot because of my personal experience, because of that experience in high school, and just that that not only that desire from my personal experience, but just using that experience to then help and support others from the mindset of of again, moving through that, that negativity to that, that foundation of grit. So it was definitely focused on psychology to be able to support others from a mindset perspective.   Michael Hingson ** 22:36 So how did you bring that into play in college?   Laura Bratton ** 22:40 So that was my focus. My My major was psychology, and then I I spent that, those years in college, figuring out specifically what area of psychology I wanted to focus on, which what, what facet of psychology I wanted my focus to be so that was, that was the purpose of the like psychology and taking different classes within psychology to try to figure out where my strengths within that Major   Michael Hingson ** 23:16 and what did you discover?   Laura Bratton ** 23:20 So what I discovered was I wanted the psychology to the mindset, to support people with to be that holistic perspective of, yes, the psychology, but also the spiritual connection and just our physical well being all connected together, so supporting our healthy mindsets and emotional health was not just psychology. It was the psychology, physical taking care of ourselves and the spiritual taking care of ourselves, all connected, combined together. So that's that's what led me to doing a master of divinity to be able to focus on and learn the spiritual part   Michael Hingson ** 24:15 of the mindset. So what part of psychology Did you eventually settle on   Laura Bratton ** 24:22 the holistic approach. So rather than just focus on specifically the mindset, focusing on us as a whole, being, supporting us through that mental, physical, spiritual connection that the healing, the empowerment came through, through all of that. So in that masters, what I focus on specifically was chaplaincy, so supporting people specifically I was a hospital chaplain, so focusing on helping people within the hospital setting, when they're there for different physical reasons and. Being able to be that spiritual presence focusing on both the spiritual and the emotional.   Michael Hingson ** 25:07 And where did you do your undergraduate study?   Laura Bratton ** 25:11 So I did my undergrad at Arizona State, and I was going to say a large reason, but not just a large reason, pretty much the whole reason I chose ASU was for their disability resources. So a major focus that that they emphasize is their disability resources is not a separate part of the university, but it's completely integrated into the university. So what I mean by that example of that is being a psychology major. I still had all the same classes. I was still in all the same classes as all the other psychology students on campus. I just had the accommodations that I needed. So that would be double time all testing or note takers, if I needed note takers in a class. So they did an incredible job, like they had a whole Braille lab that would print Braille books and provide books in PDF format. So the accommodations that I needed as a person who was blind were integrated in to the whole college experience. So that was incredibly powerful for me as a person who had just become blind and didn't know what resources were available.   Michael Hingson ** 26:37 Did you have any major challenges and major issues in terms of dealing with blindness and so on, while you're at ASU,   Laura Bratton ** 26:44 not at all. I am so grateful for that, because I wasn't the only person on campus who was blind. I wasn't the first blind person. I certainly wasn't the last so because they had so much experience, it was, it was an incredible, again, empowerment for me, because on the emotional perspective, it taught me, and literally practically showed me, yes, I give me a person with a disability and be integrated into the world, because They they showed me the resources that were available. So I was deeply, deeply grateful for what they taught me. Now, where did you grow up? So I grew up in South Carolina,   Michael Hingson ** 27:31 so that is and that's why I wanted to ask that, because we hadn't mentioned that you were from South Carolina before, but that was a major undertaking. Then to go all the way across country to go to ASU, yes. On the other hand, they do have a pretty good football team.   Laura Bratton ** 27:49 Just say Right, right, right   Michael Hingson ** 27:52 now, my I went to University California, Irvine. I don't even know. I'm sure they must have some sort of a football team today, but they do have a pretty good basketball team, and I haven't heard whether they won the Big West, but I haven't Yeah, but I haven't heard that they did. So I'm afraid that that they may not have until going to march madness. Yeah, but whatever,   Laura Bratton ** 28:21 team for March Madness spell your bracket in a different way.   Michael Hingson ** 28:25 Well, they've been in the big dance before they got to the Sweet 16 once, which was pretty cool. Wow, that's impressive. Yeah, that was pretty cool. That's so cool. What did your parents think of you going across country   Laura Bratton ** 28:42 again? Just like you talked about your parents being that taking that leap, they were incredibly supportive, because they knew ASU would provide the resources that I needed. Because again, in those years as I'm losing a major part of my sight, we didn't know other people who are blind. We didn't know what resources were available. Obviously, my parents reach out to people around us, you know, to connect with people who are blind, to learn about that, but we didn't have a lot of experience with that. So what we knew, and what my parents were excited about was ASU would be a place that I can not only have that college experience, but be taught the resources. And one of the major resources was my disability coordinator, so my disability coordinator, who was in charge of of creating all my accommodations, she was also blind, and that was such a healing experience for me, because she became a mentor. She was blind since birth. She. And so obviously we had different experiences, where I was just newly blind. She had been blind, but still, she was an incredibly powerful resource and mentor of just telling me, teaching me, not just telling me through her words, but living through her actions, you still have a full life like you're you're still a few a full human like you. This life still goes on. So she just modeled that in the way that she lived. So she she was, I'm so grateful for her mentorship, because she was very real. She had minimized blindness. But also she told me and taught me and showed me there's still a full, great life ahead,   Michael Hingson ** 30:53 which is really what all of us are trying to get the world to understand. Blindness isn't the end of the world. It's not the problem   Laura Bratton ** 31:02 exactly, exactly, she literally modeled that,   Michael Hingson ** 31:06 yeah, which was pretty cool. Well, then where did you go to get your Masters of divinity?   Laura Bratton ** 31:11 So then I went to get my masters at Princeton Theological Seminary, and that was a completely different experience, because, where as you, was completely set up for people with disabilities in the master's program, they had not had someone come through their program who was blind. So in that experience, I had to advocate and be very, very clear on what my needs were, meaning what the accommodations were that I needed, and then advocate that to the administration, which that wasn't a gift, because ASU had given me the foundation of knowing what I needed, what the accommodations Were then available. And then Princeton gave me the opportunity to become my own advocate, to force me to speak up and say, These are my needs, and these are accommodations I have. With these accommodations, I can be an equal student, so I'm not asking, Hey, give me good grades because I'm blind, but make the accommodation so that I have my books and PDF so I have double time on the test. So that was just as healing and just as powerful, because it gave me the opportunity to advocate and become clear on my needs so that I could communicate those needs. So   Michael Hingson ** 32:38 this is part of Princeton in New Jersey. Yes, so you were were in Jersey for a while, huh? Yes,   Laura Bratton ** 32:45 I went from sunny weather to   Michael Hingson ** 32:50 snowy weather. Well, you had some of that in South Carolina too, though,   Laura Bratton ** 32:53 yes, true, but from undergrad, it was quite the change.   Michael Hingson ** 32:58 Ah. But the real question is, when you were in New Jersey. Did you get to meet any members of the family? You know what I'm saying, the mob, Oh yes, absolutely being bada. Boom. Come on now,   Laura Bratton ** 33:11 definitely, definitely, definitely, absolutely, absolutely, yeah, lot of local restaurants and Oh yes,   Michael Hingson ** 33:21 oh yes. When we were building our home in New Jersey, my wife was in a wheelchair her whole life, and we decided that when we went to New Jersey, because I was going to be working in the city New York, we wanted to build a house, because it's cheaper to build an accessible home for somebody in a wheelchair. My wife then it is to buy a house and modify it so we wanted to build. And it turns out that the person who financed the building, we got a mortgage and all that without any difficulty, but we had to get somebody to build the house. And the realtors had people they worked with, the financier. Part of that was from a guy, well, let's just say his main business was, he was in the garbage business, and his last name was, was Pinto. So, you know, let's just say we know where he got his money. You know,   Laura Bratton ** 34:18 yes, yes. I had several those experiences too. Yeah, the garbage business seems to be big in Jersey. It   Michael Hingson ** 34:25 is big in Jersey, but, but, you know, but they were all, they were all very nice to us good. And so it really worked out well. It did. It all worked out. We had a wonderful home. The only difference between our house and the others around us is we had to include an elevator in the house, okay? Because we couldn't have a ranch style home. There wasn't room, and so we had to have and all the other homes in the development were two story homes, okay, but we had to have an elevator. So that was essentially about a $15,000 An uplift over what the House would have cost otherwise. But right again, you build it in so it's not that huge of a deal,   Laura Bratton ** 35:06 right? That's perfect. So all your neighbors are jealous.   Michael Hingson ** 35:10 Well, they didn't have the elevator. They didn't come and ride it much. So they didn't ask for their their their bigger challenges were, who's giving the biggest party at Christmas or Halloween? So we didn't participate in that, so we weren't we weren't a problem.   35:28 That's great,   Michael Hingson ** 35:30 yeah, so you've talked about grit a couple times, so tell me about grit, because clearly that's important to you,   Laura Bratton ** 35:39 yeah? So it's so important to me, because that was a main source of empowerment. So just as I talked about that negativity in the middle school high school, what grit helped me to do is take the overwhelming future that I was so fearful, I was extremely anxious as I looked at the whole picture everything ahead of me. So the grit came in and taught me. Grit is taking it day by day, moment by moment, step by step. So rather than looking at the whole picture and getting overwhelmed, the power of grit taught me all I need to do is trust myself for this next hour. All I need to do is trust in the support that my parents are giving me this next day. So breaking it down into manageable goals was the strength of the grit. So to break it down, rather than the whole future,   Michael Hingson ** 36:49 I didn't ask, do you did you have any siblings? Do you have any siblings?   Laura Bratton ** 36:53 Yeah, so I have one older brother. Okay, so   Michael Hingson ** 36:57 how was he with you being that you were blind. Was he a good older protective brother who never let anybody near his sister?   Laura Bratton ** 37:06 He was a good older protective brother in that he did exactly what my parents did in not having different expectations. Yeah, he so he's five years older. So when I'm 14, losing a significant amount of vision, or 15, losing a certain amount of division. He, you know, was 1920 doing great in college. So a perfect example of this connects with the grit he, he taught me, and again, not in word, not so much in words, but again, in those actions of we will figure this out. We don't know the resources that are available. We don't know exactly what the future looks like, but we as a family will figure this out. Me, as your older brother, our parents being our parents, we will figure it out day by day, step by step. And I remember a lot of people would ask my parents, what's her future, and then even ask my brother, what's her future? What's she gonna do? And they would honestly answer, we don't know, but as a family, we'll figure it out, and we'll provide the strength that she needs, and that's what I mean by the grit. So it wasn't, this is her future, and they just, you know, named it for being home with us, right? But it was, I don't know, but day by day, we'll have the grit to figure it out. So I'm glad you asked about my siblings, because that's a perfect example of how that grit came into play and was such a powerful source of strength.   Michael Hingson ** 38:54 So what did you do after you got your master's degree?   Laura Bratton ** 38:58 So after I got my master's degree, I then did a residency, just like I was talking about the chaplaincy. I did a residency specifically in chaplaincy to to complete that process of being a chaplain. So in that that was a year long process, and in that process, that was an incredible experience, because, again, it taught me, you are a complete human with gifts and talents. You just happen to be blind and need specific accommodations because of the blindness. So what I mean by that is, just as ASU gave me the resources regarding blindness, and just as Princeton gave me the gift to advocate for those resources, the experience in the chaplaincy taught me when I walked into a high. Hospital room and introduced myself as the chaplain on the unit. The patient didn't know, or didn't care how long I had been blind, or how did I make it on the unit? Or how did I know they wanted chaplain? They didn't care. They were just thankful and glad that I was there to serve them and be in that Chaplain role. So it was that's why it was empowering of healing to me, because it taught me not to focus so much on the blindness, but to view myself as that whole person, especially in that professional experience, so I can give endless examples of specifically how that, how, just the patient reaction taught me so much.   Michael Hingson ** 40:49 Where did you do your chaplaincy?   Laura Bratton ** 40:52 I did it at the Clinton clinic in Ohio. Oh,   Michael Hingson ** 40:56 my goodness, you did move around. Now. What got you there? Speaking of snow in the winter, yeah,   Laura Bratton ** 41:02 literally, I Yes, I can talk about that. And a lot of experiences there with snow, like effect snow is real. So they were very strong in their chaplaincy program and developing Kaplan's and also their Kaplan Z training was a focus that I wanted that holistic mind, body, spirit. It wasn't just spiritual or wasn't just psychological, it was the holistic experience of a whole person. So how wanting that to be my focus moving forward, that's where I chose to go to be able to focus on that. So again, it was such an incredible source of of healing through just through those patient interactions.   Michael Hingson ** 41:58 Well, one of the things that is clear about you is you're not bitter about any of the things that have happened, and that, in reality, you are a person who appreciates and understands the concept of gratitude.   Laura Bratton ** 42:11 Yes, yes. And specifically, let me go back to those high school days, and then I'll come back to the chaplain days, the way of the gratitude my focus started was not because I wanted gratitude, not because I chose to woke up, wake up one day and say, Oh, I'm so grateful for this blindness. But it all came through a mentor who said to me in those high school days, Laura, I want you to start writing down three things that you are grateful for each day and every day, I want you to write down three things that you're grateful for. So in my mind, my immediate reaction as a teenager, high schooler, was that's not good advice. I'm not sure you're a good mentor. I'm experiencing a major change in life, permanent life event. I don't know that there's a lot to be grateful for. So in my stubbornness, I said, Okay, I'm going to prove her wrong. So I started to think of the three things each day I was grateful for. And over the weeks that I did this, I then realized what she was teaching me, she was showing me. She wasn't asking me to be grateful for the blindness. She was asking me to recognize the gifts that the support that I had within the blindness. So, for example, the supportive parents, the older brother, who didn't make accommodations, or I mean, did make accommodations. Didn't lower expectations because of the blindness. So fast forward to the chaplaincy. I was incredibly grateful for all those patient experiences, because, again, it taught me to view myself as the whole person, not so hyper focused on the blindness. So one specific example that sticks out and was so clear to me is one day I had a patient request that one to see a chaplain, and I went in to this specific unit, and the so I walked in, my walked into the room, the patient took a look at my guide dog and me, and said, You're blind, like completely with this question or voice. And my thought was, well, I think so. I mean, that was this morning when I woke up, and so I said, Yes. And she said, Okay, then I'll, I'll share honestly with you how I'm doing and what I had learned, what I learned after my visit with her is she would not open up to the doctors, the nurses, the social workers, anyone who walked in the room. When I walked in the room and she didn't feel like she was being judged on her physical appearance, she was willing to open up and honestly share how she was feeling emotionally with her physical diagnosis. So that led that one conversation led to multiple visits where she could move forward in her healing emotionally because she was willing to open up and share and be honest with me as the chaplain. So that was an incredible situation of gratitude, because it taught me, yes, this is hard, yes, this is stressful. Yes, there are moments of being overwhelmed, and also their deep, deep moments that I am incredibly grateful for, that other people who are side sighted don't have that opportunity.   Michael Hingson ** 46:36 One of the things that I talk about and think about as life goes on, is we've talked about all the accommodations and the things that you needed to get in order to be able to function. What we and most everyone, takes for granted is it's the same for sighted people. You know, we invented the electric light bulb for sighted people. We invented windows so they can look out. Yes, we invent so many things, and we provide them so that sighted people can function right. And that's why I say, in large part, blindness isn't the problem, because the reality is, we can make accommodations. We can create and do create alternatives to what people who can see right choose, and that's important for, I think, everyone to learn. So what did you do after your year of chaplaincy?   Laura Bratton ** 47:39 So after my year of chaplaincy, after that incredible experience of just offering the patient care, I completed the part of the well after assorted in the master's program. But then after that, also completed my ordination in the Methodist Church. So I was appointed. I went to the process the ordination process, and then I was appointed to a local church back here in South Carolina. And again, with my focus on chaplaincy, my focus on patient care, I was appointed to that church for because what they needed most in the pastor the leader, was that emphasis on the pastoral care the mind, body, spirit connection. So as I became pastor, I was able to continue that role of what I was doing in the Kaplan see, of using both my professional experience as well as my personal experience of providing spiritual care to the members. So that was an incredible way. And again, that gratitude, it just I was so grateful that I could use those gifts of pastoral care, of chaplaincy to benefit others, to be a strength to others. Again, is that that whole person that that we   Michael Hingson ** 49:13 are now? Are you still doing that today? Or what are you doing   Laura Bratton ** 49:16 now? So I'm still I'm still there part time, okay,   Michael Hingson ** 49:21 and when you're not there, what are you doing?   Laura Bratton ** 49:23 I'm doing professional speaking, and it's all centered around my passion for that again, came when I was at Princeton, when I was doing the focus on chaplaincy, I became so passionate about the speaking to share my personal experience of the change I experienced, and also to empower others as they experience change, so not to be stuck in that. Negativity like we talked about in those middle school, high school days, but rather that everybody, regardless of the situation, could experience change, acknowledge it, and move forward with that balance of grit and gratitude. So that's my deep passion for and the reason for the speaking is to share that grit gratitude, as we all experience change.   Michael Hingson ** 50:26 So what made you decide to begin to do public speaking that what? What was the sort of the moment or the the inspiration that brought that about,   Laura Bratton ** 50:40 just that deep desire to share the resource that I'd experienced. So as I received so much support from family and community, is I had received that support of learning how to use the grit in the change, and then as I received the sport support of how to use the gratitude in the change, the reason for this, speaking and what made me so passionate, was to be able to empower others to also use this resource. So I didn't just want to say, okay, it worked for me, and so I'll just keep this to myself, but rather to use that as a source and empowerment and say, Hey, this has been really, really difficult, and here's how I can use the difficulty to empower others to support others.   Michael Hingson ** 51:31 So how's that working for you?   Laura Bratton ** 51:34 Great. I love, love, love supporting others as they go through that change. Because again, it comes back to the blindness. Is not not all we focus on, it's not all we think about, it's not all we talk about, it's not all we do, but being able to use that as a shrink to empower others. So just speaking to different organizations as they're going through change, and working with them speaking on that. How can they specifically apply the grit, the gratitude? How does that? What does that look like, practically, in their organization, in their situation? So I love it, because it takes the most difficult thing that I've been through, and turns it around to empower others.   Michael Hingson ** 52:24 What do you think about the concept that so many people talk about regarding public speaking, that, Oh, I couldn't be a public speaker. I don't want to be up in front of people. I'm afraid of it, and it's one of the top fears that we constantly hear people in society have that is being a public speaker. What do you think about that?   Laura Bratton ** 52:47 So two, two perspectives have helped me to process that fault, because you're right. People literally say that to me every day. How do you do that? I could never do that. I hear that every single day, all day, and what I've learned is when I focus on, yes, maybe it is the large audience, but focusing on I'm speaking to each person individually, and I'm speaking. I'm not just speaking to them, but I was speaking to serve them, to help again, that empowerment, to provide empowerment. So what I think about that is I don't focus on, oh my gosh. What are they going to think of me? I'm scared up here. Rather to have that mindset of, I'm here to share my life experiences so that they can be served and empowered to continue forward. So just shifting the mindset from fear to support fear to strength, that's that's how I view that concept of I could never do that, or that's my worst fear.   Michael Hingson ** 54:01 So a lot of people would say it takes a lot of courage to do what you do, what? How do you define courageous or being courageous?   Laura Bratton ** 54:08 Great question. That's a working, work in progress. So far, what I've learned over the years and again, this is a process. Not there wasn't just one moment where I said, Okay, now I'm courageous, and I'm courageous forever, or this is the moment that made me courageous, but how I understand it and how I process it now is for me and my experience courage is accepting and acknowledging the reality and then choosing to move forward with the grit, choosing to move forward with the gratitude. So holding both intention, both can be true, both I can acknowledge. Okay, this is difficult. Cult, and also I can also believe and know. I can have the grit moment by moment by moment. I can have the gratitude moment by moment by moment. So for me, courage is holding both intention the reality and what I mean by both is the reality of the blindness and reality of the frustration of people's faults, judgments. You know all that you can't do this. How can you do that without sight holding all of that at the same time as I have the support I need to move forward? So for me, Courage looks like acknowledging why I'm overwhelmed and then choosing at that same time to move forward with the support that I have. Mm, hmm. So again, that's what I mean by it's not just like one moment that, oh yeah, I'm gonna be courageous now forever, there's certainly a moment so I don't feel courageous, and that's okay. That's part of garbage. Just acknowledging that frustration and also choosing to move forward. So it's doing both it at the same time.   Michael Hingson ** 56:10 We live in a world today where there is a lot of change going on, yes, and some for the good, some not for the good, and and all sorts of things. Actually, I was reading an article this morning about Michael Connolly, the mystery writer who, for four decades, has written mystery books. He's lived in Los Angeles. He had a wonderful house, and everything changed when the fires hit and he lost his home and all that. But he continues to to move forward. But what advice would you give? What kinds of things do you say to people who are undergoing change or experiencing change?   Laura Bratton ** 56:52 I'm so glad you asked that, because I I didn't mention this in the grit so much of the grit that I experienced. So the advice I would give, or practically, what I do with someone that just what I did right before our we connected, was being being that grit for someone going through change. So in that, for example, in that speaking when I'm speaking to a group about the change they're experiencing, acknowledging, for them to acknowledge, let me be your grit. You might be overwhelmed. You might be incredibly fearful and overwhelmed by the future, by the task in front of you. So let me be the example of grit to to show you that there is support, there is courage, there is that foundation to be able to move forward. So that's my first advice, is just allowing others to be your grit when you don't feel like you had it, because, again, in those high school days and and even now days when I don't feel like I have any grit, any courage, and yet, I'll lean on the courage, the strength, the grit, of those around me so once they acknowledge and allow me to be their grit, and they their support through that change, then allowing them to slowly have that grit for themselves, and again reminding them, it's not an instant process. It's not an instant do these three steps and you'll have grit forever. But it's a continual process of grit and gratitude that leads us through the change, through the difficulty.   Michael Hingson ** 58:46 Have you used the technique that that person that you talked about earlier in high school used when she asked you to write down every day three things that you were grateful for?   Laura Bratton ** 58:56 Yes, absolutely, and the the funny part of that, what that makes me laugh is a lot of people have the exact same reaction I had when I present it to them. They immediately say, I'm not going to do that. That's no Why would I do that? They immediately think that is a horrible piece of advice. And how can I recommend? And I just, I don't say, Oh, well, just try it anyway. I just say, Well, okay, just try it and see. Just, just prove me wrong. And just like my experience, they try it and then a week or two days like, oh, that actually worked. I didn't think that would so, yeah, I'm so glad you said that, because that happens a lot. People said that is that doesn't make sense. Why are you telling me to be grateful in the midst of this overwhelming situation? So yes, great, great perspective that happens all the time.   Michael Hingson ** 59:55 Well, we've been doing this now for about an hour, but before we wrap up, do you. Have any other advice that you want to pass on for people who are dealing with change or fearing change in their lives right now,   Laura Bratton ** 1:00:08 the advice would be, take it step by step, moment by moment, rather than trying to navigate through the whole change at one time that's overwhelming, and that that's not the process that is most healing. So to trust in yourself, to trust that grit around you, and then just like, like you were saying, and ask me, and it doesn't seem like it'll work, but try the gratitude, try that three things every day you're grateful for, and just see what happens as you navigate through the change. Yeah.   Michael Hingson ** 1:00:52 And it really does work, which is the point?   Laura Bratton ** 1:00:54 Which is the point? Right? Right? We don't think it's going to but it, it totally does   Michael Hingson ** 1:00:59 well. Laura, I want to thank you for being with us. This has been absolutely wonderful and fun, and I hope that people who listen got and who watch it got a lot out of it. And you, you provided a lot of good expectation setting for people. And you, you've certainly lived a full life. We didn't mention we got us before you we we sign off. You're also an author,   Laura Bratton ** 1:01:24 yes. So I wrote harnessing courage again, just like the reason I speak, I was so passionate about taking the grit and the gratitude that I use that was such a source of Empower for me, I wanted to tell my story and tell it through the perspective of grit and gratitude so that other people could also use it as a resource. So the book tells my story of becoming blind and adapting and moving forward, but through the complete expected perspective of the gratitude, how I didn't believe the gratitude would work, how I struggled with thinking, Oh, the gratitude is ridiculous. That's never going to be source of empowerment. Yet it was so. The purpose of the book, my hope, my goal for the book, is that people can read it and take away those resources as they face their own change their own challenges.   Michael Hingson ** 1:02:30 And when did you write it? So I wrote   Laura Bratton ** 1:02:33 it in it was published in 2016 Okay, so it that that definitely was, was my goal and passion, and that just writing the book was incredibly healing. Was like a great source of strength. Cool,   Michael Hingson ** 1:02:50 well, I hope people will get it. Do you do any coaching today or   Laura Bratton ** 1:02:54 Yes, so I do coaching as well as the speaking so the the one on one coaching, as people are experiencing difficult, difficult or just navigating through change, I do the one on one coaching as well as the speaking,   Michael Hingson ** 1:03:11 which is certainly a good thing that chaplaincy taught you. Yes, 100% Well, thank you again for being here, and I want to thank all of you for being with us today, wherever you are. We would appreciate it. I would definitely appreciate it. If when you can, you go to wherever you're listening to or watching the podcast and give us a five star review. We absolutely value your reviews. I'd love to hear your thoughts about this, and I'm sure Laura would. So you're welcome to email me at Michael, M, I, C, H, A, E, L, H, I, at accessibe, A, C, C, E, S, S, i, b, e.com, love to hear your thoughts. And also, of course, as I said, we'd love your your five star reviews, wherever you're listening. Also, if any of you, Laura, including you, have any thoughts of others who we ought to have on this podcast, we're always looking for more guests, and we really would appreciate it if you'd let anyone know who might be a good guest in your mind, that they can reach out or email me, and I'll reach out, but we really would appreciate that. But again, Laura, I just want to thank you one more time for being here and for taking all this time with us today.   Laura Bratton ** 1:04:27 Thank you for the opportunity, and thank you for hosting this podcast. Incredibly powerful and we all need to be reminded   **Michael Hingson ** 1:04:37 You have been listening to the Unstoppable Mindset podcast. Thanks for dropping by. I hope that you'll join us again next week, and in future weeks for upcoming episodes. To subscribe to our podcast and to learn about upcoming episodes, please visit www dot Michael hingson.com slash podcast. Michael Hingson is spelled m i c h a e l h i n g s o n. While you're on the site., please use the form there to recommend people who we ought to interview in upcoming editions of the show. And also, we ask you and urge you to invite your friends to join us in the future. If you know of any one or any organization needing a speaker for an event, please email me at speaker at Michael hingson.com. I appreciate it very much. To learn more about the concept of blinded by fear, please visit www dot Michael hingson.com forward slash blinded by fear and while you're there, feel free to pick up a copy of my free eBook entitled blinded by fear. The unstoppable mindset podcast is provided by access cast an initiative of accessiBe and is sponsored by accessiBe. Please visit www.accessibe.com . AccessiBe is spelled a c c e s s i b e. There you can learn all about how you can make your website inclusive for all persons with disabilities and how you can help make the internet fully inclusive by 2025. Thanks again for Listening. Please come back and visit us again next week.

The economy is a vital part of the way we understand our lives and our politics more generally. But after years of growth, development, and progress, on the surface everything is rosy. But as Nobel Laureate Angus Deaton argues, behind the big picture many people have been left behind by the modern economy, and this is precisely because of the blindspots of modern economics. Join Deaton as he explores the ways economics needs to take from philosophy. Interviewed by the FT's Gillian Tett.Sir Angus Deaton is the Senior Scholar and Professor of Economics at the Princeton School of Public Affair and a Nobel prize-winner.Gillian Tett is an award-winning author, journalist, Provost of King's College Cambridge, and U.S. editor at large at the Financial Times.To witness such topics discussed live buy tickets for our upcoming festival: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Hoover History Lab hosted a Book Talk with Dan Edelstein - A Revolution to Come: A History of an Idea from Thucydides to Lenin on Tuesday, April 29, 2025 from 11:30 am - 1:00 pm PT. Revolution! How did an event once considered the greatest of all political dangers come to be seen as a solution to all social problems? Political thinkers from Plato to America's John Adams viewed revolutions as a grave threat to society and advocated for a constitution that prevented them by balancing competing interests and forms of government. The Revolution to Come traces how since the 18th century a modern doctrine of historical progress drove a belief in revolution's ability to create just and reasonable societies. SPEAKER Dan Edelstein is the William H. Bonsall Professor of French, and Professor of Political Science and History (by courtesy) at Stanford. He studied at the University of Geneva (BA) and the University of Pennsylvania (PhD).  Revolution to Come is his fourth book on European intellectual and political history. MODERATOR In addition to his Hoover fellowship, Stephen Kotkin is a senior fellow at Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. He is also the Birkelund Professor in History and International Affairs emeritus at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs (formerly the Woodrow Wilson School), where he taught for 33 years. He earned his PhD at the University of California–Berkeley and has been conducting research in the Hoover Library & Archives for more than three decades.  

00:08 — Kenneth Roth is a Visiting Professor at the Princeton School for Public and International Affairs. Previously, he served as the executive director of Human Rights Watch. His latest book is “Righting Wrongs: Three Decades on the Front Lines Battling Abusive Governments.” The post Kenneth Roth on Three Decades of Battling Abusive Governments appeared first on KPFA.

The International Criminal Court receives a wave of support after it's hit with US sanctions. President Donald Trump is punishing the court for its investigation into Israel's conduct in Gaza. Will Trump's actions hamper international justice? In this Episode: William Pace, Former Convenor of the Coalition, International Criminal Court. Kenneth Roth, Visiting Professor, Princeton School for Public and International Affairs. David L Phillips, Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. Host: Maleen Saeed Connect with us:@AJEPodcasts on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook At Al Jazeera Podcasts, we want to hear from you, our listeners. So, please head to https://www.aljazeera.com/survey and tell us your thoughts about this show and other Al Jazeera podcasts. It only takes a few minutes!

Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more GET TICKETS TO PODJAM II In Vegas March 27-30 Confirmed Guests! Professor Eric Segall, Dr Aaron Carroll, Maura Quint, Tim Wise, JL Cauvin, Ophira Eisenberg, Christian Finnegan and More! 31 minutes Ezra Levin is the co-founder and co-executive director of Indivisible. Prior to founding Indivisible, Ezra served as Associate Director of Federal Policy for Prosperity Now, a national anti-poverty nonprofit. Previously, he was the Deputy Policy Director for Congressman Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Field Director for Doggett's 2010 reelection campaign, and an AmeriCorps VISTA in the Homeless Services Division of the San Jose Housing Department.   Along with his co-founder and spouse Leah Greenberg, Ezra has been featured as one of TIME 100's Most Influential People of 2019, included on GQ's 50 Most Powerful People in Trump's Washington, and ranked #2 on the Politico 50 list of top thinkers, doers and visionaries transforming American politics. He has appeared as a commentator on and/or been interviewed by MSNBC, CNN, NPR, Pod Save America, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Politico, TIME Magazine, the New Yorker, the Nation, Slate, and Rolling Stone, among others. He is the co-author of We Are Indivisible: A Blueprint for Democracy After Trump, published by Simon & Schuster's One Signal Publishers in 2019.  He holds a Bachelor of Arts from Carleton College and a Master in Public Affairs from the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. 1 hour 2 mins Ophira Eisenberg is a Canadian-born standup comedian, writer, and host. She hosted NPR's comedy trivia show Ask Me Another for 9-years, where she interviewed and played silly games with hundreds of celebrities including Sir Patrick Stewart, Awkwafina, Rosie Perez, Yo-Yo Ma, Bob The Drag Queen, Nick Kroll, Chelsea Handler, Jim Gaffigan, Michael C. Hall, and so many others. As a comic and a parent to a 6-year-old, Ophira is the host of the new comedy podcast Parenting Is A Joke co-produced by iHeart Radio and Pretty Good Friends Productions. The show launches on October 18th. She can be seen live, regularly headlining across the United States, Canada, and Europe delivering her unique blend of standup and storytelling to a loyal fan base of smart, irreverent comedy lovers. She has appeared at Montreal's Just for Laughs Festival, The New Yorker Festival, The New York Comedy Festival, Moontower Comedy Festival, Bumbershoot, The Nantucket Film Festival, Women in Comedy Festival and more. Her new comedy album at special Plant-Based Jokes is available on iTunes and is streaming now on YouTube. Lauded as “hilarious, high risk, and an inspiration,” Ophira filmed her comedy special Inside Joke, when she was 8½ months pregnant. The show's material revolves around how she told everyone that she was never going to have kids, and then unexpectedly found herself expecting at “an advanced maternal age.” Her other comedy albums, Bangs! and As Is She has appeared on Comedy Central, This Week at The Comedy Cellar, Kevin Hart's LOL Network, HBO's Girls, Gotham Live, The Late Late Show, The Today Show, and VH-1. The New York Times called her a skilled comedian and storyteller with “bleakly stylish” humor. She was also selected as one of New York Magazine's “Top 10 Comics that Funny People Find Funny,” and hailed by Forbes.com as one of the most engaging comics working today.  Ophira is a regular host and teller with The Moth and her stories have been featured on The Moth Radio Hour and in two of The Moth's best-selling collections, including the most recent New York Times Bestseller: How To Tell A Story: The Essential Guide to Memorable Storytelling from The Moth.  Ophira's first book, Screw Everyone: Sleeping My Way to Monogamy (Seal Press), is a comedic memoir about her experiments in the field as a single woman, traveling from futon to futon and flask-to-flask, gathering data, hoping to put it all together and build her own perfect Frankenmate. It was optioned for a feature film.  She is also sought after as a brilliant interviewer and moderator, and has interviewed dozens of celebrities, writers, and actors including Neil Gaiman at New York's Town Hall; Jane Curtain, Anne Beatts, Heather Gardner, Sudi Green, Alysia Reiner, Jeanne Tripplehorn, David Crane, Jeffrey Klerik at The Nantucket Film Festival; Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara, Daniel Levy and Annie Murphy at the 92nd Street Y; and Nell Scovell and Sloane Crosley at The Mark Twain House.  Originally from Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Ophira graduated with a Cultural Anthropology and Theater degree from McGill University. She now lives in Brooklyn, NY where she is a fixture at New York City's comedy clubs including the Comedy Cellar, Gotham Comedy Club, New York Comedy Club and Carolines, as well as Brooklyn's famed performance venues The Bell House, Union Hall, and Littlefield. She resides with her husband and son where she can regularly be seen drinking a ton of coffee. Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

The ICC has requested an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu concerning possible war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Israel-Hamas War. Is it fair to put his actions on the same level as Hamas? Those who disagree argue that the ICC doesn't have legal jurisdiction in this case and it's politically motivated. Those who agree argue it's a necessary step in enforcing international law and holding accountability. Now we debate: Is the ICC's Warrant Against Netanyahu Justified? Arguing Yes: Kenneth Roth, Former Executive Director of Human Rights Watch; Professor at the Princeton School of International Affairs  Arguing No: Eugene Kontorovich, Law Professor at George Mason University; Executive Director of Scalia Law School's Center for the Middle East and International Law    Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator.    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Cecilia Rouse is the former dean of the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and the current president of the Brookings Institution. For the first two years of the Biden administration, she was the chair of the Council of Economic Advisers—the first Black American to chair the council in its 75-year history. In August, she joined Mathematica's On the Evidence podcast for a conversation with Mathematica's President and Chief Executive Officer Paul Decker about leadership, the use of evidence in public policy, and the role of research organizations in improving public well-being. During the interview, Rouse talks about what she learned from her government posts about the role of research in informing policy decisions, how she thinks about the role of academic institutions in conducting policy research and training future public servants, how economics and related professions are doing at diversifying their workforces, and what she has learned about leadership. A full transcript of the episode is available at https://mathematica.org/blogs/cecilia-rouse-on-the-use-of-evidence-in-public-policy Listen to Rouse's January 2024 interview with the Brookings Institution's podcast, The Current, which posted shortly after she became the Brookings president: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/meet-cecilia-rouse-new-brookings-president/ Listen to Paul Decker's previous interviews about leadership and evidence-based decision making: https://staginginter.mathematica.net/search#q=paul%20decker&sort=relevancy&f:BlogSeries=%5BOn%20The%20Evidence%2DPodcast%5D&f:BlogSeries:operator=and

In this episode of Battlegrounds, H.R. McMaster and Adela Raz discuss the humanitarian catastrophe and systemic human rights abuses under Taliban rule, the lessons and consequences of the collapse of the Afghanistan Republic, and the future of Afghanistan and its diaspora. Join former Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to the United States, Adela Raz, and Hoover Senior Fellow H.R. McMaster as they reflect on the geostrategic consequences of the 2021 collapse of Afghanistan. Ambassador Raz shares her insights on the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, the humanitarian catastrophe and systemic human rights abuses currently facing the country, the Taliban's repressive control over women, and her hope for the future of Afghanistan and its diaspora. ABOUT THE SPEAKERS Adela Raz served as the Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to the United States from July 2021 to February 2022. Ambassador Raz was first woman to hold the post of Deputy Chief of Staff for an Afghan president's administrative office. She served in this post both in President Hamid Karzai's Administration and in President Ashraf Ghani's. She was the Deputy Minister for Economic Cooperation at Afghanistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs from 2016 to 2018. From 2018 to July of 2021, Raz served as Afghanistan's first female Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations, where she was the Vice President of the 75th session of the General Assembly. Since 2022, Raz has served as the director of the Afghanistan Policy Lab at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. Ambassador Raz has a Master's degree in Law and Diplomacy from the Fletcher School at Tufts University. H.R. McMaster is the Fouad and Michelle Ajami Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He is also the Bernard and Susan Liautaud Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute and lecturer at Stanford University's Graduate School of Business. He was the 25th assistant to the president for National Security Affairs. Upon graduation from the United States Military Academy in 1984, McMaster served as a commissioned officer in the United States Army for thirty-four years before retiring as a Lieutenant General in June 2018.

The Hoover History Lab and Hoover Institution Library & Archives held a special hybrid event with Benjamin Nathans, introduced by Stephen Kotkin, as he launched his latest book To The Success of Our Hopeless Cause: The Many Lives of the Soviet Dissident Movement. Beginning in the 1960s, the Soviet Union was unexpectedly confronted by a dissident movement that captured the world's imagination. Demanding that the Kremlin obey its own laws, an improbable band of Soviet citizens held unauthorized public gatherings, petitioned in support of arrested intellectuals, and circulated banned samizdat texts. Soviet authorities arrested dissidents, subjected them to bogus trials and vicious press campaigns, sentenced them to psychiatric hospitals and labor camps, sent them into exile—and transformed them into martyred heroes. Against all odds, the dissident movement undermined the Soviet system and unexpectedly hastened its collapse. Taking its title from a toast made at dissident gatherings, To the Success of Our Hopeless Cause (Princeton, 2024) is a definitive history of a remarkable group of people who helped change the twentieth century. Learn more about the book. This hybrid talk with Benjamin Nathans, with an introduction by Stephen Kotkin, took place in the Shultz Auditorium at the Hoover Institution on the Stanford University campus at 4:30 pm PT. ​About the Speakers Benjamin Nathans Alan Charles Kors Endowed Term Associate Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania Stephen Kotkin Kleinheinz Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution; Birkelund Professor in History and International Affairs emeritus at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.americanprestigepod.comDerek welcomes back to the program Ashoka Mody, Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor in International Economic Policy at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, to talk about this week's election in India. They discuss the issues facing voters, Modi's presidential victory, his Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) surprise loss of i…

0:08 — Kenneth Roth is a Visiting Professor at the Princeton School for Public and International Affairs, previously executive director of Human Rights Watch. 0:20 — Louis Charbonneau is the United Nations director at Human Rights Watch.  0:33 — George Bisharat, Professor Emeritus at University of California College of Law, San Francisco. His research and writing focus on international legal aspects of Palestine/Israel and on U.S. policies toward the Middle East. 0:45 — Barry Trachtenberg, is Professor and Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History at Wake Forest University. His research focuses on modern European and American Jewry and the Nazi Holocaust. The post International Court of Justice Ruling Orders Israel to Cease Rafah Offensive appeared first on KPFA.

There's a global outcry after the discovery of more mass graves in two Gaza hospitals. Israel is under pressure to provide answers. But will it? And how will it be held to account? In this episode: Mansour Shouman, Gaza Citizen Journalist. Andreas Kleiser, Director for Policy and Cooperation at the International Commission on Missing Persons. Kenneth Roth, Visiting Professor at Princeton School for Public and International Affairs.  Host: Mohammed Jamjoom Connect with us:@AJEPodcasts on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Threads and YouTube

Mitch Julis, Co-Founder and Co-Chairman of Canyon Partners, leads one of the world's largest and most successful multi-strategy hedge funds. Established in 1990, Canyon Partners specializes in value-oriented and event-driven investments. Before establishing Canyon, Julis held positions as a portfolio director and practiced bankruptcy and creditors' rights law. His scholarly work on bankruptcy and distressed credit investing has been widely published in law journals and other periodicals. Mr. Julis was honored with Institutional Investor's Lifetime Achievement Award in 2014. He holds degrees from the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, Harvard Law School, and Harvard Business School. Mitch has been a member of 3i since 2022.Listen to hear:* Mitch's upbringing and academic philosophy, pivotal lessons from Princeton, Harvard Business & Law School* Founding & success of Canyon Partners, the importance of a compatible co-founder & partner* Predictions and opportunities in private creditLearn more about 3i Members and follow us on LinkedIn for updates. Subscribe to the Rosen Report here.

Germany is complicit in Israel's genocide in Gaza and that must end, according to Nicaragua's argument before the UN's top court. Germany says Nicaragua has a one-sided view of the war in Gaza. So, what does this case mean for countries supplying Israel with weapons? In this episode: Matthias Goldmann, Senior research fellow at the Max Planck Institute. Diana Buttu, Palestinian lawyer. Kenneth Roth, Sisiting professor at the Princeton School for Public and International Affairs.  Host: James Bays Connect with us:@AJEPodcasts on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Threads and YouTube

Bloomberg Radio host Barry Ritholtz speaks to Angus Deaton, senior scholar at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. In 1976, he became a professor of econometrics at the University of Bristol and moved to Princeton as a professor of economics and international affairs in 1983. He became an emeritus professor in 2016. In 2015, he received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. He is the author of almost 200 papers and six books, including The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality; Economics in America: An Immigrant Economist Explores the Land of Inequality; and, with Anne Case, of Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In 1992, President George Bush's bid for a second term did not go well. Despite taking 79% of the electoral vote in 1988, holding office during the collapse of communism in Europe, and serving as commander-in-chief during the US victory in the first Iraq War, Bush found himself flanked by a smooth talking former Arkansas governor and a Texas businessman armed with a personal fortune and a lot of charts. When it was all over, Bush had garnered about ten million fewer votes than he had four years earlier and a 12-year run of Republican Presidents was over.   How did Bill Clinton manage to beat an incumbent President by so much? Was third-party contender Ross Perot responsible for Bush's catastrophic loss in 1992, or was it really, as Clinton's people claimed, “the economy, stupid?” And why did Perot, who at one point looked to be a viable contender, decide to drop out of the race, only to rejoin a few weeks before the election? Let's find out.   Welcome to the Road to Now's Third Party Election Series. Today: The election of 1992 with Julian Zelizer.   Julian Zelizer is Malcolm Stevenson Forbes, Class of 1941 Professor of History and Public Affairs, Princeton School of Public & International Affairs at Princeton University. He is the award-winning author and editor of 25 books including The Fierce Urgency of Now: Lyndon Johnson, Congress, and the Battle for the Great Society, the winner of the D.B. Hardeman Prize for the Best Book on Congress and Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974, co-authored and Burning Down the House: Newt Gingrich, The Fall of a Speaker, and the Rise of the New Republican Party.   This episode was edited by Gary Fletcher.  

251: Three Keys to Scaling a Global Nonprofit (Kate Grant)SUMMARYAre you ready to scale your nonprofit globally? In episode #251 of Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership, Kate Grant, CEO of the Fistula Foundation, explores key strategies for expanding the reach and impact of nonprofit organizations. Kate shares valuable insights on optimizing board development, advocating for a lean and effective board structure to enhance decision-making and alignment with organizational goals. Delving into talent recruitment, she emphasizes the importance of hiring individuals who thrive in an entrepreneurial culture, fostering creativity and innovation. Reflecting on her path to nonprofit leadership, Kate offers candid advice on self-awareness and embracing one's strengths, weaknesses, and humility as a leader.ABOUT KATEKate Grant became the Foundation's inaugural CEO in 2005, transforming it from a single-country operation into a global leader in fistula treatment across over 20 countries. Grant's leadership has fostered key partnerships with organizations like Astellas Pharma EMEA and Johnson & Johnson, significantly increasing the Foundation's impact and earning it top ratings from Charity Navigator and Charity Watch, among others. Under her guidance, the Foundation has vastly expanded its surgical support and built new hospitals in Asia and Africa. Recognized for her contributions, Grant was awarded Nonprofit Marketer of the Year in 2014. Her career includes roles on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, at USAID, and consulting for various international organizations. Grant holds a master's degree from Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and an undergraduate degree from the University of California, Berkeley, alongside completing Harvard's Executive Education Program in Nonprofit Management.EPISODE TOPICS & RESOURCESJust Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan StevensonReady for a Mastermind?  Learn more here!Have you gotten Patton's book Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership: Seven Keys to Advancing Your Career in the Philanthropic SectorCheck out our new website, PMAnonprofit.com!

Today's episode looks at the complex topic of corporate climate disclosures. Our guests today are Erica Downs, Ned Downie, and Lou Yushan. They are the authors of a recent report, published by the Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), entitled “China's Climate Disclosure Regime: How Regulations, Politics, and Investors Shape Corporate Climate Reporting.” Erica Downs is senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University; Edmund Downie is PhD Candidate in Public Affairs at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs; and Yushan Lou is Research Associate at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. In the podcast we discuss: How disclosures on ESG and carbon emissions differ in Hong Kong versus the mainland, and for listed versus unlisted firms The differing incentives SOEs have for making public climate disclosures The value of such disclosures for policy, given that policy-makers have so many other command-and-control instruments on climate policy and ways of obtaining emissions or climate-related information from the largest emitters The ways investors can and do influence Chinese firms, including SOEs, to improve climate disclosures For further reading: Edmund Downie, Erica Downs, Yushan Lou, “China's Climate Disclosure Regime: How Regulations, Politics, and Investors Shape Corporate Climate Reporting," Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy, 29 November 2023, at https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/chinas-climate-disclosure-regime-how-regulations-politics-and-investors-shape-corporate-climate-reporting/. Edmund Downie, Erica Downs, Yushan Lou, "Better disclosure rules can help China's financial markets work for the climate," China Dialogue, 4 January 2024, at https://chinadialogue.net/en/climate/better-disclosure-rules-can-help-chinas-financial-markets-work-for-the-climate/.  Episode produced by: Anders Hove Buy us a nice chocolate chip cookie on our Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/EnvironmentChina     

0:08 — Kenneth Roth is a Visiting Professor at the Princeton School for Public and International Affairs. Previously, he served for nearly three decades as the executive director of Human Rights Watch, one of the world's leading international human rights organizations. The post Kenneth Roth on the UN Security Council and Ceasefire Possibility in Gaza appeared first on KPFA.

This week, Fareed talks with CNN correspondent Ivan Watson from south-eastern Lebanon on recents exchanges of fire between Hezbollah and Israel … and whether the tensions could escalate. Next, Fareed speaks with retired Israeli Defense Forces Col. Miri Eisin about IDF's ground strategy in Gaza following the collapse of the 7-day ceasefire. Will Israel seek to reduce civilian casualties, as the US has urged? Then, Fareed speaks with British-Palestinian surgeon Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sittah who worked inside Al-Shifa Hospital for more than 40 days of the war. He tells of the suffering inside Gaza. Plus, Fareed sits down for an interview with Princeton School of Public and International Affairs Dean Amaney Jamal to discuss Hamas' influence on the Palestinian territories and their regional neighbors. Finally, Niall Ferguson joins the show to discuss the heated controversies around the life and legacy of Henry Kissinger. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the war in Gaza continues, the question of Hamas's future has become paramount. But it has also raised questions about the years of Hamas rule in Gaza—and the group's support among Palestinians.  Amaney Jamal is dean of the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and co-founder of Arab Barometer, which conducts public opinion research across the Arab world.  Her most recent survey of Palestinian public opinion wrapped up on October 6—the eve of Hamas's attack. As she wrote in a recent piece for Foreign Affairs, “The argument that the entire population of Gaza can be held responsible for Hamas's actions is quickly discredited when one looks at the facts.” You can find transcripts and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

No matter which indicator you're using, American inequality has been increasing in recent decades. Whether you're measuring the growing wealth gap, the stagnant wages of the middle class, or the concentration of wealth and power among a small group of elites, every indicator unfailingly suggests that inequality is getting worse. Nobel Laureate Angus Deaton joins the podcast to talk about his recent book on the subject, Economics in America: An Immigrant Economist Explores the Land of Inequality, in which he explains how his own experience as an immigrant has shaped his understanding of American inequality and its impact on upward mobility. Angus Deaton is a renowned economist and author known for his groundbreaking work in the fields of poverty, inequality, and health. He is a 2015 Nobel Prize Laureate and is currently a Senior Scholar and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Professor of Economics and International Affairs Emeritus at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. Twitter: @DeatonAngus Economics in America: An Immigrant Economist Explores the Land of Inequality https://bookshop.org/p/books/economics-in-america-an-immigrant-economist-explores-the-land-of-inequality-angus-deaton/19785471?ean=9780691247625  Nick's new book, Corporate Bullsh*t, is out now! https://www.corporatebsbook.com  Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer

The topic of this episode is, “Delegates to the House of Representatives: who are they and what do they do?”My guest is Elliot Mamet. He is a Postdoctoral Research Associate and Lecturer at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. Previously, he served as an American Political Science Association Congressional Fellow. Elliot holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from Duke University.Also important to note is that Dr. Mamet spent time working in the office of Washington, D.C. delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton. All of which makes him a great person to ask the question, "Delegates to the House of Representatives: who are they and what do they do?"Kevin Kosar:Welcome to Understanding Congress, a podcast about the first branch of government. Congress is a notoriously complex institution and few Americans think well of it, but Congress is essential to our republic. It's a place where our pluralistic society is supposed to work out its differences and come to agreement about what our laws should be, and that is why we are here to discuss our national legislature and to think about ways to upgrade it so it can better serve our nation. I'm your host, Kevin Kosar, and I'm a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank in Washington D.C.Welcome to the podcast.Elliot Mamet:Thank you, Kevin. It's great to be here.Kevin Kosar:Let's start with a really simple question. Listeners are all too familiar with the fact that the House typically has 435 members. But they also have delegates. How many delegates are there to the House of Representatives?Elliot Mamet:Currently, there are five delegates to the House of Representatives. They serve from Washington, D.C., Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands. There's also a Resident Commissioner—a non-voting member—from Puerto Rico. So there're six total non-voting members in the House. Kevin Kosar:Representatives in the House come from districts these days. Where and who do these delegates and non-voting members represent? And is represent even the correct term for what their role is?Elliot Mamet:The non-voting members of Congress represent Americans who live outside the several states. Throughout their entire history, they've represented people who don't live in states—whether that's in the federal enclave of the District of Columbia or in territories either on the path to statehood or not on the path to statehood. Today, they represent 4 million Americans. Of that group, 3.5 million live in the United States territories—those people are 98% racial and ethnic minorities—and the remainder are the residents of the District of Columbia who are majority black or Hispanic. So the delegates represent overwhelmingly non-white constituents, and they represent a group of Americans who lack the same citizen rights and lack political equality to those people living in the several states.Kevin Kosar:Now, on this program, there's been a number of episodes where I and a guest have talked about earlier Congresses—the Congresses at the founding, early 20th century, etc.—and non-voting representatives just didn't come up in the conversation. Are they a recent development, or have they always been with us?Elliot Mamet:Great question. The non-voting representative has been a feature since the earliest Congresses. The institution dates back at least to 1784 when a committee chaired by Thomas Jefferson suggested that territories prior to becoming a state would be able to send a delegate to Congress with the

The day before Hamas's horrific attacks in Israel, the Arab Barometer, one of the leading polling operations in the Arab world, was finishing up a survey of public opinion in Gaza.The result is a remarkable snapshot of how Gazans felt about Hamas and hoped the conflict with Israel would end. And what Gazans were thinking on Oct. 6 matters, now that they're all living with the brutal consequences of what Hamas did on Oct. 7.So I invited on the show Amaney Jamal, the dean of the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, and a co-founder and co-principal investigator of Arab Barometer, so she could walk me through the results.And, it's a complicated picture. The people of Gaza, like any other population, have diverse beliefs. But one thing is clear: Hamas was not very popular.As Jamal and her co-author write: “The Hamas-led government may be uninterested in peace, but it is empirically wrong for Israeli political leaders to accuse all Gazans of the same.”Mentioned:Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research Public Opinion PollWashington Institute PollBook Recommendations:The One State Reality edited by Michael Barnett, Nathan J. Brown, Marc Lynch and ShibleyArabs and Israelis by Abdel Monem Said Aly, Shai Feldman and Khalil ShikakiA History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict by Mark TesslerThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast, and you can find Ezra on Twitter @ezraklein. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Emefa Agawu. Fact checking by Michelle Harris, with Mary Marge Locker and Kate Sinclair. Our senior engineer is Jeff Geld. Our senior editor is Claire Gordon. The show's production team also includes Rollin Hu and Kristin Lin. Original music by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. And special thanks to Sonia Herrero.

Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi was elected to Congress in 2016 and is now in his fourth term representing Illinois' 8th District, which includes Chicago's west and northwest suburbs as well as the 41st ward of the city. He serves as Ranking Member of the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, making him the first South Asian American in history to lead a Congressional Committee. He also serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on Oversight and Accountability as a member of the Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs. The Congressman is a Vice-Chair of the Equality Caucus and Co-Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Immigration Task Force. In addition, he is the founder and Chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Caucus to End the Youth Vaping Epidemic and the bipartisan Solar Caucus. Representative Krishnamoorthi is the child of immigrants and was raised in Peoria, Illinois. He attended public schools in Peoria and was a valedictorian of his high school class. Scholarships and student loans allowed him to graduate summa cum laude from Princeton University with a degree in mechanical engineering and a certificate from the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. He then graduated with honors from Harvard Law School and clerked for a federal judge before practicing law in Chicago. Representative Krishnamoorthi pursued public service while practicing law and was appointed by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan as a Special Assistant Attorney General to help start the state's Public Integrity Unit created to root out corruption in Illinois. As a member of the Illinois Housing Development Authority, the Congressman chaired the Audit Committee, helping to provide thousands of low and moderate-income families across the state with affordable housing. Congressman Krishnamoorthi also served as Illinois Deputy Treasurer, where he oversaw the state's technology venture capital fund and helped make programs such as the state's unclaimed property program leaner and more efficient. After his time in the Illinois Treasurer's Office, Representative Krishnamoorthi returned to the private sector, serving as president of research-oriented small businesses developing technology in the national security and renewable energy industries. Representative Krishnamoorthi also served as the Vice-Chair of the Illinois Innovation Council and co-founded InSPIRE, a non-profit that provides inner-city students and veterans with training in solar technology. The Congressman resides with his wife Priya, a physician, and 3 children in Schaumburg, Illinois. The Stand Up Community Chat is always active with other Stand Up Subscribers on the Discord Platform. Join us Thursday's at 8EST for our Weekly Happy Hour Hangout! Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Take Val Yoga Classes on YouTube

October 13, 2023 - Join us for this book talk with Dr. Aram Hur, who discusses Narratives of Civic Duty: How National Stories Shape Democracy in Asia. At a time when nationalism appears to be stoking regional conflicts and democratic backsliding in Asia and beyond, Dr. Hur's book argues for the positive capacity of nationalism. The book received the 2023 Robert A. Dahl Award from the American Political Science Association for "scholarship of the highest quality on the subject of democracy" by an untenured scholar. Dr. Hur is the Kim Koo Chair in Korean Studies and Assistant Professor of Political Science at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. She was the recipient of The Korea Society's Sherman Family Emerging Scholar Lecture Award in 2021. This program is a collaboration between The Korea Society's Policy Department and the Education Department, and is moderated by Linda Tobash, Senior Advisor for Education. The discussant is Dr. Darcie Draudt, Postdoctoral Research Associate at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. For more information, please visit the link below: https://www.koreasociety.org/policy-and-corporate-programs/item/1680-how-national-stories-shape-democracy-in-asia

The wake up call that Pakistan needs; one of the leading Economists of the world, Atif Mian, comes on The Pakistan Experience to show the Economic Reality of Pakistan. On this deep dive podcast, we discuss how Pakistan's Economy is on the tipping point, the things that need to be done to fix it, understanding the economy as part of the whole system, Foreign Investments, Debt, CPEC and the Social Realities of Pakistan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZrWDUUCzmA Atif Mian is a Pakistani-American economist who serves as the John H. Laporte Jr. Class of 1967 Professor of Economics, Public Policy, and Finance at Princeton University, and as the Director of the Julis-Rabinowitz Center for Public Policy and Finance at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. He received a Guggenheim Fellowship in 2021, and was elected Fellow of the Econometric Society in 2021. Atif Mian is also the co-author of the critically acclaimed book, "House of Debt" The Pakistan Experience is an independently produced podcast looking to tell stories about Pakistan through conversations. Please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thepakistanexperience To support the channel: Jazzcash/Easypaisa - 0325 -2982912 Patreon.com/thepakistanexperience And Please stay in touch: https://twitter.com/ThePakistanExp1 https://www.facebook.com/thepakistanexperience https://instagram.com/thepakistanexpeperience The podcast is hosted by comedian and writer, Shehzad Ghias Shaikh. Shehzad is a Fulbright scholar with a Masters in Theatre from Brooklyn College. He is also one of the foremost Stand-up comedians in Pakistan and frequently writes for numerous publications. Instagram.com/shehzadghiasshaikh Facebook.com/Shehzadghias/ Twitter.com/shehzad89 Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 2:00 Understanding the Economy as part of the whole System 10:00 What is wrong with the System and how to fix it 17:00 Loans, Foreign Investment and Real Estate Projects 28:30 IPPS, CPEC and Repayments 41:30 Building Pakistan to compete Long Term and Exposure to the Global Financial Cycle 52:00 Extreme Inequality, Wealth Distribution and China 1:07:40 Cash Hand Outs

In today's episode, Saul talks to Adam McHugh on his book "Blood from a stone: A memoir of how wine brought me back from the dead." Adam McHugh is a wine tour guide, sommelier, and Certified Specialist of Wine. He is a regular contributor to Edible Santa Barbara & Wine Country and a happy resident of the Santa Ynez Valley. Adam is the author of the memoir Blood from a Stone: A Memoir of How Wine Brought Me Back from the Dead, which tells the story of how he stumbled his way from hospice chaplain and grief counselor in Los Angeles to wine tour guide and sommelier in the Santa Ynez Valley.A former hospice chaplain and Presbyterian minister, he wrote two books while in professional ministry: The Listening Life and Introverts in the Church. He was featured in Susan Cain's bestselling book Quiet, and wrote articles on introversion and listening for Psychology Today, The Washington Post, The Huffington Post, and Quiet Revolution.Adam is a graduate of Claremont McKenna College and the Princeton School of Theology. 

Daniel Kahneman (born March 5, 1934) is an Israeli-American psychologist and economist notable for his work on the psychology of judgment and decision-making, as well as behavioral economics, for which he was awarded the 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (shared with Vernon L. Smith). His empirical findings challenge the assumption of human rationality prevailing in modern economic theory. With Amos Tversky and others, Kahneman established a cognitive basis for common human errors that arise from heuristics and biases, and developed prospect theory. In 2011 he was named by Foreign Policy magazine in its list of top global thinkers. In the same year his book Thinking, Fast and Slow, which summarizes much of his research, was published and became a best seller. In 2015, The Economist listed him as the seventh most influential economist in the world. He is professor emeritus of psychology and public affairs at Princeton University's Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. Kahneman is a founding partner of TGG Group, a business and philanthropy consulting company. He was married to cognitive psychologist and Royal Society Fellow Anne Treisman, who died in 2018. Original video ⁠here⁠⁠ Full Wikipedia entry ⁠here⁠ Daniel Kahneman's books ⁠here --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theunadulteratedintellect/support

In this episode of the OIES podcast series, Anders Hove and Edmund Downie discuss China's manufacturing sector and its present and future energy and emissions trajectory. Edmund Downie, a 2nd-year PhD student in the Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy program at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and the author of two chapters in […] The post OIES Podcast – China’s manufacturing sector carbon emissions: policies, trends, and challenges appeared first on Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.

Welcome to the Harvard Center for International Development's Road to GEM23 Climate & Development podcast. At CID, we work across a global network of researchers and practitioners to build, convene, and deploy talent to address the world's most pressing challenges. On our Road to GEM23, we strive to elevate and learn from voices from the countries on the frontlines of the climate crisis and will feature learnings from leading researchers and practitioners working to combat climate change. In this episode, we are joined by Michael Oppenheimer is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs in the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), the Department of Geosciences, and the High Meadows Environmental Institute at Princeton University. He is also the Director of the Center for Policy Research on Energy and the Environment (C-PREE) at SPIA. Oppenheimer previously worked with The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) where he served as chief scientist and manager of the Climate and Air Program. He continues to serve as a science advisor to EDF. Oppenheimer is also a long-time participant in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, most recently serving as a Coordinating Lead Author on IPCC's Special Report on Oceans and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (2019) and as a Review Editor on the upcoming Sixth Assessment Report. Oppenheimer is joined by CID Student Ambassador Yan Liang to discuss climate adaptation policies and the systemic changes for improved mitigation and resiliency across sectors.

Life expectancy in the U.S. has been on the decline, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. While the COVID-19 pandemic killed more than 1 million people in America, 2014-2015 was actually an inflection point for mortality rates. What went wrong and what's behind the downward trend? Our guests this week point out that drug overdoses, suicides and alcoholism have fueled an increase in what they term ‘deaths of despair.' Anne Case is the Alexander Stewart 1886 Professor of Economics and Public Affairs, Emeritus at the Princeton University School of Public and International Affairs. Angus Deaton is a Nobel Prize Winner and Senior Scholar and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Professor of Economics and International Affairs Emeritus at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and the Economics Department. Together, they published their groundbreaking findings in 2015 and later co-authored “Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism” in March of 2020. Case and Deaton join WITHpod to discuss what their findings reveal about capitalism and the U.S. healthcare system, education-related disparities in mortality, what might be done to reverse the surge in deaths and more.

Ashoka Mody is an Indian-born economist and a visiting professor in international economic policy and lecturer in public and international affairs at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. Mody contends that successive post-independence leaders, starting with its first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, failed to confront India's true economic problems, seeking easy solutions instead. As a popular frustration grew, and corruption in politics became pervasive, India's economic growth relied increasingly on unregulated finance and environmentally destructive construction.

Danny and Derek welcome to the program Ashoka Mody, Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor in International Economic Policy at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, to discuss what he sees as democratic and economic breakdowns in India rooted in its post-independence period. They discuss the tenure of Jawaharlal Nehru, people left behind by post-independence industrialization, parallels with postwar Japan, American investment in the subcontinent, Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, the rise of modern Hindu nationalism, and more. Check out Dr. Mody's book India Is Broken: A People Betrayed, Independence to Today. Also check out his recent op-eds in Business Standard and Project Syndicate. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.americanprestigepod.com/subscribe

The Context of White Supremacy welcomes Dr. Douglas Massey, Suspected Racist. The Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs, with a joint appointment in The Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, Dr. Massey is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. He's the current president of the American Academy of Political and Social Science and is a member of the Council of the National Academy of Sciences and co-editor of the Annual Review of Sociology. Dr Massey's research focuses on international migration, race and housing, discrimination, education, urban poverty, and stratification. Gus read about Dr. Massey work in a New York Times op-ed on White Supremacy in education. The reported cited Dr. Massey's 2017 "commentary," Why Death Haunts Black Lives. We'll address a number of Dr. Massey's great work on education, economics and law. In fact, one of his reports details how White banksters codified and exploited black stupidity to loot billions from home buyers. Even with detailed information about this process, Dr. Massey still insisted that non-white people are more informed about what Racism is and how it works. Importantly, Dr. Massey claimed Gus's definition of Racism was not accurate. However, when asked to pinpoint the inaccuracies, Dr. Massey never listed one thing. Also, Dr. Massey used the expression "black racism." Gus T. highlighted this curious phrase, but Dr. Massey disputed having said this. It's in the first 13 minutes of the program. #WhitePeopleKnowBlackPeopleAreStupid #TheCOWS14Years INVEST in The COWS – http://paypal.me/TheCOWS Cash App: https://cash.app/$TheCOWS CALL IN NUMBER: 605.313.5164 CODE: 564943#

On this final episode of our college tour, I wrap up my conversation with Gilbert Collins from Princeton University. In this episode we talk aboutwhat global health programs isPublic Policy and International Affairs Programand how Jeopardy and leadership go together.To learn more about PPIA Program, go check out their website at ppiaprogram.org.Gilbert Collins began working at the Princeton University Center for Health and Wellbeing in 2016 and he oversees several of the University's global health programs. Collins previously served as the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs' Director of Graduate Student Life where he directed academic and co-curricular programs, including the Junior Summer Institute, and offered academic advising and career counseling to students preparing for careers in public service. Before coming to Princeton, Collins spent eight years as the U.S. Peace Corps Country Director in Namibia and Associate Director in Botswana, focusing on HIV/AIDS interventions and other development activities. Prior to that, he served as the Evaluation and Planning Team Leader for the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance at the U.S. Agency for International Development, providing strategic guidance for relief and development activities in health, water/sanitation, nutrition, psycho-social support, shelter, and other sectors for seven years.Collins received his bachelor's degree in Government from Harvard University, a master's degree in Public Policy and International Affairs from Princeton University, and a master's degree in Higher Education from Penn State University. Born in Germany, he grew up in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and speaks French, German, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese.Support the showThanks for listening! If you enjoyed this episode, please support us on Patreon. For more leadership tools, check out the free workbooks at KylaCofer.com/freestuff. Book Kyla to speak at your event here, or to connect further, reach out to Kyla on LinkedIn and Instagram.All transcripts are created with Descript, an amazing transcript creation and editing tool. Check it out for yourself!Leadership School Production:Produced by Kyla CoferEdited by Neel Panji @ PodLeaF ProductionsAssistant Production Alaina Hulette

In this episode of our college tour I get to speak with Gilbert Collins from Princeton University.  As the Director of Global Health at Princeton, Gilbert teaches us the leadership lessons he's learned that led him to this position. Stay tuned for part 2 next week!Lessons from being a Peace Corp DirectorHow to lead people remotelyHow to navigate cross-cultural communicationWays to approach decision makingGilbert Collins began working at the Princeton University Center for Health and Wellbeing in 2016 and he oversees several of the University's global health programs. Collins previously served as the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs' Director of Graduate Student Life where he directed academic and co-curricular programs, including the Junior Summer Institute, and offered academic advising and career counseling to students preparing for careers in public service. Before coming to Princeton, Collins spent eight years as the U.S. Peace Corps Country Director in Namibia and Associate Director in Botswana, focusing on HIV/AIDS interventions and other development activities. Prior to that, he served as the Evaluation and Planning Team Leader for the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance at the U.S. Agency for International Development, providing strategic guidance for relief and development activities in health, water/sanitation, nutrition, psycho-social support, shelter, and other sectors for seven years.Collins received his bachelor's degree in Government from Harvard University, a master's degree in Public Policy and International Affairs from Princeton University, and a master's degree in Higher Education from Penn State University. Born in Germany, he grew up in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and speaks French, German, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese.Support the showThanks for listening! If you enjoyed this episode, please support us on Patreon. For more leadership tools, check out the free workbooks at KylaCofer.com/freestuff. Book Kyla to speak at your event here, or to connect further, reach out to Kyla on LinkedIn and Instagram.All transcripts are created with Descript, an amazing transcript creation and editing tool. Check it out for yourself!Leadership School Production:Produced by Kyla CoferEdited by Neel Panji @ PodLeaF ProductionsAssistant Production Alaina Hulette

Do you ever wish you had a manual for what to say in certain situations? Cultural Awareness powerhouses Kenji Yoshino and David Glasgow's Say the Right Thing: How to Talk About Identity, Diversity, and Justice describes itself as “a practical, shame-free guide for navigating conversations across our differences at a time of rapid social change.” While we navigate a significant time of divisiveness and unrest, conversations about identity are becoming more frequent, but also arguably more complex. When discussing subjects such as critical race theory, gender equity in the workplace, and LGBTQ-inclusive classrooms, many of us with good intentions may find ourselves fearful of saying the wrong thing and hurting someone or being misunderstood. That fear can sometimes prevent us from speaking up at all, which can have the detrimental effect of stalling progress toward a more just and inclusive society. As founders of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at NYU School of Law, Yoshino and Glasgow share a goal of showing potential allies that these conversations don't have to be so overwhelming. Through stories drawn from social media posts, dinner party conversations, and workplace disputes, they offer seven user-friendly principles that are supported by research and teach skills like avoiding common conversational pitfalls, engaging in respectful disagreement, offering authentic apologies, and better supporting the people in our lives who experience bias. Say the Right Thing seeks to encourage us away from cancel culture and shame toward more meaningful and empathetic dialogue on issues of identity on both large and small scales. Whether managing diverse teams at work, navigating issues of inclusion at college, or challenging biased comments at a family barbecue, Yoshino and Glasgow may help us move from unconsciously hurting people to consciously helping them. Kenji Yoshino is the Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at NYU School of Law and the director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. A graduate of Harvard (AB summa cum laude), Oxford (MSc as a Rhodes Scholar), and Yale (JD), he specializes in constitutional law, antidiscrimination law, and law and literature. Yoshino taught at Yale Law School from 1998 to 2008, where he served as Deputy Dean and the inaugural Guido Calabresi Professor of Law. He is the author of three books: Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights; A Thousand Times More Fair: What Shakespeare's Plays Teach Us About Justice; and Speak Now: Marriage Equality on Trial. Yoshino has published in major academic journals, including the Harvard Law Review, the Stanford Law Review, and the Yale Law Journal, and has written for the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, and the Washington Post. He makes regular appearances on radio and television programs, such as NPR, CNN, PBS and MSNBC. He has won numerous awards for his scholarship and teaching, including the American Bar Association's Silver Gavel Award in 2016 and the Podell Distinguished Teaching Award in 2014. David Glasgow is the executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging and an adjunct professor of law at NYU School of Law. In his role at the Meltzer Center, he develops and executes educational programs on diversity and inclusion for internal and external clients, coordinates a speaker series and other events on contemporary diversity and inclusion issues, and manages the center's general operations. He has co-taught courses at the Law School on leadership, diversity, and inclusion, and co-authored a book with Kenji Yoshino, Say the Right Thing: How to Talk about Identity, Diversity, and Justice. David graduated with a BA in philosophy and an LLB (First Class Honors) from the University of Melbourne, and a Master of Laws (LLM) from NYU School of Law, where he received the David H. Moses Memorial Prize and the George Colin Award. Prior to joining the Meltzer Center, he practiced employee relations and anti-discrimination law in Melbourne, Australia, and then served as an Associate Director of the Public Interest Law Center at NYU School of Law. Jane Park is the CEO of Athena Consumer, an all women founded Special Purpose Acquisition Company, as well as CEO and Founder of Tokki, a social & sustainable giftwrap company. Prior to founding Tokki, Ms. Park was the CEO and Founder of Julep, an on-line first beauty brand now distributed nationally at Ulta stores as well as on QVC and Nordstrom. Ms. Park was also an executive at Starbucks in the New Ventures division where she launched new consumer businesses. She was also a leader at the Boston Consulting Group in the Retail and Consumer Goods practice group, and a founding director of the CEO Forum for Education and Technology with luminaires such as Steve Jobs (CEO Apple) and Eckhard Pfeiffer (CEO Compaq). Ms. Park serves on the Board of Directors of Athena Consumer, Glo Beauty, and the Washington State Opportunity Scholarship, and regularly appears on television as well as consumer, technology, and women's leadership conferences.  She is a graduate of the Princeton School of Public Policy and International Affairs and Yale Law School. Say the Right Thing: How to Talk About Identity, Diversity, and Justice Third Place Books

FASKIANOS: Thank you, and welcome to today's session of the Winter/Spring 2023 CFR Academic Webinar series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website CFR.org/Academic if you would like to share it with your colleagues or classmates. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Arunabha Ghosh with us to discuss climate compensation and cooperation. Dr. Ghosh is an internationally recognized public policy expert, author, columnist, and institution builder. He's the founder and CEO of the Council on Energy, Environment, and Water. He previously worked at Princeton University, the University of Oxford, the UN Development Program, and the World Trade Organization. He's also contributed to the creation of the International Solar Alliance and was a founding board member of the Clean Energy Access Network, and he currently serves on the government of India's G20 Finance Track Advisory Group, has co-chaired the World Economic Forum's Global Future Council on Clean Air, and is a member of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group and on the board of directors of the ClimateWorks Foundation. And he is joining us—it is, I think, after 11:00 p.m. where he is, so we appreciate your doing this so late your time. So, Dr. Ghosh, thank you very much for being with us today. We saw in November a historic climate compensation fund approved at the UN climate talks. It would be great if you could give an overview of what it means to compensate developing countries for losses and damages caused by climate change, as well as share your recommendations for how countries can more effectively cooperate on such efforts and maybe the interplay between mitigation, adaptation, and compensation—how are we attacking all of these things. So over to you. GHOSH: Well, good day to everyone out there. It's good evening at my end. It's nearing up on midnight. But thank you, Irina, for having me as part of this conversation and thank you to the Council on Foreign Relations. I think the way you framed it right at the end is really the way to start—how does mitigation, adaptation, and compensation all come together? Before I dive into the specific issue of loss and damage I want to just up front state for those listening in that I see climate change and the responses to climate change as not one market failure but at least three market failures that we are simultaneously trying to solve for. The first market failure is that climate risks are nonlinear in nature and, therefore, we don't have the normal approaches to insuring ourselves against climate risks. You can predict the probability of an earthquake of a certain intensity in a particular region without predicting an exact time of an earthquake but you can actually insure it by looking at the averages. But you can't do that with climate risk because the risks that we face today is less than the risks that you will face in 2030 and then it will exponentially rise in 2050. So your normal approaches towards insurance don't work. That's market failure number one. Market failure number two is, put very simply, money does not flow where the sun shines the most. We have a severe problem of climate-related investment in absolute terms not being sufficient globally and in relative terms significantly insufficient, especially in the regions where you actually have very good natural resources, particularly sunshine, for solar power, and the very same regions where sustainable infrastructure needs to be built between the tropics where countries continue to be developing and need to raise their per capita incomes. The third market failure is that even as we move towards or at least expend efforts towards moving to a more sustainable planet, we haven't really cracked the code on how do we narrow the technology gap rather than widen it. And this matters because, ultimately, the response to climate change, while it's a global collective action problem, because it is nationally situated it does raise concerns about national competitiveness, about industrial development, about access to technology and, of course, the rules that will—that would embed our moves towards a more free and more sustainable marketplace at a global level. And if we cannot crack the code on how technologies are developed and technologies are diffused and disseminated then it will continue to serve as a hindrance towards doubling down on developing the clean-tech technologies of tomorrow. So it's against this backdrop of multiple market failures that we have to understand where this whole loss and damage story comes through. Loss and damage has been discussed for decades, actually, in the climate negotiations. It was put formally on the agenda in 2007. But it was only at COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt that there was finally an agreement amongst all the negotiating parties that a loss and damage financing facility would be set up. Now, what is loss and damage itself? Is it the same as adaptation? Clearly, not. It refers to the adverse impacts that vulnerable communities and countries face as a result of a changing climate including the increase in incidence and intensity of natural disasters and extreme weather events, as well as the slow onset of temperature increase, sea level rise, and desertification. So it's not just the hurricane that comes and slams on the coast. It's also repeated rounds of drought which might be impacting smallholder farmers in another part of the world. Now, adapting to a changing climate is different from compensating for the damages that you're facing and that is why there was this call for a separate financing facility for loss and damage. Now, this is the agreement thus far but it's not—it's not a done deal yet. What the decision did was basically said there will be now a transition committee developed dedicated to loss and damage with equal representation for rich and poor countries, and so on and so forth, but that transition committee would then have to figure out the funding arrangements, the institutional arrangements, where would this money sit, figure out how alternative sources of funding would come through only through existing mechanisms and ensure that it all gets delivered by COP28, which will be held in the UAE later this year. Now, my belief is that a political decision, while it's a strong signal, it's only, you know, just—you're just getting off the blocks and several other building blocks will be needed to make this work properly. Number one, we will need a much more granular understanding of hyperlocal climate risk. Today, if you wanted to buy a house in Florida, for instance, there's a high chance that there will be a neighborhood by neighborhood understanding of flooding risk, hurricane risk, et cetera, which is then priced into the insurance premiums that you had to pay for purchasing that property. But in many other parts of the world, when you look at climate models they treat entire countries as single pixels, which is not good enough. My own organization, CEEW, has trying to develop the first high-resolution climate risk atlas for India, a country of a billion and a half people. We now have a district-level vulnerability index looking at exposure to natural disasters sensitivity based on the economic configuration of that district and the adaptive capacity of the local communities and the administration. Based on that then we can say where do you need to double down on your efforts to build resilience. But that kind of effort is needed across the developing world in order to actually understand what it means to climate-proof communities and what it means to actually understand the scale of the problem that loss and damage financing facility will have to address. The second thing that has to happen is more development of attribution science. What is attribution science? Basically, a bad thing happens and then you figure out using the latest science how much of that bad thing happened because of the changed climate. Now, here's the problem. Only about—about less than 4 percent of global climate research spending is dedicated, for instance, to Africa but nearly 80 percent of that spending is actually spent in Europe and North America. So what I'm trying to say is that even as we try to build out attribution science we need a lot more capacity that has to be built in the Global South to understand not just global climate models but be able to downscale them in a way that we're able to understand what the next hurricane, the next flooding event, the next cyclone means in terms of the impacts of climate change. The third thing that has to happen is something called Early Warning Systems Initiative. Basically, the idea—it was unveiled at COP27—is to ensure that every person is protected by early warning systems within the next five years or so. So the next time a tsunami is coming you're not reacting after the fact but you're able to actually send out information well in advance. I'll give you an example. In 1999 a big cyclone—super cyclone—hit an eastern state of India, Odisha, and about ten thousand lives were lost. A huge effort was put in for early warning systems subsequently along with building storm shelters, et cetera. So twenty years later when a similar sized cyclone hit the same state in 2019 less than a hundred lives were lost. Ten thousand versus a hundred. So this is the scale of impact that properly designed early warning systems can do to save lives and save livelihoods. And, finally, of course, we have to build more resilient infrastructure. So the next bridge that is being built, the next airport that is being built, the next bridge that is being built, or a highway that's being built, all of that is going to get impacted by rising climate risks. So how do you bring in more resilient infrastructure? There's something called the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure that India has promoted. It has about thirty-five countries as members already and many multilateral institutions. It itself has started a program on infrastructure for resilient island states—for the small island states. So what I'm trying to tell you here is that the loss and damage—when we talk about compensation it's not just the monetary resources that are needed. There's a lot of technical resources needed to do the hyperlocal climate risk assessment, the infrastructure that is needed to do early warning initiatives, the scientific capability that is needed for attribution science, and the sort of organizational administration capability at a district level but also all the way at an international level. If all of that comes together then maybe we have a better architecture rather than just an announcement around compensation. But that just solves or begins to solve the first market failure. Let me maybe pause there and we can use the rest of the hour to talk about this and the other market failures I highlighted. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. Thank you so much. It really is daunting what needs to happen for sure in all the three market failures. We want to go now to all of you for your questions. You all should know how to do this. You can click the “Raise Hand” icon on your screen to ask a question. On an iPad or a Tablet click the “More” button to access the raise hand feature and when you're called upon accept the unmute prompt and state your name and affiliation and your question. Please keep it brief. And you can also write a written question in the Q&A box and, please, you can vote for questions that you like but if you do write a question it would be great if you could include your affiliation along with your name so that it gives us context. So the first question I'm going to take we'll go to Morton Holbrook. Morton, please identify yourself. Q: Hi. I'm Morton Holbrook at Kentucky Wesleyan College in Owensboro, Kentucky. Thanks, Dr. Ghosh, for your presentation. I confess I haven't paid enough attention to COP27. Can you enlighten me as to what the United States committed to and, more importantly, whether the Democratic bill—the bill passed in Congress in December was able to add—actually commit funds to the loss and damage project? GHOSH: Should I answer that, Irina, or are you taking a bunch of questions at a time? FASKIANOS: No, I think it's better to take one at a time— GHOSH: One at a time? OK. FASKIANOS: —so we can have more in-depth— GHOSH: Sure. Sure. Thank you, Morton. Well, the decision on loss and damage was agreed to by all the member states negotiating at COP27. But, as I said earlier, this only suggests the setting up of a financing facility. How it's going to be funded is yet to be determined. Will this be a reallocation of overseas development assistance that is redirected towards loss and damage or is this new money that's put on the table? All of that has to be decided. In fact, the developed countries did take a position that some of the larger developing countries that are big emitters should also contribute towards this loss and damage financing facility. Of course, on the other side the argument is that these are also the countries that are continuing to be vulnerable. So there is a difference now that is coming up in the conversation around loss and damage around vulnerability versus developing in the sense that even emerging economies could be vulnerable to climate change, whereas developing countries might be poorer than emerging economies that are also vulnerable to climate change but in some cases might not be as vulnerable. So the focus is actually on vulnerability in terms of the exposure to climate risks and, as I said earlier, the sensitivity of the communities and the economic systems. Now, with regards to the U.S. legislation, I am not sure of the legislation you're referring to for December. The one I'm aware of is the Inflation Reduction Act that was passed prior to COP27. But if there is something specifically that you're referring to that was passed through Congress in December then I'm not aware of it. FASKIANOS: OK. Let's go to Clemente Abrokwaa. Q: Thank you. Can you hear me? FASKIANOS: We can. Q: Oh, good. Thank you, Dr. Ghosh. Very interesting your explanation or discussion. I'm from Penn State University and I have two short questions for you. One is base compensation. How would you monitor that? If you give a bunch of money or a lot of money to a country, especially those in the third world societies, third world countries, how would you monitor where it goes? Who controls the funding or the money? And I have a reason for—reasons for asking that question. And the second is I was a little surprised about the—what you said about the 80 percent of the money given to Africa is spent in Europe, unless I got you wrong. Yeah, so those—why should that be if that's true? GHOSH: So let me answer the second question first. That is, I was referring to climate—global climate research spending that happens. Of all the global climate research spending that happens less than 4 percent is dedicated to climate research on Africa. But that climate research 80 percent of that less than 4 percent is actually spent in research institutions in Europe and North America. So it wasn't about money going to Africa for climate. It's about the climate modeling research that goes on. So the point I was trying to make there was that we need to build up more climate research capacity in the Global South, not just in Africa and Asia and South America and so forth, in order to become better at that attribution science when it's related to the extreme weather events but also to understand in a more localized way the pathways for more climate-friendly economic development pathways. For instance, my institution CEEW, when we did net zero modeling for India we were looking at multiple different scenarios for economic development, for industrial development, for emissions, for equity, for jobs impact, et cetera, because we were able to contextualize the model for what it meant for a country like India, and now we're doing similar—we've downscaled our model now to a state level because India is a continent-sized country. So that's the point I was trying to make there. With regards to how to monitor the compensation, now, I want to make two points here. Number one is that, of course, if any money is delivered it should be monitored, I mean, in the sense that it's—transparency leads to better policy and better actions as a principle. But we should be careful not to conflate compensation for damages caused with development assistance. Let me give an analogy. Suppose there is—someone inadvertently rams their car into my garage and damages my house. Now, I will get a compensation from that person. Now, whether I go and repair my garage or whether I go on a holiday as such should not matter because what matters is that the damage was caused and I was due compensation. That's different from my neighbor coming and saying, I see that your garage, perhaps, needs some repair. Let me be a good neighbor and give you some money and help you rebuild your garage. In that case, it would be unethical for me to take that money and go on holiday. So there is a difference between compensation for loss and damage and money delivered for development assistance. However, I want to reiterate that once that money reaches any—whether it's a developing country government or a subnational government there should be—there should be mechanisms put in place for transparently monitoring where that money is going. That should be reported whether it's in a—I have often argued for climate risk assessments to be—annually reported at a national level. So the expenditure on all of this should also be reported. That should be tabled in a country's parliament. So I think it's important to use democratic processes to ensure that monies are deployed for where they are meant to be. But it should not be a reason that if I cause you damage, I will not pay you unless I think you are good enough to receive my money. No, I caused you damage. I owe you money. That is the basic principle of loss and damage. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Lindsey McCormack, raised hand. Q: Hi. I would love to hear your thoughts on lessons from the successful response to Cyclone Fani in 2019. I believe you mentioned it was over a million people were evacuated in India and Bangladesh, saving many lives. You know, I am a student at Baruch College in New York and you probably saw that terrible blizzard upstate. People were stranded and died. And I was just comparing their response capacity and the preparedness in that situation versus in the cyclone where you have over a million people moved out of harm's way. I'm really interested to hear what goes behind making that kind of preparation possible. GHOSH: Well, thanks for the question, Lindsey. This is extremely important. I think what happened—before I talk about Cyclone Fani let me go back again twenty years. There was the super cyclone in 1999 and then just a few years later there was also the tsunami in 2004 and, of course, there have been natural disasters from time to time. In fact, between 1990 and 2005 there were about 200-odd extreme weather events that we faced in India. But since 2005, we've already faced well over three hundred. The frequency of extreme cyclones has gone up 3X between the 1980s and now. So there is this constant need, obviously, to upgrade your systems but that investment that was put in in early warning systems at a sort of regional scale using satellites, using ground sensors in the sea, et cetera, help to monitor and help to predict when—the movement of cyclones' landfall and so forth. Along with that is—has been a lot of local administration capacity building of how do you then get this word out and how do you work with local communities. So there are, for instance, again, Odisha women run self-help groups who have become managers of storm shelters so when the community voices are telling people to get out of harm's way it has, perhaps, more social capital attached to it. In another part of the country in a hilly state in Uttar Pradesh—Uttarakhand, I'm sorry—there is a community-run radio station that sends out information about forest fires and things like that. The third thing has been around the rebuilding. So saving of lives is one thing but saving livelihoods is another critical issue and that's why it's not just getting people out of harm's way but often, for—the early warning helps to get livestock out of harm's way as well because, you know, for a small marginal farmer losing their cattle itself becomes a major loss of livelihood. So these are ways in which there have been attempts to ensure that the scientific or the technical capacity building is married with the social capital and the local administrative capital. But that does not mean that this is consistently done all the time. It's all work in progress and a lot more needs to be done in terms of the coverage of—and that's why this Early Warning Systems Initiative that was talked about in COP27 is important because you've got to—I mean, we, again, are working with some private sector entities that provide early warning systems for hundreds of millions of people. So how do their—how do our ground-level data and their sort of AI-based kind of modeling capacity marry together to offer those services to much larger numbers of people, literally, in the hundreds of millions. So it's very important that this becomes—and since the title of this conversation is about climate compensation and cooperation I would argue that this is a no regrets approach towards bridging the North and the South. 2022 has demonstrated that a long-held assumption that the rich would escape and the poor would somehow adapt is kind of gone. You know, we've all been slammed with extreme events and I think, of course, there will be positions on which the North and the South and the East and the West will be on different sides of the table. But building a resilience against nonlinear climate risk is a no regrets approach on which we could certainly be cooperating. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take a written question from Caden Hicks, who is at Lewis University. Of the 197 nations involved in these annual conferences of the parties when wealthy and powerful nations such as the United States and China do not meet their pledges are there any consequences for them? If they decide to drop their participation in this council how would they—what would the consequences be? GHOSH: This is at the heart of the climate problem. I talked about three market failures and there is one political failure, which is that we don't have an accountability mechanism, so to speak, that can hold everyone to account, the largest polluters but also everybody else. And that's why the climate regime is different from the trade regime, which has a dispute settlement mechanism, or the international financial regime where you have annual surveillance of what you're doing in managing your fiscal deficit, for instance. So when it comes to holding actors to account, I see that we need to make efforts both within the FCCC framework and with outside. Within the FCCC framework, the Article Fifteen of the Paris Agreement is something that can be leveraged more to ensure that the Compliance Committee has greater powers, that those that are not compliant are able to then—for instance, in Article Six, which has yet to be operationalized in terms of internationally trading of carbon credits, if you are not compliant with your domestic nationally determined contributions, then Article Thirteen compliance should demand that you have to buy more carbon credits than otherwise would have been possible. That's one idea. The second is that the—and I've written about this recently—that we need to stop making the COPs just platforms for announcing new initiatives, that every alternate COP should be designed as an accountability COP, which means that we come there and we report not just on what we are emitting and automating in terms of the biannual update reviews, but have a genuine peer review conversation as it happens in many other international regimes. Right now no one asks tough questions and no one answers tough questions. So it's—I mean, I said this quite publicly at—in Sharm el-Sheikh that, unfortunately, the COPs have become mutual admiration societies. Every year we come and make announcements. We form some initiatives. We say something will happen on methane, something will happen on finance, something will happen on agriculture and forests. And the next year we come and make new announcements. We never really ask what happened to the announcement you made twelve months ago. So how do we shift from being mutual admiration societies to mutual accountability societies? But beyond the COP process I think there are two other ways in which parties can be held to account. Number one is domestic legislatures and domestic courts. It's important that the pledges that are being made are legislated upon at a national level so that parliaments can hold executives to account, and if that is not happening then you can go to court and hold your governments to account. But, equally, it's not just about state parties. There are the nonstate actors. And last year I also served on the UN secretary-general's high-level expert group on net-zero commitments of nonstate entities, which means the corporations that are promising to get to net zero, or the cities and the states and the regions that are promising to get to net zero, and we laid out some clear principles on what it would mean to claim that you're headed towards net zero. Where are your plans? Where are your interim targets? Where are your financing strategies? How is this linked to your consumer base so you're not just looking at scope one or scope two but also scope three emissions. So there are ways in which then the shareholders and the consumers of products and services of corporations can hold them to account. It's a much more complicated world. But in the absence of the FCCC haven't been able to deliver genuine compliance. We've got to get creative in other ways. FASKIANOS: I'm going to go next to Stephen Kass, who has raised his hand. Also wrote a question but I think it'd be better if you just shared it yourself. Q: I'm an adjunct professor at Brooklyn Law School and at NYU Center on Global Affairs. As you know, COP27 included these remarkable but belated obligations to make payments but without any enforceable mechanism or a specific set of commitments. Some years ago the New York City Bar Association proposed an international financial transaction tax on all transfers of money globally with the proceeds dedicated to climate adaptation. This would not be intended to replace the COP27 obligations but I wonder how you feel about that proposal. GHOSH: This is, again, a very interesting question, Stephen, because the need to be creative of—about different sources of money that can capitalize a loss and damage financing facility or an adaptation financing facility is absolutely essential because governments—I mean, we recognize that governments have limited fiscal resources and it has become harder and harder to get any money—real money—put on the table when it comes to the pledges that have been made. So I have recently been appointed to a group of economists that are looking at this issue. There is this approach, of course, of taxing financial transactions. There is another idea around taxing barrels of oil. Even a single dollar on a barrel of oil can capitalize a huge amount of fund. There are other ways, taxing aviation or the heavy kind of—heavy industries that—you know, shipping, aviation, et cetera. Then there are approaches towards leveraging the special drawing rights (SDRs) on the International Monetary Fund, which are basically a basket of currencies that can then be used to capitalize a—what I've called a global resilience reserve fund. So you don't make any payout right now from your treasuries but you do use the SDRs to build up the balance sheet of a resilience fund, which then pays out when disasters above a certain threshold hit. So these are certainly different ways in which we have to be thinking about finding the additional resources. See, when it comes to mitigation—this goes back to Irina's very first point—when it comes to mitigation there is—at least it's claimed there are tens of trillions of dollars of private investment just waiting to be deployed and that brings me to that second market failure that I referred to, that despite those tens of trillions of dollars waiting to be deployed, money does not flow where the sun shines the most. But when you pair it with, say, adaptation, let me give you an example. India has the largest deployment of solar-based irrigation pumps and it plans to deploy millions of solar-based irrigation pumps so you're not using diesel or coal-based electricity to pump water for agriculture. Now, is a solar-based irrigation pump a mitigation tool or is it an adaptation tool or is it a resilience tool? I would say it's all of the above. But if we can define that through the International Solar Alliance, it's actually trying to also fund the deployment of solar-based irrigation in sub-Saharan Africa as well. So the point I'm trying to make here is if we can find ways to aggregate projects, aggregate demand, and reduce that delta between perceived risk and real risk, we can lower the cost of finance and drive private investment into mitigation-cum-adaptation projects. But when it comes to pure compensation, the kind that we are talking about when it comes to loss and damage, disaster relief, et cetera—especially when climate shocks have compounding effects—that you're not just doing an after the event, you know, pitching a tent to house the displaced population, but we're building in real resilience against even the slow onset of the climate crisis, in some aspects. Then we have to get a lot more creative about the resources because private resources are not flowing there and traditional kind of vanilla-style public resources don't seem to be available. So your idea is very much one of those that should be considered. FASKIANOS: So I'm going to take a written question from Allan Victor Cortes, who's an undergrad at Lewis University: To what extent do you believe that small motivated groups can truly make a global impact on the climate scene? What incentivizes larger bodies, be it states or multinational corporations, to listen to these collaborations of small governments or firms and their proposed environmental solutions? GHOSH: This is a very interesting question because it has a normative dimension to it and an instrumental dimension to it. The normative dimension—I was having another public event just yesterday where we were talking about this—is what is the value—when you're faced with a planetary crisis what is the value of individual or small group action? The value, of course, is that there is agency because when we talk about, say, lifestyle changes, and India announced this national mission called Mission LiFE in October in the presence of the UN secretary-general—Lifestyle for Environment—the idea was how do you nudge behavior, to nudge behavior towards sustainable practices, sustainable consumption, sustainable mobility, sustainable food. You can think about creating awareness. You can think about giving more access to those products and services and, of course, it has to be affordable. But there is a fourth A, which is that it only works when individuals and communities take ownership or have agency over trying to solve the problem. But that is one part of the story. But there is an instrumental dimension to it, which is what I call the enabling of markets beyond just the nudging of individual or small group behavior. So, again, let me give an example of—from India but which is applicable in many other parts of the world. It is the use of distributed renewable energy. Now, distributed renewable energy is smaller in scale, smaller in investment size, even less on the radar of large institutional investors, and yet has many other benefits. It makes your energy system more resilient. It actually creates many more jobs. We calculate that you create—you get seven times more jobs per megawatt hour of distributed renewables or rooftop solar compared to large-scale solar, which creates more jobs than natural gas, which creates more jobs than coal, and it is able to drive local livelihoods. So we mapped this out across India of how distributed renewables could drive livelihoods in rural areas whether it's on-farm applications or off-farm applications, small food processing units, textile units, milk chilling and cold chain units, and so on and so forth, and we were baffled when we realized or we calculated that the market potential is more than $50 billion. In sub-Saharan Africa the market potential of solar-based irrigation is more—about $12 billion. So then suddenly what seems like really small individual efforts actually scales up to something much larger. Now, if we can figure out ways to warehouse or aggregate these projects and de-risk them by spreading those risks across a larger portfolio, are able to funnel institutional capital into a—through that warehousing facility into a large—a portfolio of a number of small projects, if we are able to use that money to then enable consumer finance as has been announced in today's national budget in India, then many things that originally seemed small suddenly begin to gain scale. So we, as a think tank, decided to put our own hypothesis to the test. So we evaluated more than one hundred startups, selected six of them, paired up with the largest social enterprise incubator in the country, and are now giving capital and technical assistance to six startups using distributed renewables for livelihoods. Within two and a half years we've had more than thirteen thousand technology deployments, 80 percent of the beneficiaries have been women who have gone on to become micro entrepreneurs, and India is the first country in the world that's come out with a national policy on the use of distributed renewables for livelihood activities. So the normative value is certainly there about agency. But the instrumental value of converting that agency into aggregated action is also something that we should tap into. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Tombong Jawo, if you could ask your question—it also got an up vote—and identify yourself, please. Let's see. You have to unmute yourself. You're still muted. OK. We're working on that. I'm going to take a quick question from Mark Bucknam, who's the chair of Department of Security Studies at the National War College. What is the best source for statistics on how much money is being spent on climate research? GHOSH: There are multiple sources depending on where you—I mean, the study I was referring to came from a journal paper that was written by Indra Overland, “Funding Flows for Climate Change Research.” This was in the journal Climate and Development. But I would think that the IPCC—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—would probably have some estimates aggregated in terms of this and you could check there. But let me also check with my modeling teams to see if they have better sources and get back to you on this. FASKIANOS: Fantastic, and we will be sending out a link to this webinar—to the video and transcripts—so we can include sources in that follow-up. So since Tombong could not unmute I will ask the question. Tombong is an undergraduate student at Cavendish University Uganda. Climate compensation and cooperation is undoubtedly a step in the right direction if all stakeholders adhere to the laid down rules and regulations. However, what mechanisms are put in place to ensure that it gets to the people who matter the most and not diverted for political gains by politicians? GHOSH: I mean, this is similar to the question that Clemente asked earlier, and I understand and I think it's important now that we start thinking about what are the national-level efforts that would be needed to build in the monitoring of where the funds go and what kind of infrastructure is built. So you can do this at multiple levels and this, again, goes back to the first thing I said about loss and damage, that we need this hyperlocal assessment. Let's say a hundred thousand dollars have been given to a small country for resilience. Now, how you deploy that needs to be a conversation that first begins with the science. Now, where are you going to be impacted the most? What is the kind of climate risk that you're going to be impacted by? Is it a flooding risk? Is it coastal degradation? Is it crop loss? Is it water stress? Accordingly, the monies should be then apportioned. Once it's apportioned that way it should immediately get down to a much local-level kind of monitoring. That requires itself a combination of state-level reporting but I would argue also nonstate reporting. So, again, we spend a lot of our efforts as a nonprofit institution tracking not just emissions but also tracking how moneys are deployed, the scale of projects, where the projects are coming up. We do a lot of ground surveys ourselves. We do the largest survey in the world on energy access, that data that helps to inform the rollout of energy access interventions. We've now paired up with the largest rural livelihood missions in two of our largest states to ensure that this work around distributed energy and livelihoods and climate resilience is tied up with what the rural livelihood missions are promising at a state legislature level. So I think that it is very important that the science dictates the apportionment of the funds but that there is a combination of government reporting and nongovernment assessment to track the progress of these projects. Of course, with advanced technology—and, I mean, some have proposed blockchain and so forth—can also track individual transactions, whether it's reaching the person who was intended to be reached, and so on and so forth, and those kinds of mechanisms need to be developed regardless of this loss and damage financing facility. If we talk about offsets, all the activity in voluntary carbon markets that are going on, the level of rigor that is needed for when, so you're trying to offset your flight and saying, well, a tree is going to be planted in Indonesia for this long-haul flight that you're taking, how do you know that that tree truly was planted? And also if trust is broken then it's very hard to rebuild and that's why, again, I said earlier in answer to a different question that transparency has its own value in addition to improving the trust of the market. But it has its own value because it guides policy development and policy action and individual action in a far better way. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Charles Fraser, who has raised his hand. Q: You can hear me? FASKIANOS: We can now. Thank you. But identify yourself. I know you also wrote your question. So— Q: Sure. I'm a graduate student at the Princeton School of International Public Affairs. My question is about access to finance issues. The UNFCCC has produced—has decreed other climate funds in the past, the Green Climate Fund and the Adaptation Fund for example, and often beyond issues of how much money is mobilized to those funds issues about how recipients can access the funds is a prominent thing that's discussed. How do you think that the—this new fund on loss and damage can be set up to address those issues and, perhaps, demonstrate ways to get around those problems? GHOSH: Firstly, in the case of the loss and damage financing facility we should make sure that it is not designed as a development assistance fund because, as soon as you do that, then you get into all those other questions about is this—is this going to be spam, should we really send it there, are they really ready to receive the money, and then so on and so forth. It has to be a parameterized one in the sense that if certain shocks are hitting vulnerable communities and countries above a certain threshold it should be able to pay out and that's why that hyperlocal climate science and the attribution science is absolutely critical. On top of that it has to—you know, this is not an investment fund in the sense that this is not a fund manager that has to then see where do I get best returns, and is the project application good enough for me to invest in this, whether it's a mitigation project or adaptation project. No. This is a payout fund. So most of the effort for loss and damage financing facility, in my opinion—I don't sit on the—that technical steering committee that is designing it—but in my opinion most of the effort has to go in figuring out what was the vulnerability, what was the baseline, and how much about that baseline did the—was the damage caused and therefore how much has to be paid out. That is really where a lot of the effort has to go, and the second effort that has to go goes back to what Stephen Kass was suggesting in terms of alternative ways to capitalize this, because with rising climate risks we will quickly run out of money even if we were able to capitalize it with some amount of money today. So these two will have to be the basis and the governing board has to basically decide that is the science that is guiding our understanding of a particular event robust enough for us to make the payout. It should not be contingent and that's—it's the same as one, say, an investigator from an insurance company does before a payout is made for a house that's burned down. But if you keep the victim running around from pillar to post asking for the money that they deserve as compensation, then it will quickly lose legitimacy like many of the other funding schemes that have come out of the climate regime thus far. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the last question from Connor Butler, who's at the University of Wisconsin Whitewater. In the near future do you see wealthy developed countries collaborating with poorer lesser-developed countries in order to build a resilience toward and combat climate change, or do you think that the North will always work together without involving the South? GHOSH: Connor, thank you for this question because this gives me a segue into my third market failure, which is should we build or are we building a sustainable planet which widens rather than narrows the technology divide. I analyzed about three dozen so-called technology-related initiatives emerging in the climate and energy space over the last decade and a half and there were only four that did any kind of real technology transfer and that to—none at scale. Basically, what happens is when you talk about technology, when you talk about cooperation on new technologies, usually these initiatives get stopped at, you know, organizing a conference and you talk about it. Sometimes you put in a—there's a joint research project that begins. Very few times there's a pilot project that actually you can physically see on the ground, and almost never does it get used at scale. So I have been increasingly arguing for technology co-development rather than technology transfer, because it's a fool's errand to hope that the technology will be transferred. Now, why is technology co-development important not just from the point of view of Global South? It's important from the point of view of Global North as well. Let's take something like green hydrogen. It is a major new thrust in many economies. The U.S. Inflation Reduction Act provides a $3 subsidy for production of green hydrogen. India has just announced the largest green hydrogen mission in the world aiming to produce 5 million tons of green algae by 2030. But green hydrogen is not just—it's not easy to just take water and split it. You need a lot of energy. To make that—to split the water you need electrolyzers. For that, you need critical minerals. You need membranes that are developed in certain places. You need manufacturing capabilities that can build this out at scale. I mean, India alone will need 40 (gigawatts) to 60 gigawatts of electrolyzers by the end of the decade. So, ultimately, if we have to build a cleaner energy system and a cleaner economic system we will actually have to move away from islands of regulation towards a more interdependent resilient supply chain around clean energy and climate-friendly technologies. So rather than think of this as a handout to the Global South, I think it makes more sense—and I can talk about batteries, critical minerals, solar panels, wind turbines, green hydrogen, electric vehicles—and you will see again and again we are actually mapping economy by economy where strengths, weaknesses lie and how the complementarities come together. We can see that this technology co-development can become a new paradigm for bridging the North and the South rather than technology transfer being a chasm between the North and the South. FASKIANOS: I think that's a good place to conclude, especially since it is so late there. This was a fantastic conversation. We really appreciate your being with us, Dr. Ghosh, and for all the questions. I apologize to all of you. We could not get to them all. We'll just have to have you back. And I want to commend Dr. Ghosh's website. It is CEEW.in. So that is the Council on Energy, Environment, and Water website and you can find, I believe, a lot of the studies that you're talking about and your papers there. So if people want to dig in even further they should go there, also follow you on Twitter at—oh, my goodness. I need—I need—I think it's midnight here. GHOSH: So ghosharunabha. It's my last name and my first name—at @ghosharunabha FASKIANOS: Exactly. Right. So thank you again for doing this. We really appreciate it. The next Academic Webinar will be on Wednesday, February 15, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time with Margaret O'Mara, who is at the University of Washington, and we will be talking about big tech and global order. So, again, thank you, and if you want to learn about CFR paid internships for students and fellowships you don't have to be in New York or Washington. We do have virtual internships as well. You should please reach out to us, and we also have fellowships for professors. You can go to CFR.org/Careers and do follow us at @CFR_Academic and come to CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. So, again, Dr. Ghosh, thank you very much for today's conversation and to all of you for joining us. GHOSH: Thank you, Irina. Thank you, CFR. Thank you very much. (END)

Toby de Lys is a native New Yorker, who after residing in various major countries around the world –along with his spouse decided that Colombia was the best nation in which to live in or the 21st Century. Graduate and post-graduate studies included Architecture (at the Princeton School of Architecture), Theoretical Physics, Bio-Engineering, Art, Art History, Music, Music History, Philosophy, and Philology as he has native-level fluency in several languages acquired during his early academia in Switzerland. De Lys also identified Bogota as the most promising emerging market capital city to found his new business endeavors, principally the investment firm; Colombia Investing. In his CEO role, de Lys spearheads business development strategies and investment advisory for Colombia Investing to present local and international investors with innovative emerging market vectors and the high-yield opportunities that exist in Colombia.De Lys and his husband Tigre Haller were married in Colombia and wrote the first bilingual guidebook about Bogota and its region; Bogota! A Bilingual Guide to the Enchanted City, published by Penguin-Random House and released internationally in June 2014. In Bogota, De Lys and Haller have become integral to the social and cultural fabric of the city and of Colombia. Along with his husband, de Lys founded the Bogota Anglo Theater; a professional theater company that also flourished into filmmaking ventures (having co-produced/written and directed five films; two of which premiered in Cannes, France). Currently, de Lys is endeavoring to create the first housing community for retiring expats in Colombia with a Canadian business partner. In his spare time; de Lys will also soon be creating the Colombian Bach Society.Bogotá is Colombia's sprawling, high-altitude capital. La Candelaria, its cobblestoned center, features colonial-era landmarks like the neoclassical performance hall Teatro Colón and the 17th-century Iglesia de San Francisco. It's also home to popular museums including the Museo Botero, showcasing Fernando Botero's art, and the Museo del Oro, displaying pre-Columbian gold pieces. Elevation: 8,661′Area: 685 miPopulation: 7.181 million (2018)Support the showIf you enjoy these podcasts, please make a donation by clicking the coffee cup on any page of our website www.wheredogaysretire.com. Each cup of coffee costs $5 and goes towards bringing you these podcasts in the future.

Links from the show:* Getting China Wrong* Surveillance State: Inside China's Quest to Launch a New Era of Social Control* Subscribe to the newsletterAbout my guest:Aaron L. Friedberg is Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, where he has taught since 1987, and co-director of the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs's Center for International Security Studies. He is also a non-resident senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States and a Senior Advisor to the National Bureau of Asian Research.Friedberg is the author of The Weary Titan: Britain and the Experience of Relative Decline, 1895-1905 and In the Shadow of the Garrison State: America's Anti-Statism and its Cold War Grand Strategy, both published by Princeton University Press, and co-editor (with Richard Ellings) of three volumes in the National Bureau of Asian Research's annual "Strategic Asia" series. His third book, A Contest for Supremacy: China, America and the Struggle for Mastery in Asia, was published in 2011 by W.W. Norton and has been translated into Japanese, Chinese and Korean. His most recent monograph, Beyond Air-Sea Battle: The Debate Over U.S. Military Strategy in Asia was published in May 2014 as part of the International Institute for Strategic Studies' Adelphi Paper series. Friedberg's articles and essays have appeared in a number of publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, Commentary, The National Interest, The American Interest, The Weekly Standard, Foreign Affairs, The Washington Quarterly, Survival, and International Security.In 2001-2002 Friedberg was selected as the first occupant of the Henry A. Kissinger Chair at the Library of Congress. He has been a research fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, the Norwegian Nobel Institute, the Smithsonian Institution's Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and Harvard University's Center for International Affairs. Dr. Friedberg served from June 2003 to June 2005 as Deputy Assistant for National Security Affairs in the office of the Vice President. After leaving government he was appointed to the Defense Policy Board and the Secretary of State's Advisory Committee on Democracy Promotion. Friedberg received his AB in 1978 and his PhD in 1986, both from Harvard University. He is a member of the editorial boards of Joint Forces Quarterly and The Journal of Strategic Studies and a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Council on Foreign Relations. Get full access to Dispatches from the War Room at dispatchesfromthewarroom.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Patrick Sharkey - The William S. Tod Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, author of several books including “Uneasy Peace: The Great Crime Decline, the Renewal of City Life, and the Next War on Violence” and a leading scholar or urban crime. He joins Tavis for a conversation about the recent rise in crime and why this current crime spike isn't necessarily a mystery.

Over the weekend, the United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP 27, went into overtime as nations came to an historic agreement to establish a loss and damage fund. This fund is meant to give resources to countries who have experienced the worst effects of climate change. Some like to think of it as climate reparations. There are a lot of factors that might have created the momentum for this historic agreement to go through after many years. An interesting one is that it's becoming more and more difficult for big emitters like the United States to deny their role in contributing to climate change, particularly as new scientific studies have been pivotal in creating a pretty unimpeachable basis for climate responsibility. But, just because science can verify certain realities does not mean that it's a straight path forward for climate justice. To get a sense of what factors are coming together to achieve climate justice, Lawfare associate editor Hyemin Han merges the legal and policy perspective with the science perspective in a conversation with Karen Sokol, a professor at the Loyola University New Orleans College of Law and a fellow at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, and Chris Callahan, a PhD candidate at Dartmouth College who co-produced a scientific study that informed negotiations on loss and damage at COP 27.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr. Meg Jacobs - Research Scholar in the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. The Federal Reserve raised the target federal funds rate by 0.75 percentage points for the fourth time in a row. She joins Tavis to unpack how both Parties are politicizing inflation.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has launched rhetoric about nuclear war in recent weeks, while escalating air missile attacks on Ukrainian cities after Russian forces suffered on-the-ground defeats. President Biden recently remarked that the world has only felt closer to nuclear war in 1962, at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Though U.S. officials have stated they see no indication that Putin will follow through on his threats to use nuclear weapons, and Biden recently tempered his own response, the rhetoric has still left many on edge. We're taking a look at what's prompting Putin to escalate now and the rising stakes of Russia's war in Ukraine. We're joined by Julian E. Zelizer, professor of history and public affairs in the Princeton School of Public & International Affairs and Nikolas Gvosdev, professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College and editor of "Orbis," a journal of world affairs by the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

One of the world's leading Economists, Atif Mian, comes on The Pakistan Experience for a masterclass on Pakistan's economic problems. On this deep dive podcast, we discuss inequality, real estate, economic indicators, incompetence of our leaders, circular debt, CPEC, IMF and the political economy. How bad is our economy? What are Pakistan's core economic problems? Why Pakistan focuses on unproductive sectors? Find out this and more on this week's episode of The Pakistan Experience. Atif Rehman Mian is a Pakistani-American economist who serves as the John H. Laporte Jr. Class of 1967 Professor of Economics, Public Policy, and Finance at Princeton University, and as the Director of the Julis-Rabinowitz Center for Public Policy and Finance at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. He received a Guggenheim Fellowship in 2021, and was elected Fellow of the Econometric Society in 2021. His work focuses on the connections between finance and the macro economy. He is the first person of Pakistani origin to rank among the top 25 young economists of the world. In 2014, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) identified Atif as one of twenty-five young economists who it expects will shape the world's thinking about the global economy in the future. Atif Mian reflects on whether IMF, the Pakistani Economy and our failures to fix it. Just how bad is the Pakistani Economy? The Pakistan Experience is an independently produced podcast looking to tell stories about Pakistan through conversations. Please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thepakistanexperience And Please stay in touch: https://twitter.com/ThePakistanExp1 https://www.facebook.com/thepakistanexperience https://instagram.com/thepakistanexpeperience The podcast is hosted by comedian and writer, Shehzad Ghias Shaikh. Shehzad is a Fulbright scholar with a Masters in Theatre from Brooklyn College. He is also one of the foremost Stand-up comedians in Pakistan and frequently writes for numerous publications. Instagram.com/shehzadghiasshaikh Facebook.com/Shehzadghias/ Twitter.com/shehzad89 Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:30 Core Challenges of the Pakistani Economy 11:00 Speculation in the Economy 14:00 How do we move towards investing in Productive Assets 17:00 The Elite and their Incentives 23:30 Civilian Governments not having the courage 29:00 Political Instability 34:00 Daronomics and Fixed Exchange Rate 37:00 Industrial Policy and Export Prioritization 43:00 CPEC 50:20 IMF 56:00 Remittances and How bad is our Economy? 1:05:20 Extreme Inequality 1:07:30 Twin Deficits 1:10:00 Savings Rate and Investment Rate 1:14:15 Productive Sectors ripe for Public Investment 1:16:30 Advice to young Economists 1:21:00 Atif Mian and Macro Finance 1:25:45 What Economists should ask? 1:27:45 Class Mobility 1:31:00 Tax Base and Amnesty Schemes 1:33:50 State led Development model for Asian Countries and Privatization 1:38:45 Lessons from India 1:41:40 Path to Sustainable Recovery 1:44:00 Pakistan's consumption should fall and political incompetency 1:52:20 Economic Charter 1:55:20 Book Recommendation and closing

For some of us, September 11th, 2001 still rings clear in our minds, even 20 years after the attacks. But newer generations have little to no memory of that tragic day — either having been too young to remember, or not yet born. Under The Radar is marking the upcoming 20th anniversary of 9/11 by reflecting on how Gen-Zers recognize an event that they learn about in history books. How does generational trauma affect those who didn't even live through the event? And, once it was clear that the 9/11 hijackers were Muslim, American Muslims became targets 20 years ago. The pain and anger of the tragedy drove anti-American sentiment as well as ongoing suspicion and misconception of Islam. Has public perception towards Muslims shifted, as the 20-year marker of 9/11 approaches? Under The Radar is examining the systemic and structural racism against Muslims that has long been embedded in the U.S. Guests: Garrett Graff, journalist and historian, whose latest book “The Only Plane in the Sky,” is the first comprehensive oral history of September 11th. Graff also serves as the director of the Aspen Institute's cybersecurity and technology program. Sam Sommers, experimental social psychologist, author, and professor at Tufts University. Dana Rose Garfin, trauma scholar and assistant professor at the University of California, Irvine. Amaney Jamal, the Edwards S. Sanford professor of politics at Princeton University, dean of the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, director of the Mamdouha S. Bobst Center for Peace and Justice and author of "Race and Arab Americans Before and After 9/11." Journalist Malika Bilal, host of “The Take” podcast by Al Jazeera and former co-host of The Stream, a social-media led talk show on Al Jazeera English. Fatema Ahmad, executive director at Muslim Justice League, here in Boston.

Kim Lane Scheppele, professor of sociology and international affairs in the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, discusses the American conservative movement's obsession with Viktor Orbán and Hungary's authoritarian nationalism.

Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24th, 2022, and the two nations have been at war since. This week, two experts in constitutional law and international affairs join us to unpack the causes of this war, what potential implications for the core principles of liberal democracy and constitutionalism might be, and whether international law has any power to stop the fighting. Kim Lane Scheppele, the Laurance S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and International Affairs in the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, and the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University, and Jeffrey Kahn, the Professor of Law and Gerald J. Ford Research Fellow at Southern Methodist University join Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center. The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.