Podcasts about XX

Are you over decorating your home? Does it look stiff and just a little too perfect? Do you have just too much stuff? Yikes - does it look like you are trying too hard? If so you are over-decorating. We discuss how to avoid over-decorating today.Kelly mentioned the episode on how to work with patterns (episode 15) and you can listen to it ⁠HERE⁠DTT defines rafter tailsWe participate in the affiliate program with Amazon and other retailers. We may receive a small fee for qualified purchases at no extra cost to you.Anita's crush is a beautiful set of Spode Stafford Blooms plates ⁠HERE⁠Kelly's crush is the book "What Is My Plant Telling Me?" by Emily L. Hay Hinsdale. Gret your copy of this wonderful reference for your houseplants ⁠HERE⁠.Need help with your home? We'd love to help! We do personalized consults, and we'll offer advice specific to your room that typically includes room layout ideas, suggestions for what the room needs, and how to pull the room together. We'll also help you to decide what isn't working for you. We work with any budget, large or small. Find out more ⁠HERE⁠Hang out with us between episodes at our blogs, IG and Kelly's YouTube channels. Links are below to all those places to catch up on the other 6 days of the week!Kelly's IG ⁠HERE⁠Kelly's Youtube ⁠HERE⁠Kelly's blog ⁠HERE⁠Anita's IG ⁠HERE⁠Anita's blog ⁠HERE⁠Are you subscribed to the podcast? Don't need to search for us each Wednesday let us come right to your door ...er...device. Subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts. Just hit the SUBSCRIBE button & we'll show up!If you have a moment we would so appreciate it if you left a review for DTT on iTunes. Just go ⁠HERE⁠ and click listen in apple podcasts.XX,Anita & KellyDI - 17:49 /21:36See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

[Attention, certaines scènes racontées peuvent heurter la sensibilité des personnes fragiles.] Retour sur une saison événement en 8 épisodes qui vous a marqués. Voici le drame familial le plus emblématique du XXème siècle : l'affaire Grégory. Le 16 octobre 1984, Grégory Villemin, 4 ans, est retrouvé pieds et poings liés dans la Vologne, une rivière des Vosges. Depuis près de 40 ans, cet infanticide est toujours irrésolu. Ce cold case français a connu des décennies de rebondissements et de fausses pistes. Dans cette saison événement, Caroline Nogueras retrace toute l'enquête, au cœur de l'intimité des familles Villemin, Jacob, Laroche, Bolle… En invitée exceptionnelle, nous recevons Maître Marie-Christine Chastant-Morand, l'avocate du couple Villemin. Caroline Nogueras sera aussi accompagnée de deux invités pour éclaircir les zones d'ombre : Thibaut Solano, auteur de “La Voix rauque” et le journaliste Jacques Expert qui a couvert toute l'affaire à l'époque. Pieds et poings liés dans la Vologne Les Vosges. A Lépanges-sur-Vologne, 16 octobre 1984. Il est un peu plus de 20 heures. Tout le monde ne parle que de ça dans ce village de 1095 habitants. Le fils Villemin, Grégory, 4 ans, est introuvable depuis 17h. Il jouait devant la maison de ses parents. Et puis, plus rien. Les gendarmes et des pompiers volontaires venus en renfort quadrillent le secteur. Depuis 17h30, des équipes longent la Vologne à la recherche du petit garçon, craignant le pire. La disparition du petit garçon n'a rien d'accidentelle... Production et diffusion : Bababam Originals Ecriture : Virginie Guedj Voix : Caroline Nogueras Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

La historia de los conflictos bélicos, especialmente los acaecidos en el siglo XX, son una fuente ingente de información para los historiadores, no solo por su cercanía en el tiempo sino también por la cantidad ingente de documentos históricos (cartas, archivos y fotografías o vídeos) con que cuenta. En este programa hablamos de la Guerra (in)civil española, la II Guerra Mundial, moda y guerra y otros temas sugerentes que nos ayudan a contar con nuevas perspectivas sobre la historia de los conflictos en el siglo XX

Sous la conduite de Françoise d'Aubigné, bientôt Madame de Maintenon, le château se transforme : une aile nouvelle, des appartements baignés de lumière, des jardins et parterres signés Le Nôtre, un grand canal, et l'aqueduc monumental de Vauban conçu pour alimenter Versailles en eau. Cette ambition architecturale s'inscrit dans un récit plus vaste — de la transmission à la famille de Noailles aux restaurations du XIXᵉ siècle, jusqu'aux sauvetages du XXᵉ — façonnant un lieu où l'art de bâtir, l'ingénierie hydraulique et le soin du paysage s'entrelacent à jamais avec le destin d'une femme hors du commun.Image teaser DR © 1T2K (capture vidéo)Son : Com d'Archi podcast____Si le podcast COM D'ARCHI vous plaît n'hésitez pas :. à vous abonner pour ne pas rater les prochains épisodes,. à nous laisser des étoiles et un commentaire, :-),. à nous suivre sur Instagram @comdarchipodcast pourretrouver de belles images, toujours choisies avec soin, de manière à enrichirvotre regard sur le sujet.Bonne semaine à tous ! Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Meditación en el domingo (C) de la XX semana del Tiempo Ordinario, predicada durante un curso anual a numerarios del Opus Dei. Jesús, en el Evangelio de hoy nos enseña un rasgo de su corazón: su ardiente celo por las almas: «He venido a prender fuego en el mundo: ¡y ojalá estuviera ya ardiendo!». Nosotros hemos de imitarle en este santo celo apostólico, que es un don divino, como afirmaba San Josemaría.

Hi Intentional Wellness Warrior! Are you going through it? By “it” I mean anything! Are you in a season of change or transition? With the changes of life, many feelings accompany those changes. Some of these changes can feel very hard and bring complex feelings. These feelings can send our stress buckets pouring over into burnout. This breath prayer in the Breathe & Be Still Series (once a month podcast series) is for that caregiving mom who is IN it. You are trying to push through and keep it all together in this new season. Let's take a BREATH and BE STILL with the One who can give us peace, grace and joy in the hard changes.  Shalom Shalom,  Xx, Shan  ……CONNECT……

El siglo XX es el siglo de dos de las guerras más terribles que se libraron, entre medias, el auge de los totalitarismos, el deficiente reparto colonial... El resultado: la polarización del continente en dos bloques que tendrán mucho que decir en el futuro

W najnowszym odcinku serii „Powojnie” opowiadam o Libii rządzonej przez Muamara Kaddafiego. Przedstawiam historię tego kraju od początku XX wieku oraz drogę, która doprowadziła do przewrotu i przejęcia władzy przez młodego wojskowego.nOpisuję pierwsze lata jego rządów – czas reform i radykalnych zmian. Prawo podporządkowano zasadom islamu, a kościoły przekształcano w meczety. Monarchiści i zwolennicy dawnego ustroju trafiali do więzień. Równocześnie ruszyły ambitne projekty infrastrukturalne – powstawały nowe szkoły, szpitale i drogi. Edukacja i opieka zdrowotna stały się bezpłatne. Środki na te inwestycje pochodziły z gigantycznych dochodów z ropy, które wcześniej trafiały głównie do kieszeni elit i otoczenia libijskiego króla. Kaddafi miał inną filozofię – uznał, że większa część zysków powinna trafiać do społeczeństwa. Jednym z największych przedsięwzięć jego epoki była Wielka Sztuczna Rzeka – monumentalny system rurociągów i zbiorników, który miał dostarczać wodę spod Sahary do największych libijskich miast. Był to projekt budzący podziw na całym świecie.Więcej na ten temat w najnowszym odcinku – zapraszam do słuchania!

Zredagowana transkrypcja dostępna na radionaukowe.pl***Latem 1920 roku los Polski wydawał się przesądzony. Wojna z bolszewikami toczyła się praktycznie od stycznia 1919 roku, ale w lipcu 1920 do Warszawy zbliżała się Armia Czerwona pod dowództwem „demona” Tuchaczewskiego. Józef Piłsudski i sztab Wojska Polskiego pod kierownictwem generała Tadeusza Rozwadowskiego zdecydowali się na słynny manewr znad Wieprza. Katastrofa była o włos: plany miał przy sobie oficer, który poległ w okolicach Włodawy, i dokumenty trafiły do bolszewickich żołnierzy. – Tuchaczewski spojrzał na to, rozważył i doszedł do wniosku, że jest to celowa zagrywka Polaków, podrzucenie fałszywych dokumentów, żeby odciągnąć oddziały Armii Czerwonej od Warszawy – opowiada mój gość, prof. Janusz Odziemkowski, specjalista od historii polskiej wojskowości, a zwłaszcza Bitwy Warszawskiej. Rozmawiamy oczywiście z okazji 105 rocznicy tzw. cudu nad Wisłą.

Sharing our personal secrets on shopping for antiques, consignment, estate sales, thrift and market places. We know where and how to get the goods. Now you will too! Listen in...If you want to study American silver hallmarks, try Kovel's American silvermarks ⁠HERE⁠If you want to study English silver hallmarks, try Jackson's Guide to Hallmarks ⁠HERE⁠ CRUSHES:Anita is crushing on the audiobook Eliza Hamilton: The extraordinary life and times of the wife of Alexander Hamilton ⁠HERE⁠Kelly loves these rose pruning gloves. Click ⁠HERE⁠ SCHEDULE A DESIGN CONSULT:Need help with your home? We'd love to help! We do personalized consults, and we'll offer advice specific to your room that typically includes room layout ideas, suggestions for what the room needs, and how to pull the room together. We'll also help you to decide what isn't working for you. We work with any budget, large or small. Find out more ⁠HERE⁠Hang out with us between episodes at our blogs, IG and Kelly's YouTube channels. Links are below to all those places to catch up on the other 6 days of the week!Kelly's IG ⁠HERE⁠ Kelly's Youtube ⁠HERE⁠ Kelly's blog ⁠HERE⁠Anita's IG ⁠HERE⁠ Anita's blog ⁠HERE⁠ SUBSCRIBE:Are you subscribed to the podcast? Don't need to search for us each Wednesday let us come right to your door ...er...device. Subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts. Just hit the SUBSCRIBE button & we'll show up!If you have a moment we would so appreciate it if you left a review for DTT on iTunes. Just go ⁠HERE⁠ and click listen in apple podcasts.XX, Anita & KellyDI - 16:22 / 21:59See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Testamos a prévia de Ninja Gaiden 4, exploramos a Sicília do início do século XX em Mafia: The Old Country e realizamos nossos sonhos antes do fim em Time Flies. Também falamos sobre o cancelamento de Contraband, demissões na Bithell Games, batemos o martelo se Silent Hill f é ou não um soulslike e mais!

La historia de Beceite no se concibe sin las fábricas de papel, enormes edificios que marcaron la orografía del pueblo en los siglos XIX y comienzos del XX, y que lo siguen haciendo pero transformados en otros negocios, principalmente, destinados al turismo. Ahora los vecinos de la localidad han recopilado los recuerdos de su historia papelera, tal y como nos cuentan Ana Santos, de la Asociación Clásicas y modernas, y Eli Díez, presidenta de la Asociación de Mujeres La Pesquera. El resultado se verá en la Feria de Arte del 20 de agosto, BeseitArt.

If you're in your  40s, 50s, or beyond and starting to notice changes in your skin—like loss of firmness, fine lines, or that youthful glow starting to fade—you are not alone. And today's guest is here to help you navigate it all with clarity and confidence. I'm joined by Dr. Mary Alice Mina, a Harvard-trained, double board-certified dermatologist and dermatologic surgeon with over 15 years of experience helping women age gracefully—with both in-office procedures and daily skincare strategies that actually work. In this episode, we're asking: What are the biggest skincare myths mature women still believe—and what should we be doing instead? When should you really start thinking about a facelift or cosmetic procedures? What are the most common mistakes Dr. Mina sees women making in their 40s and beyond? And how can we keep our collagen and skin plumpness without going overboard? Plus, Dr. Mina shares her personal skincare routine, go-to beauty devices, and the reason she decided to start a podcast of her own—despite her incredibly busy schedule. Whether you're a skincare minimalist or love trying all the latest treatments, this episode is packed with practical, age-smart advice you won't want to miss. Let's dive in! XX, Lindsey   Next Steps: Follow Dr. Mina Instagram: @drminaskin Website: https://www.theskinreal.com/  Podcast: The Skin Real  Book a ONE on ONE Skincare Routine coaching call with me to get you Radiant skin!  LISTEN TO EXCLUSIVE PODCAST CONTENT and Download our FREE Esthetician led Skincare app: Apple IOS  Here OR Google Play Here Download my Free 7 Day Skincare Guide: Here If you liked this episode, you will also like this one : Discover Your Skin type: HERE Favorite Skincare Products HERE Connect with me:  @lindseyrholder and @spaskinandbeauty  Leave a review and get instant access to my  48 Hour Skincare Makeover Guide: HERE Listen to related episodes: Dr. Trevor Cates on Hormonal imbalances and their effects on skin health, including acne, premature aging, and inflammation Glowy Skin at 52—No Botox, No Lasers, Just Smarter Skincare: LIVE Skincare coaching session Skincare in a Hurry: Live Coaching a Busy Mom with Oily Skin & Dark Circles  

Hi Intentional Wellness Warrior! Let's fight for healthy hormones today!! I have a special guest on, Lara Frendjian who is a holistic nutritionist and hormones expert. She is so wise on how to care for our bodies as women and in these stressful seasons. So if you feel like you are tired, stressed, gaining weight, foggy, forgetful, crazy…then tune in! She has some help for you! You can connect with Lara on her podcast: Master Your Metabolism after 40 or on her website at nutritionherway.com Red light Lara recommends: https://lifeblud.co/products/relax?dt_id=1604157%3Bap%3A895731 Use code HERWAY for 10% off    Shalom Shalom,  Xx, Shan  ……CONNECT……

Kia Ora! It's Armageddon time! Which of course is New Zealands largest convention which travels the entire country and soo do my guests! I've invited Nikki and Michaela from Bea D&D, and Ruby from Questbook onto the episode to tell you all about what Armageddon is really like. The good. The Bad. And the SMELLY.Thanks to my Gems listening out there: Barry, Lieran, Ezequiel, Violet, Joey, Samsara, Karl, BJ, Spencer and the Pink Phantom Become a Gem by visiting https://www.patreon.com/jewelsfromnzSend messages thru Glitter Discord or email on julzburgisser@gmail.com Find me under @JulzfromNZ on Instagram, Facebook and @julzburgisser on Twitter as well! Aroha nui. Ka kite anō. Xx

Tunes: Patrick MacDonald: Coma Leam, coma leam cogadh no sithAlike to me peace or War, The Gathering of the Clans, William Ross: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes, J&R Glen: Louden's bonny Woods and Braes, Robertson & Ramsay: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes, Matthew Betham: Earl Moira's Welcome to Scotland, David Glen: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes “Old Gaelic Air” Roddy Cannon/Keith Sanger: The Mother, Ailean Domhnullach (Allan MacDonald): The Harlaw Brosnachadh, Donald MacDonald: Cogadh na Sith Simon Chadwick: Cogadh no Sith – War or Peace C.A. Malcolm: The Piper in Peace and War Articles Read or Referenced: Keith Sanger's 2015 Post about War or Peace from Pibroch.net: https://pibroch.net/learning/cogadh-no-sith-or-war-or-peace/ Listen to the George Moss and Peter Cooke interview here: https://www.tobarandualchais.co.uk/track/65235?l=en Special thanks to Alan MacDonald and Bonnie Rideout for the Use of Alan's Performance on the Harlaw Album: https://youtu.be/3blkFtU0x9E?si=xtuSb06Iyoa8Lwr4 Check out Allan's Work here: https://allanmacdonald.com/ And Bonnie Rideout's work here: http://www.bonnierideout.com/ For the Translation I used for the Battle of Harlaw Poem is here: https://mastodon.scot/@scotlit/112841104994359938 Simon Chadwick's excellent post about his work preparing for his performance of War or Peace is here: https://simonchadwick.net/2016/07/cogadh-no-sith-war-peace.html To Watch Simon's Performance look here: https://youtu.be/eXZDTefKrFI?si=9S4man2MW0Id6R8b 1927: Excerpt from The Piper In Peace And War By C. A. Malcolm, M.A., Ph.D. https://electricscotland.com/history/scotreg/peaseandwar15.htm Sound effects at the beginning from BBC Sound Effects Archive: https://sound-effects.bbcrewind.co.uk/ Sources: Loudon's Bonny Woods and Braes 1869: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes from William Ross's Collection of Pipe Tunes: https://web.archive.org/web/20210728140711/http://www.ceolsean.net/content/WRoss/Book08/Book08%206.pdf +X+X+ 1870: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes from J & R Glen's Collection for the Great Highland Bagpipe Book Three https://web.archive.org/web/20211017230720/https://ceolsean.net/content/JRGlen/Book03/Book03%2017.pdf +X+X+ “Sixty Years Ago”: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes from Robertson and Ramsay's Master Method for the Highland Bagpipes: https://web.archive.org/web/20211017213952/https://ceolsean.net/content/RobRam/Book02/Book02%2014.pdf +X+X+ 1815: Earl Moira's Welcome to Scotland (Loudon's Bonnie Banks and Braes from Matthew Betham MS: https://tunearch.org/wiki/EarlofMoira%27sWelcometoScotland(The) +X+X+X+X+ 1880s: Loudon's Bonnie Woods and Braes “Old Gaelic Air” from David Glen's Collection of Highland Bagpipe Music, Book 4 https://web.archive.org/web/20211017213952/https://ceolsean.net/content/RobRam/Book02/Book02%2014.pdf +X+X+ War or Peace 1784: Coma Leam, coma leam cogadh no sith_Alike to me peace or War, The Gathering of the Clans from Patrick MacDonald's Collection of Highland Vocal Airs: https://www.google.com/books/edition/ACollectionofHighlandVocalAirsTow/XCvLHYWLkFcC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=RA1-PA43&printsec=frontcover +X+X+ 1820s: Cogadh na Sith from Donald MacDonald Manuscript https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/archive/rja14/musicfiles/manuscripts/macdonald/ +X+X+ 1890s: War or Peace from David Glen's Collection of Ancient Piobaireachd Book 5 https://web.archive.org/web/20240813223119/https://ceolsean.net/content/GlenPio/Book05/Book05%2014a.pdf +X+X+ Here are some ways you can support the show: You can support the Podcast by joining the Patreon page at https://www.patreon.com/wetootwaag You can also take a minute to leave a review of the podcast if you listen on Itunes! Tell your piping and history friends about the podcast! Checkout my Merch Store on Bagpipeswag: https://www.bagpipeswag.com/wetootwaag You can also support me by Buying my Albums on Bandcamp: https://jeremykingsbury.bandcamp.com/ You can now buy physical CDs of my albums using this Kunaki link: https://kunaki.com/msales.asp?PublisherId=166528&pp=1 You can just send me an email at wetootwaag@gmail.com letting me know what you thought of the episode! Listener mail keeps me going! Finally I have some other support options here: https://www.wetootwaag.com/support Thanks! Listen on Itunes/Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wetootwaags-bagpipe-and-history-podcast/id129776677 Listen on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5QxzqrSm0pu6v8y8pLsv5j?si=QLiG0L1pT1eu7B5_FDmgGA

====================================================SUSCRIBETEhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNpffyr-7_zP1x1lS89ByaQ?sub_confirmation=1==================================================== DEVOCIÓN MATUTINA PARA JÓVENES 2025“HOY ES TENDENCIA”Narrado por: Daniel RamosDesde: Connecticut, USAUna cortesía de DR'Ministries y Canaan Seventh-Day Adventist Church===================|| www.drministries.org ||===================12 de Agosto¡Abre la caja!«Prueben, y vean que el Señor es bueno. ¡Feliz el hombre que en él confía!». Salmos 34: 8A comienzos del siglo XX, el físico austríaco Erwin Schrödinger concibió un experimento mental sumamente intrigante. Invitó a sus lectores a visualizar un escenario donde un gato se hallaba dentro de una caja de acero junto a un dispositivo que contenía veneno. Este mecanismo estaba meticulosamente diseñado para presentar una probabilidad exacta del 50 % tanto de liberar el veneno como de abstenerse de hacerlo durante un lapso de media hora. Mientras la caja permaneciera cerrada, explicaba el científico, el gato estaba en un estado de superposición cuántica, o paradoja, pues debía considerarse, al mismo tiempo, vivo y muerto. La única forma de saber cuál de las dos posibilidades se había materializado era abriendo la caja.Hay situaciones en las que tenemos que «abrir la caja» para descubrir qué hay dentro. Pero en el Salmo 34, David nos dice que cada vez que probamos a Dios, nos damos cuenta de que él es bueno. ¿Qué argumentos presenta David para hacer semejante sugerencia? David enfrentó peligros mientras apacentaba el ganado en las montañas, enfrentó al gigante Goliat, fue perseguido por un rey paranoico y en medio de todo esto dice: «Recurrí al Señor, y él me contestó, y me libró de todos mis temores» (Salmos 34: 4); y luego añade: «Este pobre gritó, y el Señor lo oyó, y lo libró de todas sus angustias» (Salmos 34: 6).Quizás pienses que la experiencia de David solo es válida para él, pero fíjate que el salmo también contiene una promesa universal: «Los que miran al Señor [...] jamás se verán defraudados» (Salmos 34: 5). David comprobó por experiencia propia que Dios «está cerca» (Salmos 34: 18), sus oídos están atentos a nuestras oraciones. ¡Qué bueno es poder contar con un Dios así!Hoy te invito a abrir la caja de tu relación con Dios. En ella descubrirás un Dios que te escucha, un Dios que provee para tus necesidades, un Dios que te libra de tus temores, un Dios que siempre está cerca de ti. Y lo mejor es que cada vez que probamos a Dios, llegamos a la misma conclusión que David: «El Señor es bueno». ¡Qué dicha es poder confiar en él! 

Salimos a el 'El Descampao' con Sergio Mena a escuchar buena música en un ejercicio de nostalgia. Repasamos los mejores éxitos de una de las duplas de compositores más importantes del siglo XX en España: José Luis Armenteros y Pablo Herrero.

La ciencia no es un camino de rosas. Hay que estudiar mucho, es muy competitiva, y la mayoría de las veces las cosas no salen como uno quiere. Pero a pesar de ello, resulta increíblemente atractiva por la emoción del descubrimiento, la resolución de problemas, el pensamiento crítico y lógico que proporciona y el viaje de continuo aprendizaje en el que uno se embarca de por vida. De todo ello trata el libro "Ser Científico. La ciencia como vocación y profesión", editado por la Fundación Lilly y escrito por el investigador del CSIC Lluís Montoliu, que nos ha acompañado en el estudio. En este programa hemos recuperado el resto de secciones. Eva Rodríguez nos contó que científicos de EE UU han descubierto que el gen de la saliva responsable de digerir el almidón podría haberse duplicado por primera vez hace más de 800 000 años, antes de la llegada de la agricultura. Lo que podría explicar nuestra afición por las patatas fritas. José Manuel Torralba nos habló del biomimetismo, los esfuerzos por copiar industrialmente las soluciones que ha desarrollado la naturaleza (819). Con Bernardo Herradón conocimos las fuentes naturales y aplicaciones del potasio. Javier Ablanque, al mando de nuestra máquina del tiempo, nos llevó a principios del siglo XX para ver como Annie Cohen se convierte en la primera mujer que da la vuelta al mundo en bicicleta, y conocer los fundamentos físicos que hacen que no nos caigamos cuando montamos sobre dos ruedas (819). En nuestros “Destinos con ciencia”, viajamos con Esther García al Museo de Paleontología de Castilla-La Mancha (MUPA) con fósiles de dinosaurios procedentes de los yacimientos de Las Hoyas y Lo Hueco. Escuchar audio

De Stokely Carmichael, figure des luttes noires du XXème siècle, on connaît surtout le combat aux États-Unis, comme dirigeant des Black Panther. On sait moins qu'en 1968, Carmichael a rejoint la Guinée avec son épouse, la chanteuse sud-africaine Miriam Makeba. Il est alors devenu un proche collaborateur du président ghanéen en exil Kwame Nkrumah et s'est engagé aux côtés de la révolution guinéenne. Bokar Ture, fils de Stokely Carmichael, a accordé un entretien à RFI : il raconte les années africaines de la vie de son père. RFI : Votre père a été un acteur important des luttes noires du XXème siècle. Aux États-Unis, où il a été l'un des responsables des Black Panther… mais aussi dans son parcours transatlantique puisqu'il vient s'installer en 1968 en Guinée. Parlez-nous d'abord de lui. D'où vient-il ? Comment est née cette conscience militante noire ?  Bokar Ture : Kwame Ture est né Stokely Carmichael à Trinidad et Tobago, connu aussi en français comme Trinité-et-Tobago, en 1941. Il immigre plus tard aux États-Unis pour retrouver sa mère -donc ma grand-mère- qui y était déjà installée quelques années plus tôt. Elle avait pu avoir sa nationalité américaine parce qu'elle était née à Panama. Comment a commencé cette conscience ? Déjà, il avait un penchant politique très tôt. Il y a une de ses tantes qui racontait une anecdote : quand il était jeune, il la poussait à aller voter pour un syndicaliste à l'île de Trinidad. Et au lycée, aux États-Unis, il fréquentait déjà des groupes gauchistes. Un de ses amis de classe était le fils du président du Parti communiste américain dans les années 1952. Et donc, très tôt, il a pu découvrir les discours marxistes. Et bien sûr, il vivait au sud du Bronx, à côté de Harlem. Et la 125e rue de Harlem est une rue reconnue pour des discours politiques de tout genre, de différents groupes.  Il a été l'un de ceux qui ont travaillé l'idée de Black Power. Il a même coécrit, en 1967 avec Charles Hamilton, un ouvrage qui le théorise, intitulé Black Power, the politics of Liberation in America.  Effectivement, le concept de Black Power existait avant. Il y avait un livre qui s'appelait Black Power par Richard Wright, qui a été écrit pendant les années 1950 et qui était un ouvrage dédié à Kwame Nkrumah. Mais personne n'a rendu l'idée de Black Power aussi populaire que Kwame Ture - Stokely Carmichael à l'époque. Notamment durant une marche contre la peur au sud des États-Unis, aux côtés de Martin Luther King, où il disait, plus ou moins : « On est fatigué de mendier notre liberté, comme on l'a fait ces dernières années dans les droits civiques. Maintenant, ce qu'on va faire, c'est de demander le Black Power », le pouvoir noir, qui était un appel à une autodétermination en termes de structures politiques et économiques pour les personnes noires descendantes d'africains aux États-Unis.  En 1968, votre père épouse une première femme, la chanteuse sud-africaine Miriam Makeba. Au-delà de la relation amoureuse qui s'est nouée entre eux, cette union reflète-t-elle aussi une pensée de votre père, de plus en plus tournée vers l'Afrique et vers le panafricanisme à cette époque ?  Ce n'est pas un tournant, c'est une continuité. Kwame Ture a toujours été Africain dans l'âme. Il vient d'un milieu où l'Afrique est centrale dans l'identité noire. Bien avant qu'il ne se marie avec Miriam Makeba. On le voit dans des photos au début des années 1960 avec ses camarades où il est en tenue africaine. Il se sentait toujours africain. Pour lui, être noir et africain, il ne voyait pas de distinction et toute sa vie était ainsi. Quand il a marié Tantie Miriam, comme je l'appelle, c'était juste une continuité. Après aussi, ma mère, Marlyatou Barry, qui était aussi une Guinéenne. C'était juste une continuité de sa façon de vivre.  Comment se fait concrètement la connexion entre votre père et le premier responsable guinéen, Ahmed Sékou Touré ? Stokely Carmichael, à l'époque, faisait une tournée mondiale et il a rencontré Shirley Graham Du Bois, qui était la veuve de W.E.B Du Bois, qui est aussi une légende de l'histoire de la lutte antiraciste et du développement du panafricanisme. Elle a invité Stokely Carmichael à venir en Guinée pour une conférence du Parti démocratique de Guinée pour rencontrer Kwame Nkrumah et Sékou Touré. Quand il est venu, il a rencontré les deux présidents. Il avait déjà beaucoup entendu parler de Kwame Nkrumah, parce que mon grand-père a travaillé dans un bateau un moment. Il est parti au Ghana et quand il est revenu à New York, il expliquait que c'était la première fois qu'il avait vu une nation noire, indépendante, avec sa propre armée, un président, etc. et il expliquait ceci à un jeune Stokely Carmichael. Cela a vraiment marqué sa pensée. Quelques années plus tard, ils se voient face à face avec Kwame Nkrumah. Après la conférence, en quittant la Guinée, il part dire au revoir à Sékou Touré, qui lui dit : « Écoute, mon fils. Ici, c'est chez toi, tu peux revenir quand tu veux. C'est ta maison. »  Il part voir Kwame Nkrumah qui lui dit « Écoute, moi, je cherche un secrétaire politique, donc si ça t'intéresse, tu es toujours le bienvenu. » Un an et demi plus tard, deux ans pratiquement, il était de retour avec sa nouvelle épouse, Miriam Makeba.  Qu'est ce qui fait qu'il vient s'installer à Conakry à cette époque ?  Pour lui, c'était le coin le plus révolutionnaire en Afrique. Lumumba a été assassiné très tôt donc il n'y avait plus le Congo. Après, il y a eu le coup d'État contre Kwame Nkrumah en 1966. Modibo Keïta en 1968. Quand lui est arrivé, le seul autre pays, c'était la Tanzanie, mais qui était beaucoup moins radicale. Donc il a choisi la Guinée. C'était le pays qui s'alignait le plus avec sa pensée du pouvoir noir à l'échelle mondiale.  Il est aussi menacé aux États-Unis. C'est aussi pour cela qu'il quitte les États-Unis ? De toute façon, mon père était prêt à se martyriser. Il a vu Malcolm X tué, il a vu Martin Luther King tué et les agences voulaient sa tête. Il a échappé à pas mal d'attentats. Mais ce n'était pas la raison centrale. Déjà, il y avait l'invitation. Ensuite, il ne voyait pas les États-Unis comme le centre de cette lutte à laquelle il a dédié sa vie. Il voyait l'Afrique comme étant une partie essentielle. Pour lui, en venant en Guinée, il rejoignait l'Afrique, il rejoignait la révolution africaine qui pouvait donner la dignité à tout le peuple noir à travers le monde.  Diriez-vous qu'il y a un vrai projet politique international derrière cette volonté de s'installer en Guinée ?  Il a toujours eu ce projet. Quand il parlait de Black Power, déjà, dans le livre dont vous avez parlé, il parlait aussi des colonies en Afrique. Dans Black Power, lui et Charles Hamilton faisaient le parallèle entre la situation que vivaient les Afro-Américains aux États-Unis et la situation que vivaient les Africains en Afrique et aux Caraïbes aussi. Il faisait ce parallèle. Dans sa tête, c'était quelque chose qui était un combat international dès le début.  Quelles sont les idées sur lesquelles votre père, Stokely Carmichael – Kwame Ture, une fois qu'il change de nom – et Ahmed Sékou Touré se retrouvaient ?  On parle de personnes qui avaient la même vision d'une Afrique unie, une Afrique libre où il n'y a pas d'inégalités. Ils étaient tous deux penchés vers des idées socialistes. Ils étaient totalement alignés idéologiquement. Sékou Touré était un de ses mentors, une de ces personnes qui l'ont formé dans cette idéologie.  Ils se retrouvent dans l'idée, qui est défendue par Ahmed Sékou Touré à l'époque, d'authenticité africaine ? À 100 %. Et il s'intègre à 100 %. Je peux vous dire que moi, par exemple, j'ai très peu de souvenirs de mon père en habit occidental. Il s'habillait en tenue africaine, cousue en Afrique. Il s'est enraciné dans la population africaine. Ce qui était quand même unique parce que tout le monde était tourné vers une façon de vivre occidentale. Et lui non, il voulait se réapproprier son héritage culturel.  Et la volonté de promouvoir les cultures africaines, de leur donner leur vraie place ? C'est exactement cela, revaloriser la culture africaine, la culture noire, se réapproprier celle-ci. Et ne pas avoir de complexes vis-à-vis des cultures européennes, dominantes et autres.  Depuis le début de cet entretien, on joue avec deux noms pour parler de votre père, Stokely Carmichael, Kwame Ture. À un moment donné de sa vie, il décide de passer du nom de Stokely Carmichael à celui de Kwame Ture. C'est une démarche qui dit aussi beaucoup de choses sur le lien qu'il a avec Kwame Nkrumah et Ahmed Sékou Touré.  Effectivement. Il y avait un précédent aux États-Unis. Il y avait pas mal d'Afro-Américains, notamment dans son milieu révolutionnaire, qui changeaient de nom. Notamment Malcolm X, Mohamed Ali. Bien sûr, le nom est inspiré de Kwame Nkrumah et de Sékou Touré. L'anecdote, c'est qu'il était en Tanzanie lors d'un entretien radio. Après l'entretien, apparemment, un vieil homme venu à pied d'un village lointain est venu le voir et lui a dit : « Écoute mon fils, j'ai vraiment aimé ton entretien. Mais il y a une chose : ton nom sonne un peu bizarre, un peu féminin, il faut le changer ». Il a alors pris le nom de Kwame Nkrumah et de Sékou Touré. Lorsqu'il venait l'annoncer à Sékou Touré et lui dire : « J'ai pris le prénom de Kwame », Sékou Touré lui a répondu : « C'est bien, parce qu'à chaque fois que nous avons des débats, tu prends toujours son parti. » Il lui a répondu : « Mais j'ai pris le nom Touré comme nom de famille. ». Ce qui était approprié, car c'étaient ses deux mentors. À lire aussiKwame Ture, le destin hors du commun d'un Black Panther parti s'installer en Guinée [1/2] Comment est-ce que vous décririez les liens qu'il entretenait avec Kwame Nkrumah et Ahmed Sékou Touré ? En Kwame Nkrumah, il voyait un symbole de cette lutte. Il était prêt à le suivre. Il a mené quelques opérations au Ghana pour essayer de voir s'il pouvait réinstaurer Kwame Nkrumah au pouvoir. Il était très proche de lui. Et Sékou Touré était comme un père pour lui. En 1970, votre père vit l'un des moments charnières de l'histoire de la Première République guinéenne, à savoir l'attaque contre Conakry du 22 novembre 1970. Savez-vous comment il a vécu ces journées ?  Je sais qu'il était un participant dans l'action de repousser les troupes portugaises. Il était armé ce jour et a dû utiliser son arme. Selon ce que j'ai appris, il était un des premiers à alerter les autorités, y compris le président, du fait qu'il y avait une attaque qui venait. Ca tirait sur sa case, donc il devait quitter sa maison. Lui et Miriam Makeba ont dû se réfugier quelque part d'autre où il l'a laissée et lui est ressorti pour aider à défendre la ville.  Cette opération conjointe de militaires portugais et de rebelles guinéens a conduit à la plus grande vague d'arrestations en Guinée de toute la Première République. La vie du pays va être rythmée pendant de longs mois par des confessions publiques de personnes présentées comme les complices d'un « complot impérialiste » aux ramifications tentaculaires. Comment est-ce que votre père se positionnait par rapport à cette thèse du complot permanent contre la Guinée ? Et plus généralement, quel regard portait-il sur l'État policier qu'était aussi devenu la Guinée de cette époque ?  C'est quelque chose de très complexe et malheureusement, la Guinée ne s'est toujours pas réconciliée avec ce passé et les positions sont assez ancrées. Maintenant, si on parle de Kwame Ture précisément, pour lui, c'était un régime panafricaniste, le seul régime panafricaniste radical. Et malgré toutes ses erreurs, c'était celui qui pouvait tenir jusqu'au bout cette conviction qu'il avait lui-même. Il était totalement d'accord avec le fait qu'il fallait conserver ce régime pour qu'il ne bascule pas dans un régime néocolonialiste.  À tout prix ? À tout prix.  En 1974, il y a un autre évènement important pour l'Afrique et plus généralement pour le monde noir, c'est le combat en Afrique, à Kinshasa, entre Mohamed Ali et George Foreman. Dans un livre de mémoires, votre père indique qu'il a été invité par Mohamed Ali lui-même à venir à Kinshasa pour le combat. Est-ce que vous savez ce que représentait cet affrontement pour votre père ?  Mohamed Ali était son ami. Il y avait ce symbole de Mohamed Ali qui représentait l'Africain fier et George Foreman qui était un peu l'opposé de cela. Mais après, il a rencontré George Foreman et il disait que George Foreman l'avait séduit avec son charme, l'a embrassé et tout. Je pense qu'au-delà du symbolique, mon père était beaucoup plus intéressé par ce qui se passait au Congo démocratique, c'est-à-dire le Zaïre à l'époque, et le fait que c'était sous le régime de Mobutu Sese Seko, auquel il était farouchement opposé par ce qu'il représentait en termes de corruption et d'alignement avec les puissances coloniales. Qui sont de manière générale les acteurs politiques qui fréquentaient le salon de votre père dans ces années 1970 et au début des années 1980, pendant la Première République en Guinée ? On parle d'un melting pot qui ne dit pas son nom. Que ce soit des artistes - Miriam Makeba et Nina Simone, qui était une de ses amies très proches - ou des activistes de partout dans le monde. Qui venaient à Conakry et qui venaient le rencontrer ? Qui venaient à Conakry ou qui y vivaient. Parce que vous savez qu'à une époque, Conakry était un centre du monde noir où on conciliait l'art, les mouvements de libération, etc. Il y avait un grand nombre de personnes qui y vivaient, comme Amilcar Cabral, comme Kwame Nkrumahn, avant même il y avait Félix-Roland Moumié du Cameroun, pour ce qui est de la politique. Concernant les arts et la littérature, il y avait Ousmane Sembène qui y vivait, il y avait Maryse Condé qui y vivait. C'était vraiment un centre… et il se retrouve chez lui avec toutes ces personnes, plus ou moins de différentes sphères. Moi, je peux raconter avoir vu des activistes exilés sud-africains, Tsietsi Mashinini, qui a commencé la révolte estudiantine de Soweto, qui était parmi d'autres exilés sud-africains. Il y avait beaucoup d'Afro-Américains, bien sûr, des Black Panthers exilés. Il y avait la diplomatie guinéenne, des diplomates de pays gauchistes et souverainistes, il y avait tout un monde. Mais aussi, il faut savoir que Kwame Ture était vraiment penché vers la masse, la masse populaire. Donc autour de tout ça, on voit un chef villageois qui est assis ou on voit la personne déshéritée du quartier qui est là, assise, qui peut recevoir un repas. Parce que notre maison était comme un centre communautaire pour la jeunesse du quartier. Il amenait tous les enfants du quartier à la plage chaque dimanche. Puis se retrouvait peut-être un mardi à saluer un chef d'État. Puis avait une conférence avec un groupe communautaire. Moi, j'ai vu tout cela dans cette maison. C'était quelque chose de magique. Il recevait où, justement ? Dans son salon, dans son bureau ? Y avait-il un rituel autour de la réception de ses amis politiques ? Déjà, il avait une véranda où il était assis… parce que c'était un bibliophile. Il lisait beaucoup, il écrivait beaucoup. Il ne lisait pas pour le plaisir, mais il lisait pour ses conférences. Après, il y a des gens qui venaient pour le rencontrer. Je sais qu'il y a eu Charles Taylor qui était venu de nulle part pour le rencontrer. C'était vraiment un melting pot.    À cette époque, votre père continue aussi ses voyages et ses tournées, il n'est pas tout le temps à Conakry ? Il était très organisé. Sur toutes ses photos, il écrivait les dates et les lieux. On se demande comment il pouvait parcourir toutes ces distances en si peu de temps. Un jour, on le voit au Connecticut. Le lendemain, on le voit à Paris, banni, chassé. En Angleterre, peut-être, d'où il est banni et chassé. Parce que c'était très compliqué pour lui d'avoir accès a beaucoup de pays. Après, on le voit en Californie... Il était partout. Sékou Touré disparaît en 1984. Mais votre père continue, lui, son engagement pour ses idées au sein du Parti démocratique de Guinée. Qu'est-ce qui a marqué ces années de militantisme politique sous Lansana Conté ? Le contexte a vraiment changé !  Et c'est là que l'on voit vraiment les convictions de l'homme. Parce que, du jour au lendemain, tout a changé. Il a été arrêté par le régime de Lansana Conté. Donc, il a perdu les privilèges qu'il avait, bien sûr, où il connaissait le président et était sous sa tutelle. Mais malgré cela, il a décidé de rester en Guinée. La moitié de sa vie guinéenne, quinze ans, s'est passée ainsi. Il a décidé malgré tout de rester en Guinée, d'être actif dans la vie politique guinéenne et la vie sociale de la Guinée.  … Et de rester fidèle à ses convictions.  Exactement. Vous êtes à l'époque enfant. Quel souvenir est-ce que vous gardez de ces années, de votre maison à Conakry, de ceux qui y passaient ? Quelle était l'ambiance ? Vous disiez tout à l'heure que tout le quartier se retrouvait chez vous…  C'est cela. Mon père était d'une gentillesse rare, d'un altruisme qu'on ne retrouve pas très souvent. Donc effectivement, c'était pour moi quelque chose de très formateur. Comment quelqu'un peut traiter un chef d'État avec le même respect qu'il traite la personne la plus déshéritée du quartier. Et toutes ces personnes pouvaient se retrouver chez lui, devant lui, avec le même respect, ou peut-être même le déshérité avec un peu plus d'amour.  Vous appelez régulièrement les Guinéens à se souvenir de votre père, Stokely Carmichael / Kwame Ture. Avez-vous le sentiment que son histoire a été oubliée en Guinée ?  Je parle de manière générale. Il y a une politique de mémoire en Guinée qui doit être améliorée. Stokely Carmichael est un pont unique entre l'Afrique et l'Amérique. On parle d'un personnage qui a passé la moitié de sa vie en Guinée. À ce stade, l'État guinéen n'a pas fait une seule initiative pour se réapproprier de l'héritage de cette personnalité.  Donc il y a un vrai chantier ? Il y a un chantier.  Une dernière question plus personnelle. Quel père a été Stokely Carmichael ? Quelle image retenez-vous de lui ?  Un père adorable, d'une gentillesse rarissime, qui m'a beaucoup appris, que j'ai profondément aimé. Quelqu'un qui était attaché à tout ce qui est beau dans le monde, à commencer par les enfants. ►A lire pour aller plus loin : BERTHO Elara, Un couple panafricain, Editions Rot-Bo-Krik, 2025 À (ré)écouterElara Bertho: «Replacer Conakry au centre des imaginaires, c'était un peu l'idée de cet ouvrage»

Murielle, 22 ans, est étudiante en japonais et fan de jeux de rôle. On est en 1996 et depuis quelques années, les jeux de rôle sur table débarquent en France après avoir fait un carton aux Etats-Unis. Les plus appréciés mettent en scène les univers inspirés de Tolkien peuplés de dragons, d'elfes et de chevaliers. Murielle, seule fille dans un milieu masculin, serait probablement étonnée de constater qu'à l'heure actuelle près de la moitié des rôlistes dans le monde, sont des femmes ! *** Crédits archive *** Extrait de l'émission radiophonique "Le temps qui change" - Réalisée par Pierette Perrono - Produit par Marion Thiba - France Culture - 24/05/1996 *** Crédits podcast *** Documentalistes : Hélène Deudon - Textes : Elsa Coupard, Lætitia Fourmond - Restauration et mixage : Ian Debeerst, Quentin Geffroy - Enregistrement : Vincent Dupuis, Guillaume Solignat, Laurent Thomas - Voix off : Clara De Antoni - Musique(s) avec l'aimable autorisation d'Universal Production Music France - Chargée de production : Delphine Lambard - Cheffe de projet : Lætitia Fourmond - Stagiaires : Inès Bichel, Edith Monnier - Responsable éditoriale : Zoé Macheret - Un podcast INA Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

XXX was our guest speaker on the XX 2025, sharing X experience, strength and hope with the disease of compulsive overeating and recovery. The meeting topic from X share was ' keep coming back no matter what! ' Stream of Life (SOL) OA Speaker Meeting Meeting #: 800250 (OA.org)Every week on Sunday at 09:30 AM (Sydney time)https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89701998028?pwd=M0hEZThWMkcyS3B1WjZ3UXc2eTVCUT09Meeting ID: 897 0199 8028Passcode: 769518

L'Océan révélé. Bleu Profond : c'est la nouvelle exposition dans le magnifique couvent rénové des Franciscaines à Deauville qui nous invite à un voyage en eaux profondes. De quoi se rafraîchir cet été et s'émerveiller à la découverte d'une faune et d'une flore aquatique qui ne cessent d'émerveiller. Des pièces entre œuvres d'art et curiosités du XVIIIᵉ siècle à la fin du XXᵉ témoignent de la fascination exercée par les océans.

Las migraciones hacen parte de la naturaleza humana. Emigramos desde siempre, nos movemos y con esa sinergia transformamos nuestras culturas, nuestras historias, nuestros sentimientos. Pero esta pulsión se esculpió a lo largo de la Historia bajo el choque de los pueblos, lo que provocó que en el siglo XIX se consolidara un dilema: civilización vs barbarie. Luego en el siglo XX, cuando se establecieron los grandes sistemas nacionales e internacionales de los documentos de ciudadanía y los pasaportes, se catalogaron a las personas como migrantes bienvenidos y migrantes rechazados. Este tipo de valoración sobre la migración ha establecido cientos de conflictos entre las naciones modernas, desde la creación de la ONU después de la posguerra. Todavía se crean categorías discriminatorias sobre los migrantes, víctimas de su nacionalidad. Entonces la imagen de los migrantes cambian dependiendo de cómo soplan los vientos políticos. Pero la migración, más allá de ser un problema demográfico, es una pulsión que nos invita a encontrarnos y enriquecernos. Ampliamos nuestra percepción de lo humano cuando cruzamos caminos con otros, porque somos movimiento.  Notas del episodio: Este episodio fue traído a ustedes gracias a Boston Scientific Si quieres conocer más sobre el trabajo que la ONU hace en relación a las migraciones, te invitamos a explorar la página oficial de la OIM, la Organización Internacional de Migración. También puedes consultar las categorías y las concepciones sobre qué es un migrante en la migración internacional, en las Naciones Unidas. Si estás interesado en revisar cómo las ciudades están siendo afectadas hoy con fenómenos migratorios como la gentrificación, te sugerimos consultar el libro Guía global para el espacio público: De principios globales a políticas y prácticas locales. Si lo que buscas es comprender más a fondo cómo funciona la distinción entre civilización y barbarie, visita el libro “Orientalismo” de Edward W. Said, un clásico histórico que se ocupa de analizar la configuración de la mirada hegemónica occidental sobre otros pueblos.  Si quieres consultar un texto que te ayude a comprender de una manera crítica cuáles son los beneficios de la migración, consulta el ensayo Internacionalismo o extinción, de Noam Chomsky. Gracias de nuevo a nuestra comunidad de patreon por apoyar la producción de este episodio. Si quieres unirte, visita www.dianauribe.fm/comunidad

Vuelve una sección muy querida por nuestra audiencia, Misterios Misteriosos Como En El History Channel, de la mano del Profesor Dinosaurio, y grabado en territorio argentino. Grabamos ahí, y el Profesor nos trajo una historia de criptozoología autóctona, con Nahuelito, el monstruo del lago Nahuel Huapi, entre las provincias de Río Negro y Neuquen. Principios del siglo XX; un sheriff (o cazarrecompensas) de Texas que deviene en cacique tehuelche, el director del zoológico de Buenos Aires, críptidos varios, kaijus, posibles experimentos peronistas, y más, mucho más, en este misterio. Con música de Ween, y Sciammarella Tango (interpretando a D'Agostino y Morbidelli). Próximo programa: Historias de Historietas - Especial Batman. ------------------------------------- #perdidoseneleter #criptozoologia #criptidos #monstruos #misterios

Entrevista con historiador Jesús Palacios, coautor junto con Stanley G. Payne, del libro ‘Franco. Una biografía personal y política'. Visita el podcast de historia de Libertad Digital, Desmemoria Histórica, el periodista, escritor e historiador especializado en historia contemporánea Jesús Palacios, coautor junto con Stanley G. Payne, catedrático emérito de Historia en la Universidad de Wisconsin-Madison, del libro Franco. Una biografía personal y política (La Esfera de los Libros). El libro, de más de 800 páginas, se publicó por primera vez en el año 2014 y se ha reeditado con motivo del 50º aniversario de la muerte del dictador. Un clásico que fue considerada "la primera biografía académica rigurosa", "el primer estudio objetivo y desapasionado sobre la figura que gobernó España durante casi cuarenta años" o "una profunda investigación en fuentes primarias".Un nuevo prólogo En esta nueva introducción se destaca su "capacidad de penetración" en la sociedad española: "España tiene una de las historias más trascendentales de cualquier país en el mundo, y en toda esta inmensa trayectoria sería difícil encontrar una figura más dominante que Francisco Franco. A lo largo de su historia España ha dado grandes reyes, ha protagonizado epopeyas sin par y creado un imperio de iguales de más de trescientos años de duración. Pero ningún rey tradicional ha tenido tanto poder, y lo que los politólogos llaman "capacidad de penetración" en la sociedad y las instituciones como el dictador-autoritario de ningún régimen del siglo XX. Lo que pudo hacer y evitar que pasara no tiene paralelo en la historia de España". Y se critican las sucesivas leyes de Memoria socialistas, cincuenta años sin Franco pero con más Franco que nunca: "Hace cincuenta años que falleció Francisco Franco y, sin embargo, su figura se ha convertido en el actor político más importante de la España actual para el presidente Pedro Sánchez, su gobierno, las izquierdas y los grupos separatistas, incluido el terrorista vasco. En esto participa también el principal partido de la oposición, el liberal conservador Partido Popular, que bien por inacción, claudicación o complicidad con el Partido Socialista, ha contemporizado con este espectáculo destructivo. ¿Por qué se ha llegado hasta aquí? ¿Cómo ha sido posible que todo esto esté ocurriendo?." "La Transición sigue abierta" Sobre su régimen afirma Palacios que "Franco fue el dictador más exitoso del siglo XX y el menos dictador de todos ellos". Considera que "nunca fue un fascista" aunque en los primeros años sí había "una fascistización", por ejemplo, en el Fuero del Trabajo (1938), la primera ley fundamental que aprobó, inspirado en la Carta del Lavoro de Mussolini. Cuenta que Franco no tuvo ideología pero sí unas convicciones profundas: "anti partidos políticos, anti comunista, anti masón". Según los autores "la transición sigue estando abierta". Para Palacios "la nación no se puede defender del permanente secuestro del separatismo por la trampa introducida en la Constitución y que hace que el Estado sea fallido". Asegura el invitado que "las dos Leyes de Amnistía fueron una reconciliación política porque los españoles habían hecho tabla rasa, se habían reconciliado, veinte años antes"."Juan Carlos I engañó a todos" En la entrevista también participa el historiador y escritor Pedro Fernández Barbadillo, colaborador habitual del podcast. Otros de los asuntos que abordamos son por qué Franco restaura/instaura la monarquía, aunque fuese "tradicional, social y representativa", por qué elige a Juan Carlos en julio de 1969 y por qué los falangistas republicanos lo aceptan y hasta votan a su favor en las Cortes. Sobre la figura del Emérito dice Palacios que "Juan Carlos I barrió todo lo que había jurado defender" que "engañó a todos". Explica por qué Franco nunca perdonó a Alfonso XIII.De puertas hacia dentro En la charla también abordamos detalles personales del personaje, al define como "providencialista y pragmático", "sin aspiraciones políticas", "un militar muy reglamentista". Su vínculo emocional con África, donde casi pierde la vida, es muy curioso cómo se salva de una muerte segura. Tras la guerra llevó una vida sedentaria contra la que intentaba luchar su médico personal, Vicente Gil. Era "muy frugal en la comida", su cocinero era un militar y nos cuenta que "odiaba el arroz con leche". Sus mayores aficiones fueron "ir de cacería" y "ver películas en el cine privado de El Pardo". Tenía la costumbre de ver "dos televisiones a la vez, con cada uno de los dos canales que existían entonces". Destaca el hecho de que "al morir tenía veinte millones de pesetas" y que cobraba el "sueldo como capitán general". Francisco Franco Bahamonde, el teniente franquito, fue, con 22 años, el Capitán más joven del Ejército, con 24 el comandante más joven de España, con 33 el general de brigada también más joven. De sufrir las más crueles novatadas en la Academia de Toledo, por su pequeña estatura, su delgadez y su voz con poca presencia, llegó a generalísimo y a dictador plenipotenciario hasta su muerte en 1975.

Marcial Maciel fue uno de los personajes más influyentes y reverenciados dentro de la Iglesia Católica en el siglo XX. Fundador de los Legionarios de Cristo, fue considerado por muchos como un “santo en vida”, admirado por papas y fieles alrededor del mundo. Sin embargo, detrás de su imagen intachable, se escondía uno de los mayores escándalos que haya enfrentado el Vaticano. Durante décadas, Maciel estuvo comprometido con seminaristas menores de edad, tuvo hijos con varias mujeres y construyó una red de poder que protegía sus crímenes. Aunque las denuncias comenzaron desde los años 50, no fue sino hasta el pontificado de Benedicto XVI que se le retiró de toda función pública y se le obligó a una vida de retiro y penitencia. A pesar de la gravedad de los hechos, nunca fue juzgado ni excomulgado formalmente. En este video analizamos su ascenso, su caída, y cómo sus crímenes impactaron a miles de víctimas y sacudieron los cimientos de la Iglesia Católica. Una historia que no debe olvidarse. Entra a happymammoth.com usando PEPEMISTERIO y recibe 15 % de descuento en tu primer pedido._________________Distribuido por Genuina Media

Este episodio forma parte de una selección para el verano de EL PAÍS Audio. Este episodio se emitió el 8 de mayo de 2025. “Alemania se ha rendido. La victoria será proclamada hoy a las 15:00 en las capitales aliadas”. Ese fue el titular de portada del diario francés Le Figaro el 8 de mayo de 1945. Es el día que se considera como el fin de la Segunda Guerra Mundial en Europa, justo 9 días después del suicidio de Adolf Hitler. Lejos del continente, todavía continuaría unos meses, hasta después del ataque nuclear de Estados Unidos a Japón. Hoy, 6 de agosto, se cumplen 80 años de ese momento, y por eso recuperamos este episodio. Cada vez queda menos gente que pueda contar la Segunda Guerra Mundial en primera persona, quien era adulto entonces hoy tiene que haber llegado a ser centenario. Es el inevitable paso del tiempo: cuando ya no queden testimonios directos, la memoria pasará a ser historia. Ocurre de la misma manera con la Guerra Civil española. Las sociedades del siglo XXI tienen el reto de que el recuerdo del gran conflicto del siglo XX y de los horrores del nazismo perviva en las generaciones que ya no podrán escucharlo de sus padres o abuelos. Entre los países que se enfrentan a ese desafío, hay dos que han marcado dos modelos distintos de mirar atrás para no olvidar —y no repetir— durante estas ocho décadas: Francia y Alemania. CRÉDITOS Realiza: Belén Remacha Con información de: Marc Bassets y Guillermo Altares Presenta: Ana Fuentes Dirige: Silvia Cruz Lapeña Edición: Ana Ribera Diseño de sonido: Nicolás Tsabertidis Sintonía: Jorge Magaz Lecturas mencionadas: Beevor, La Segunda Guerra Mundial. (Editorial Pasado y Presente, 2025) Volker Ullrich, Ocho días de mayo. De la muerte de Hitler al final del Tercer Reich. (Taurus, 2023) Beevor. Berlín: La caída 1945. (Booket, 2005) Anónima, Una mujer en Berlín. Anotaciones de diario escritas entre el 20 de abril y el 22 de junio de 1945. (Anagrama, 2005) Kempowski, Winter 1945. (Taschenbuch, edición en alemán, 2004)

Wednesday, 6 August 2025   He will not quarrel nor cry out, Nor will anyone hear His voice in the streets. Matthew 12:19   “Not He will wrangle, nor He will clamor, nor anyone – he will hear in the streets His voice” (CG).   In the previous verse, Jesus was referred to in Matthew's citation of Isaiah 42. Isaiah's words that parallel this verse are found in Isaiah 42:2 –   “Not he will shriek, and not he will lift, and not He will cause to declare in the street His voice” (CG).   In the Hebrew, the word “lift” must mentally be supplied with the additional words “His voice.” Understanding this, Matthew continues his citation, stating, “Not He will wrangle.” Matthew uses the word erizó, which signifies to wrangle, as in disputing or quarreling. This is its only use in the New Testament.   While among Israel, Jesus did not possess a contentious spirit. Rather, He stated His case and rebuffed falsities, but the gospels show that He did not get into lengthy arguments with those who came against Him. Next, it says, “nor He will clamor.”   It is a second new word, kraugazó, clamor, as in people shouting vehemently. There are times Jesus is recorded as having lifted up His voice, but it was usually in a petition for reason or a calling of those around Him to come to their senses. There was no sense of violent argumentation in those accounts. The only other time this word is used when referring to Jesus is found in John 11 –   “Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, ‘Lazarus, come forth!' 44 And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, ‘Loose him, and let him go.'” Matthew 11:43, 44   In that instance, Jesus' crying out was not violently agitating the people, which is the point Isaiah and Matthew are making. Understanding this, Matthew continues with, “nor anyone – he will hear in the streets His voice.”   The idea here is a person who looks to draw attention to himself as a way of gaining popularity. If one went into the streets and started singing or acting, it would mean he was trying to draw attention to himself. Likewise, if he started a public agitation about some leader or against Rome, he would be trying to gain an audience.   Jesus didn't approach His ministry that way. Instead, He led by His actions, not having a need to distract from them with lofty or manipulative words.   Life application: There are innumerable ways of getting the word out to the people. It would be a sad loss for people to take the words of this verse and say, “Jesus didn't do XX, and therefore I will not do that as well.”   He has already told His disciples, “Whatever I tell you in the dark, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops” (Matthew 10:27). There is no record of Jesus having gone to the rooftops to do this. Jesus set His own example based on His ministry. We are to set our example based on our abilities, culture, situation, etc.   It would be inappropriate for a person to stand up in the middle of his office and start preaching like a street evangelist. It would probably lead to his dismissal. Sometimes, handing out a tract is the right thing to do. At others, getting a permit and going to a town square to preach may draw people to you.   However, standing on a street corner with a megaphone and yelling at the passing people that they are all sinners and are going to hell is a ridiculous approach that many have taken over the years. That will only cause people to close their ears, laugh at the crazy Christian, and alienate those in the crowd from ever wanting to have anything to do with Jesus.   The point of evangelizing is to bring people to Jesus. Understanding the time, situation, location, state of the people, etc., is all necessary to effectively transmit the good news so that it will be heard and accepted.   Remember that the exaltation of Jesus as the One God sent to restore us to Him is the primary thing we are to share with others. This is the point of the gospel. We are in a bad spot. God took the initiative to correct that. He sent Jesus, who did everything necessary to restore us to God. All God wants from us is to believe the good news.   How you communicate this message is important. Consider it and then act accordingly.   Heavenly Father, help us to be aware of the best way to get the message of Jesus out to others. Help us to consider the time and circumstances around us and to then be willing to use them to lead others to a saving knowledge of You. Yes, Lord, give us wisdom in this awesome responsibility. Amen.

承认害怕虫子不难，难的是与虫子若无其事的共生。还好冬夏温差明显的北方，虫子只是季节限定，个头也是弟中弟。传说中会飞的XX已经成为不敢去南方的重要理由了。希望本期讲述不会给同样害怕虫子的朋友带来什么不好的联想。不怕虫子的朋友们也不要轻视我们，毕竟还浅浅加了一part吃虫的部分。另外，提醒大家还是要注意防蚊，远离疾病。

Florestan Fernandes foi um sociólogo, etnólogo, intelectual e político brasileiro, patrono da sociologia brasileira sob a lei nº 11 325. Foi um dos intelectuais brasileiros mais influentes do século XX, com contribuições notórias para o estudo do racismo, dos direitos humanos e da desigualdade social no país. Essa é a nossa história de hoje. Se você gostou deixe seu like, faça seu comentário, compartilhe essa biografia com outras pessoas. Vamos incentivar a cultura em nosso pais. Até a próxima história! (Tania Barros)Ajude Tânia a manter o Canal Ativo - PIX: 7296e2d1-e34e-4c2e-b4a0-9ac072720b88 - Seja Membro Youtube á partir de R$1,99 por mês - Contato: e-mail - taniabarros339@gmail.com

Red carpet ready isn't just a phrase—it's a science. Back when I worked as a celebrity assistant, I got a behind-the-scenes look at how stars actually prep for the spotlight. In this episode, I'm revealing the exact beauty rituals I witnessed—from microcurrent facials and high-frequency treatments to conditioning buns, double masking, and cuticle-perfect nails. These aren't just trends—they're timeless glam secrets that truly work.

Hey Intentional Wellness Warrior! If you're a nurse, healthcare provider, or full-time caregiver… I want to ask you something gently today: Have you ever said, “I'm just tired.” Or maybe: “This is just a busy season.” Or even: “Everyone feels like this—it's part of the job.” Then this episode is for you. Because what if that exhaustion… is something more? What if you are believing misconceptions of what burnout is and you don't realize you are in it?  Today, we're breaking down the misconceptions of burnout—what burnout isn't… and what it actually feels like. And friend, if you're not sure where you land, I've got a super helpful free quiz that will give you clarity. You can take the quiz after listening at: [www.theshanwright.com/quiz].   Shalom Shalom,  Xx, Shan  ……CONNECT……

A lo largo del siglo XX y XXI, distintas canciones fueron censuradas por motivos políticos, religiosos, sexuales o morales.Desde letras que incomodaron a los gobiernos hasta melodías consideradas “peligrosas” para el orden social, este episodio recorre la historia de algunas de las canciones más polémicas y vetadas de todos los tiempos.Exploramos casos como el de “The Pill” de Loretta Lynn, silenciada por su mensaje feminista en la América conservadora; “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” de The Beatles, acusada de promover el consumo de drogas; y otras piezas prohibidas por desafiar regímenes autoritarios, desafiar tabúes o retratar realidades incómodas.

Episódio T05E15 (remasterizado, continuação do T04E12) que conta o lado pessoal de um dos mais importantes físicos do século XX, Paul Dirac. Neste episódio, Marco Aurélio Idiart (IF-UFRGS), Jorge Quillfeldt (Biofísica-UFRGS) e Jeferson J. Arenzon (IF-UFRGS) conversam com Fernanda Steffens (atualmente ligada à Universidade de Bonn na Alemanha). Produção: Jeferson Arenzon Edição: Francisco Guazzelli e Jeferson Arenzon Créditos da Imagem:  Clara Ewald (1939), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Clara_Ewald_-_Paul_Dirac.jpg

Kiedy John Hersey pojechał do Hiroszimy, był 30-letnim reporterem.Czy przypuszczał, że tekst, który pisał na zamówienie tygodnika The New Yorker, zostanie okrzyknięty najważniejszym reportażem XX wieku, a Albert Einstein będzie biegał od kiosku do kiosku, by zgromadzić jak najwięcej egzemplarzy tego — dziś już historycznego — numeru?Kiedy Hersey pisał swój reportaż, Amerykanie wiedzieli o dwóch bombach atomowych, które spadły na dwa japońskie miasta – najpierw Hiroszimę, potem Nagasaki. Dużo mówiło się bowiem o triumfie amerykańskiej nauki, o tym, jak atak na Japonię pozwolił zakończyć drugą wojnę światową. Nie mówiono za to nic o ludziach, którzy byli ofiarami tego wydarzenia.Reportaż Hiroszima uświadomił nie tylko Amerykanom, ale także czytelnikom na niemal całym świecie niewyobrażalny do tej pory ogrom zniszczenia i ludzkiego cierpienia, jakie niesie ze sobą użycie broni atomowej. Opowiedział historię sześciorga mieszkańców miasta, którzy przeżyli — historię, która dziś nie traci nic na aktualności.Prowadzenie: Agata KasprolewiczGość: Michał ChoińskiKsiążka: „Hiroszima” John Hersey/ przekład: Jerzy Łoziński/ Wydawnictwo Znak---------------------------------------------Raport o stanie świata to audycja, która istnieje dzięki naszym Patronom, dołącz się do zbiórki ➡️ ⁠https://patronite.pl/DariuszRosiak⁠Subskrybuj newsletter Raportu o stanie świata ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠➡️ ⁠https://dariuszrosiak.substack.com⁠Koszulki i kubki Raportu ➡️ ⁠https://patronite-sklep.pl/kolekcja/raport-o-stanie-swiata/⁠ [Autopromocja]

REDIFFUSION. Cet été, Émotions prend des vacances et vous propose de (re)découvrir certains de nos épisodes favoris. Bonne écoute !Synonyme d'amour ou de rancœur, animée par des cris, ou plongée dans le silence, la famille, est ce lieu que l'on ne choisit pas mais que l'on croit devoir aimer malgré tout. Parce que ne pas aimer sa famille c'est renoncer au seul espace sur terre qui nous “appartient”. Le dire, “Je n'aime pas ma famille”, c'est presque un tabou et pourtant, parfois, ça ne va pas de soi. Dans cet épisode d'Émotions, la journaliste Milia Legasa nous partage des moments de vie de sa famille recomposée, où elle se demande parfois si on peut se forcer à s'aimer. En interrogeant Alice, elle réalise qu'elle n'est pas la seule à s'être posé cette question. En tombant amoureuse, Alice a dû accepter l'enfant de son compagnon, et a très mal vécu son rôle de belle-mère. Pour comprendre les mécanismes de culpabilisation que vivent particulièrement les femmes qui n'aiment pas leurs beaux-enfants et comprendre comment remédier à cela, Milia Legasa interroge Catherine Audibert, psychologue clinicienne. La journaliste a aussi rencontré Camille, qui à l'inverse, a été rejetée par sa belle-mère et explique l'impact que cela a eu dans sa construction d'adulte.Elle tend également son micro à Gérard Neyrand, sociologue, qui souligne l'importance de l'amour dans le bon développement d'un enfant et explique comment, à partir de ce constat, l'injonction à aimer s'est imposée au XXème siècle. Quelques références sur le sujet:Love Me Tender, Constance Debré, FlammarionFamille recomposée l'envers du décor de Anne Chapeline, Librinova.La famille recomposée : Comment répondre aux questions des enfants de Agnès de Viaris, Carnet de l'Info.L'enfant de l'autre, de Catherine Sellenet, éditions Max MiloAmour et crises dans la famille recomposée, Les enjeux psychiques de la recomposition familiale de Catherine Audibert, chez Payot. Et enfin, le site internet « La Douceur des Hérissons », dont Milia Legasa parle dans l'épisode. Émotions est un podcast de Louie Media présenté par Brune Bottero. Cet épisode a été tourné et écrit par la journaliste Milia Legasa. L'épisode a été réalisé par Charles de Cillia. Benoît Daniel s'est occupé de la prise de son et Jean-Baptiste Aubonnet était au mix. C'est Nicolas de Gélis qui a composé le générique d'Émotions. Maud Benakcha est la chargée de production d'Émotions, accompagnée d'Agathe Le Taillandier et de Capucine Rouault pour cet épisode. Ce podcast est également rendu possible grâce à Maureen Wilson, responsable éditoriale, Marion Girard responsable de production, Mélissa Bounoua directrice des productions et Charlotte Pudlowski, directrice éditoriale. Cet épisode a été diffusé pour la première fois le 22 novembre 2021

Raffaello Sanzio - Spendieren Sie einen Cafè (1€)? Donate a coffee (1€)? https://ko-fi.com/italiano Livello B1, B2#storia #personaggi #italiano #vhs #Raphael #ArteBuongiorno cari amici e amanti dell'italiano e benvenuti al mio nuovo episodio. Torniamo a parlare di arte e più precisamente di un grande pittore rinascimentale che è vissuto pochi anni, ma che nella sua breve vita ha dipinto opere d'arte famosissime ed è diventato uno dei tre grandi maestri del suo periodo, insieme e Leonardo Da Vinci e Michelangelo Buonarroti. Stiamo parlando di Raffaello (Raphael).Il suo modo di lavorare è stato importantissimo per l'arte che è venuta anche dopo di lui con artisti che hanno cercato di imitarlo ma anche che lo hanno rifiutato e iniziato un nuovo stile, come Caravaggio. Raffaello però non è stato solo pittore ma anche architetto e uno studioso dell'arte romana che lo hanno reso uno dei padri dell'archeologia e della tutela dei beni culturali.La sua arte è stata presa come modello in tutte le accademie di belle arti fino alla metà dell'Ottocento e il pittore è diventato un vero e proprio mito sia per l'arte del XX e X1 secolo arrivando perfino al cinema e al fumetto....- The full transcript of this Episode is available via "Luisa's learn Italian Premium", Premium is no subscription and does not incur any recurring fees. You can just shop for the materials you need or want and shop per piece. Prices start at 0.20 Cent (i. e. Eurocent). - das komplette Transcript / die Show-Notes zu allen Episoden sind über Luisa's Podcast Premium verfügbar. Den Shop mit allen Materialien zum Podcast finden Sie unterhttps://premium.il-tedesco.itLuisa's Podcast Premium ist kein Abo - sie erhalten das jeweilige Transscript/die Shownotes sowie zu den Grammatik Episoden Übungen die Sie "pro Stück" bezahlen (ab 20ct). https://premium.il-tedesco.itMehr info unter www.il-tedesco.it bzw. https://www.il-tedesco.it/premiumMore information on www.il-tedesco.it or via my shop https://www.il-tedesco.it/premium

Edad de Plata. Así es como se ha denominado a las primeras décadas del siglo XX; un momento de enormes inquietudes intelectuales, el inicio de una época que interrumpió la guerra, y en la que han confluido los más importantes nombres de nuestra Cultura en mayúsculas. A este periodo solo podría hacerle sombra el Siglo de Oro, el siglo de Cervantes; y a su sombra precisamente surge el segundo periodo español de máximo esplendor cultural, político y artístico: la Generación del 98 y la del 14: Machado, Valle-Inclán, Juan Ramón, Ortega y Gasset, Ramón y Cajal, Gregorio Marañón, Benavente, Joaquín Costa, Giner de los Ríos, Azaña… son una lista infinita de nombres a la que se solapará la larga lista de autores de vanguardia y miembros de la Generación del 27 (Lorca, Cernuda, Aleixandre…), y la de otros artistas como Picasso, Dalí, Buñuel, Maruja Mallo... La efervescencia cultural del primer tercio del siglo XX no se podrá explicar sin la Residencia de Estudiantes y el influjo de la Institución Libre de Enseñanza, de las que hoy hablaremos en este audio, y sobre todo, cómo la realidad social de un país en crisis fue precisamente el acicate para poner a España en el mapa de Europa, después de un atraso cultural de siglos. Invitado el profesor Álvaro Ribagorda Episodio remasterizado el 3 de agosto de 2025. Emitido originalmente el 21 de octubre de 2018. Accede a más contenidos extra y haz posible la producción de El Abrazo del Oso pinchando en el botón 'apoyar' aquí en iVoox. O pásate por www.patreon.com/elabrazodeloso ¡GRACIAS! www.elabrazodeloso.es www.latostadora.com/elabrazodeloso Canal de Telegram para estar informado: https://t.me/+T6RxUKg_xhk0NzE0 Grupo abierto de Telegram para conversar con el equipo y la audiencia: https://t.me/+tBHrUSWNbZswNThk Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/elabrazodeloso ¿Quieres patrocinar este podcast?: https://advoices.com/el-abrazo-del-oso-podcast Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

It's In the News.. a look at the top headlines and stories in the diabetes community. This week's top stories: FDA approves the first fast-acting biosimilar insulin in the US, Tandem issues warning, DOJ stands up for remote monitoring in schools, GLP1 use protects against dementia, and more! Find out more about Moms' Night Out  Please visit our Sponsors & Partners - they help make the show possible! Learn more about Gvoke Glucagon Gvoke HypoPen® (glucagon injection): Glucagon Injection For Very Low Blood Sugar (gvokeglucagon.com) Omnipod - Simplify Life Learn about Dexcom   Check out VIVI Cap to protect your insulin from extreme temperatures The best way to keep up with Stacey and the show is by signing up for our weekly newsletter: Sign up for our newsletter here Here's where to find us: Facebook (Group) Facebook (Page) Instagram Twitter Check out Stacey's books! Learn more about everything at our home page www.diabetes-connections.com  Reach out with questions or comments: info@diabetes-connections.com Episode transcription with links:   Hello and welcome to Diabetes Connections In the News! I'm Stacey Simms and every other Friday I bring you a short episode with the top diabetes stories and headlines happening now. XX We've got the first and only biosimilar FDA approved and moving to market. Kirsty – insulin aspart, which is a biosimilar to Novolog will be available as a single-patient-use prefilled pen for subcutaneous use and a multiple-dose vial for subcutaneous and intravenous use. KIRSTY has been available in Europe and Canada since 2022. This same company makes Semglee, the first biosimilar for long acting? Sales of Insulin Aspart in the United States were approximately $1.9 billion in 2024, according to IQVIA. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/07/15/3115973/0/en/Biocon-Biologics-Expands-Diabetes-Portfolio-with-FDA-Approval-of-Kirsty-the-First-and-Only-Interchangeable-Rapid-Acting-Insulin-Aspart-in-the-United-States.html XX Tandem Diabetes Care (Nasdaq:TNDM) has issued an urgent medical device correction for some t:slim X2 automated insulin pumps. In a July 22 notice, the San Diego-based company warned of pumps that may exhibit a higher rate of speaker failure. During normal use, the insulin pump software monitors current flowing through the speaker during use. Measurements that fall within a pre-determined range indicate a functioning speaker. Meanwhile, measurements falling outside the range indicate a speaker failure.   When the measurements land outside the expected range, the system declares a malfunction, referred to as “Malfunction 16.” If the pump declares this malfunction, insulin delivery will stop and the pump will no longer be operational. Malfunction 16 terminates communication between the pump and continuous glucose monitor (CGM), as well as the t:slim mobile app.   If not addressed, the issue can lead to hyperglycemia, which can result in hospitalization or medical intervention. The company reports 700 adverse events and 59 reported injuries to date, with no reports of death.   Tandem identified that certain speaker versions have a higher rate of Malfunction 16 events due to a wiring issue within the speaker. Users can continue using their pump but with added precautions because Malfunction 16 can occur at any time. They should use the t:slim mobile app with push notifications turned on so the app alerts them if the malfunction occurs, the company said.   Additionally, Tandem intends to release a software update aimed at enhancing the early detection of speaker failure. The update also introduces persistent vibration alarms to help reduce potential safety risk. Tandem plans to notify affected pump users when it makes the update available. https://www.drugdeliverybusiness.com/tandem-warns-insulin-pump-speaker-malfunction/ XX BIG WIN! The DOJ protects T1D rights again! The US Attorney's office for the Western District of Washington State reached a settlement with a public school district that once again confirms remotely monitoring students' CGMs is a reasonable accommodation that schools must provide to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. If its true for one state its true for all states under federal law! If your local schools still refuse to remotely monitor CGMs of their students, provide them with this letter to compel them to FOLLOWT1Ds and FOLLOW Federal Laws. If they still refuse contact us! https://followt1ds.org/ XX new study finds people taking GLP-1 agonists had a significantly lower cumulative risk of developing dementia, when compared to metformin users. Past studies show that people who have type 2 diabetes — a chronic condition where the body does not use its insulin properly — are at a higher risk of developing dementia. The study found that when comparing the neuroprotective abilities of two diabetes medications — metformin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 agonists) — participants taking GLP-1 agonists had a significantly lower cumulative risk of developing dementia, when compared to metformin.   https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/glp-1s-may-offer-better-dementia-protection-than-metformin XX Front office changes coming to Dexcom.  CEO Kevin Sayer will step down  & give the reins to current Chief Operating Officer Jake Leach. Scheduled for January 1, 2026, Leach will also join Dexcom's board of directors where Sayer will remain  executive chairman. One of our frequent guests here.. Leach has worked at Dexcom for 21 years. He served as chief technology officer from 2018 to 2022 before he was named COO in late 2022. He was given the title of president in May. https://www.medtechdive.com/news/dexcom-ceo-change-kevin-sayer-jake-leach/756382/ XX A major international study has revealed that many children and young adults in Sub-Saharan Africa who are diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (T1D) may actually have a different, non-immune-based form of the condition. Unlike the traditional autoimmune version of T1D, this form appears to develop without the immune system attacking the insulin-producing cells. This finding could significantly reshape how diabetes is diagnosed and treated across the region, potentially leading to more precise care and better health outcomes. The researchers found that many young people in Sub-Saharan Africa diagnosed with T1D often don't have the usual markers in their blood (called islet autoantibodies) typically seen in people with T1D in other parts of the world. Specifically, 65% of participants with T1D in this region did not have islet autoantibodies. When the researchers compared this data to studies in the U.S., they found a smaller but significant proportion (15%) of Black participants diagnosed with T1D had a similar form of diabetes found in Sub-Saharan Africa – characterized by negative autoantibodies and a low T1D genetic risk score.   However, white Americans with T1D showed the typical autoimmune pattern, even if they didn't have detectable autoantibodies, their genetics still pointed to autoimmune diabetes.   “The identification of this T1D diabetes subtype in Sub-Saharan African populations and among individuals of African ancestry in the U.S. suggests a potential ancestral or genetic link,” Dabelea notes. “These findings highlight the need to consider alternative etiologies in this group and a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms may provide important insights for future prevention and treatment strategies.”     https://scitechdaily.com/new-diabetes-subtype-discovered-in-africa-challenges-global-assumptions/   XX Formal recognition for the specialty of Diabetology.   Diabetology is the specialty focused on the full continuum of diabetes care — encompassing diagnosis, treatment, prevention, technology integration, education, and cardiometabolic management. While it intersects with endocrinology, primary care, and public health, diabetology is uniquely defined by its depth and focus on diabetes alone.       The American College of Diabetology (ACD) is the national professional organization representing clinicians who specialize in diabetes care. ACD advances clinical excellence and education to improve the lives of those affected by diabetes. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250725766248/en/American-College-of-Diabetology-Announces-Formal-Taxonomy-Classification-for-Diabetology   XX Tidepool announces cloud-to-cloud integration with Abbott's FreeStyle Libre portfolio. From the release: This integration allows people living with diabetes using the FreeStyle Libre portfolio to connect their data to their Tidepool account seamlessly. For healthcare providers, this means more comprehensive insights and streamlined workflows, with FreeStyle Libre systems data flowing continuously into the Tidepool Data Platform. https://www.tidepool.org/blog/abbott-freestyle-libre-integration-launched XX Stelo dexom ai food XX With high drug prices remaining an ongoing concern for U.S. politicians, Roche is considering following in the footsteps of some of its peers with a direct-to-consumer (DTC) model to cut out the middlemen.     About 50% of the money spent on drugs in the U.S. healthcare system goes straight to PBMs instead of the companies that create the medicines, Roche CEO Thomas Schinecker called out in a press conference on Thursday.   Bringing the drugs directly to the consumer could be a solution to positively impact pricing for patients “without destroying innovation,” Schinecker added on a separate Thursday call with investors, noting that the company has discussed the matter with the U.S. government and its Department of Health and Human Services. The pricing talks come after President Donald Trump inked a “Most Favored Nation” executive order in May, aiming to tie U.S. drug prices to lower prices in other developed nations. The plan was quickly called out by industry voices such as the PhRMA trade group, which labeled it a “bad deal” for U.S. patients. https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/roche-weighing-direct-consumer-drug-sales-ease-us-drug-pricing-woes-cut-out-pbms-ceo-says XX SAB BIO secures substantial $175M financing to advance T1D therapy with impressive investor lineup and extended cash runway until 2028. Most critically, this financing fully funds the pivotal Phase 2b SAFEGUARD study evaluating SAB-142 for delaying progression of autoimmune Type 1 diabetes in newly diagnosed patients. By extending the cash runway into mid-2028, SAB has effectively eliminated near-term financing risk and provided clear visibility through this crucial clinical trial and potential commercialization preparation. Participation from strategic investor Sanofi, along with new investors RA Capital Management, Commodore Capital, Vivo Capital, Blackstone Multi-Asset Investing, Spruce Street Capital, Forge Life Science Partners and Woodline Partners LP, and existing investors Sessa Capital, the T1D Fund, and ATW Partners         https://www.stocktitan.net/news/SABS/sab-bio-announces-oversubscribed-175-million-private-fwsf2t91ek4z.html   XX In a landmark 14-year study, researchers have found that artificially sweetened drinks raise the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by more than a third, significantly higher than those loaded with sugar. It challenges the long-standing perception of diet drinks being a healthier alternative and suggests they may carry metabolic risks of their own. In the first longitudinal study of its kind, led by Monash University, researchers tracked 36,608 participants over an average period of 13.9 years to assess how both sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) impacted health outcomes. The self-reported health data, from the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study, was drawn from participants aged 40 to 69 years at the time of recruitment.   What they found was that drinking just one can of artificially sweetened soda increased the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 38%, compared to people who didn't consume these drinks at all. For those consuming the same amount of sugary drinks, the risk was 23% higher. This suggests there's more than obesity at play. The researchers believe this result is due to an independent metabolic effect, possibly gut microbiome disruption or a change in glucose metabolism.   While the study didn't identify which artificial sweeteners were at play,   Evidence suggests that artificial sweeteners can alter the composition and function of gut bacteria, leading to glucose intolerance – a precursor to type 2 diabetes. And that some sweeteners may trigger insulin release, desensitize metabolic responses over time, or confuse the body's glucose regulation system – even without actual sugar in the picture.   Another hypothesis is that regular exposure to the kind of intense sweetness that artificial products deliver may condition the body to anticipate sugar calories that never come, affecting appetite regulation, insulin sensitivity and broader metabolic pathways. However, the authors suggest that how sweeteners affect the gut microbiota and glucose regulation are the most likely drivers of increased diabetes risk.   https://newatlas.com/diet-nutrition/one-drink-diabetes-risk/ XX After months of deliberation, information gathering and public testimony, a state board unanimously agreed Monday that two common medications for type-2 diabetes and other conditions appear to pose an affordability challenge to the state and Marylanders.   The state Prescription Drug Affordability Board approved two resolutions saying that prescription drugs Jardiance and Farxiga likely pose an “an affordability challenge for the state health care system” and the state should look for ways to bring down those costs.   Health care advocates call the long-awaited resolution an “important first step” in the process in bringing down prescription costs for those on the state's health plan.       That milestone has been years in the making. Created in 2019 by the General Assembly, the Prescription Drug Affordability Board was slow to launch due in part to a veto from former Gov. Larry Hogan (R) amid pandemic-induced economic uncertainty in 2020 that delayed the board's formation. The board also cited out-of-pocket costs for consumers and state and local spending on those drugs as indicators that there may be an affordability challenge.   The board will now look at options to address the potential affordability challenge, which could include setting an upper payment limit on those drugs. But it's not clear when the state will see cost savings.   That said, some members of the health care system and the pharmaceutical industry say that policies such as upper payment limits could weaken access to life-saving drugs. Others say that the board has not engaged enough viewpoints from the health care industry. https://marylandmatters.org/2025/07/29/state-board-determines-two-type-2-diabetes-drugs-may-be-unaffordable/   XX One year after it was revealed that Chrissy Teigen and John Legend's son, Miles, was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, Teigen is revealing how she's making her son feel more included. Teigen first opened up about her 7-year-old son's diagnosis after she and her two oldest kids, Miles and 9-year-old daughter Luna were at the 2024 summer Olympics cheering on Simone Biles. Teigen posted a photo of Miles and Luna holding up a sign. Also visible in the picture was the insulin pump on Miles' arm. Now, Teigen is sharing some insight into how she's making Miles more comfortable with having type 1 diabetes, including giving LeBron James' Barbie doll type 1 diabetes as well. In a video shared on Instagram, Teigen is seen taking the T1D Barbie, removing her insulin pump and gluing the pump onto LeBron James' Barbie. “Turning T1D Barbie into T1D Lebron James for my son,” Teigen captioned the video, revealing James is Miles' hero. 41 million followers https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/articles/chrissy-teigen-gives-lebron-james-154608782.html  

Natalie unpacks her trip to Costa Rica and shares who decided to join last minute, Riley's “identity theft” and someone stole $$$ from the homes safe!!? And more!  Happy Thanksgiving to my extended family, beyond thankful for all of you! Cheers! Xx, Nat Sponsor:  Go to ⁠www.honeylove.com/hungry⁠ to save 20% off site wide.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Barack Obama Must Go To Prison, The Case For Prosecuting Barack Obama. Dinesh D'Souza, Victor Davis Hanson, Jordan Peterson, Jesse Kelly, Mr. Reagan.   Barack Obama Must Go To Prison FBI Whistleblower Issues MAJOR Warning The Case For Prosecuting Barack Obama Victor Davis Hanson: The Race-Fueled Cincinnati Beatdown Was Real—And Ignored. Jordan Peterson - A Good Father Helps You to Become Your Best Self   Barack Obama Must Go To Prison https://youtu.be/VFNZQ3UaexE?si=1q8LA93sxKQW52OT Mr Reagan 399K subscribers 7,393 views Jul 28, 2025 #Politics #News #Trending Subscribe to my NEW Channel, STRANGE TALES!    • The Great Emu War   ----------------------------------------------- Patreon:   / mrreagan   ----------------------------------------------- MR REAGAN MERCHANDISE https://teespring.com/stores/mr-reagan -------------------------------------------- FOLLOW MR REAGAN ON TWITTER!   / mrreaganusa   ----------------------------------------------- Music by The Passion HiFi www.thepassionhifi.com #Politics #News #Trending   https://youtu.be/r7tXPGOePZY?si=6gqQPvypESG4BSX6 FBI Whistleblower Issues MAJOR Warning Jesse Kelly 74.7K subscribers 12,956 views Jul 30, 2025 Jesse Kelly is joined by an FBI whistleblower to discuss some major happenings. LIKE & SUBSCRIBE FOR NEW VIDEOS DAILY:    / @jessekellydc   Watch Full Editions Of I'm Right With Jesse Kelly: https://bit.ly/3V2F2Tt Check Out Jesse's Latest Interviews With Big-Name Guests: https://bit.ly/48UxEzn Here Are Jesse's Can't-Miss Monologues: https://bit.ly/3UZBWQl Subscribe To Jesse Kelly Wherever You Get Your Podcasts Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7fy7hsV... Watch Jesse Kelly nightly on The First TV at 9pm ET: TheFirstTV.com/watch Follow Jesse Kelly On all social platforms X - X.com/@JesseKellyDC Instagram - Instagram.com/JesseKellyShow Facebook - Facebook.com/@JesseKellyDC   https://youtu.be/C-c1B1uAHIU?si=vwh5uHzV0jlw_Efn The Case For Prosecuting Barack Obama Dinesh D'Souza 792K subscribers 180,519 views Jul 21, 2025 The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast Obama's supposed “presidential immunity” should absolutely not deter Republicans from prosecuting him. Here's why. #vindicatingtrump is now STREAMING on multiple platforms. You can now WATCH AT HOME with family and friends. DVDs are also available! (They make great gifts.) Audiences love this film: 97% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Go to https://vindicatingtrump.com — Dinesh D'Souza is an author and filmmaker. A graduate of Dartmouth College, he was a senior domestic policy analyst in the Reagan administration. He also served as a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of many bestselling books, including "Illiberal Education," "What's So Great About Christianity," "America: Imagine a World Without Her," "The Roots of Obama's Rage," "Death of a Nation," and "United States of Socialism." His documentary films "2016: Obama's America," "America," "Hillary's America," "Death of a Nation," and "Trump Card" are among the highest-grossing political documentaries of all time. He and his wife Debbie are also executive producers of the acclaimed feature film "Infidel." — Want to connect with Dinesh D'Souza online for more hard-hitting analysis of current events in America? Here's how: Get Dinesh unfiltered, uncensored and unchained on Locals: https://dinesh.locals.com/ Facebook:   / dsouzadinesh   Twitter:   / dineshdsouza   Rumble: https://rumble.com/dineshdsouza Instagram:   / dineshjdsouza   Parler: https://parler.com/user/DineshDSouza GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/dineshdsouza Email: https://dineshdsouza.com/contact-us/ https://youtu.be/GHyXkWK8gqs?si=6BqshsUmqfqBFATa Victor Davis Hanson: The Race-Fueled Cincinnati Beatdown Was Real—And Ignored. The Daily Signal 861K subscribers 202,560 views Jul 29, 2025 #DailySignal We're celebrating over 10,000 patriots who've upgraded to Freespoke Premium—and now it's your turn to join the movement. As part of Freespoker Appreciation Week, we're offering an exclusive promo for ALL American Thinker readers, giving you a limited-time special discount for an annual Freespoke Premium plan. Freespoke Premium includes: Unlimited, Unbiased AI — Search without the censorship Ad-Free, Fully Private Browsing Deep Dive Podcast Access Filter Out Media Bias Block Sites You Don't Trust Own The Truth: Use the Freespoke Search tool and fact-check Google, ChatGPT, and various outlets.

We've covered the US Agency for International Development, or USAID, pretty consistently on Statecraft, since our first interview on PEPFAR, the flagship anti-AIDS program, in 2023. When DOGE came to USAID, I was extremely critical of the cuts to lifesaving aid, and the abrupt, pointlessly harmful ways in which they were enacted. In March, I wrote, “The DOGE team has axed the most effective and efficient programs at USAID, and forced out the chief economist, who was brought in to oversee a more aggressive push toward efficiency.”Today, we're talking to that forced-out chief economist, Dean Karlan. Dean spent two and a half years at the helm of the first-ever Office of the Chief Economist at USAID. In that role, he tried to help USAID get better value from its foreign aid spending. His office shifted $1.7 billion of spending towards programs with stronger evidence of effectiveness. He explains how he achieved this, building a start-up within a massive bureaucracy. I should note that Dean is one of the titans of development economics, leading some of the most important initiatives in the field (I won't list them, but see here for details), and I think there's a plausible case he deserves a Nobel.Throughout this conversation, Dean makes a point much better than I could: the status quo at USAID needed a lot of improvement. The same political mechanisms that get foreign aid funded by Congress also created major vulnerabilities for foreign aid, vulnerabilities that DOGE seized on. Dean believes foreign aid is hugely valuable, a good thing for us to spend our time, money, and resources on. But there's a lot USAID could do differently to make its marginal dollar spent more efficient.DOGE could have made USAID much more accountable and efficient by listening to people like Dean, and reformers of foreign aid should think carefully about Dean's criticisms of USAID, and his points for how to make foreign aid not just resilient but politically popular in the long term.We discuss* What does the Chief Economist do?* Why does 170% percent of USAID funds come already earmarked by Congress?* Why is evaluating program effectiveness institutionally difficult?* Why don't we just do cash transfers for everything?* Why institutions like USAID have trouble prioritizing* Should USAID get rid of gender/environment/fairness in procurement rules?* Did it rely too much on a small group of contractors?* What's changed in development economics over the last 20 years?* Should USAID spend more on governance and less on other forms of aid? * How DOGE killed USAID — and how to bring it back better* Is depoliticizing foreign aid even possible?* Did USAID build “soft power” for the United States?This is a long conversation: you can jump to a specific section with the index above. If you just want to hear about Dean's experience with DOGE, you can click here or go to the 45-minute mark in the audio. And if you want my abbreviated summary of the conversation, see these two Twitter threads. But I think the full conversation is enlightening, especially if you want to understand the American foreign aid system. Thanks to Harry Fletcher-Wood for his judicious edits.Our past coverage of USAIDDean, I'm curious about the limits of your authority. What can the Chief Economist of USAID do? What can they make people do?There had never been an Office of the Chief Economist before. In a sense, I was running a startup, within a 13,000-employee agency that had fairly baked-in, decentralized processes for doing things.Congress would say, "This is how much to spend on this sector and these countries." What you actually fund was decided by missions in the individual countries. It was exciting to have that purview across the world and across many areas, not just economic development, but also education, social protection, agriculture. But the reality is, we were running a consulting unit within USAID, trying to advise others on how to use evidence more effectively in order to maximize impact for every dollar spent.We were able to make some institutional changes, focused on basically a two-pronged strategy. One, what are the institutional enablers — the rules and the processes for how things get done — that are changeable? And two, let's get our hands dirty working with the budget holders who say, "I would love to use the evidence that's out there, please help guide us to be more effective with what we're doing."There were a lot of willing and eager people within USAID. We did not lack support to make that happen. We never would've achieved anything, had there not been an eager workforce who heard our mission and knocked on our door to say, "Please come help us do that."What do you mean when you say USAID has decentralized processes for doing things?Earmarks and directives come down from Congress. [Some are] about sector: $1 billion dollars to spend on primary school education to improve children's learning outcomes, for instance. The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) [See our interview with former PEPFAR lead Mark Dybul] is one of the biggest earmarks to spend money specifically on specific diseases. Then there's directives that come down about how to allocate across countries.Those are two conversations I have very little engagement on, because some of that comes from Congress. It's a very complicated, intertwined set of constraints that are then adhered to and allocated to the different countries. Then what ends up happening is — this is the decentralized part — you might be a Foreign Service Officer (FSO) working in a country, your focus is education, and you're given a budget for that year from the earmark for education and told, "Go spend $80 million on a new award in education." You're working to figure out, “How should we spend that?” There might be some technical support from headquarters, but ultimately, you're responsible for making those decisions. Part of our role was to help guide those FSOs towards programs that had more evidence of effectiveness.Could you talk more about these earmarks? There's a popular perception that USAID decides what it wants to fund. But these big categories of humanitarian aid, or health, or governance, are all decided in Congress. Often it's specific congressmen or congresswomen who really want particular pet projects to be funded.That's right. And the number that I heard is that something in the ballpark of 150-170% of USAID funds were earmarked. That might sound horrible, but it's not.How is that possible?Congress double-dips, in a sense: we have two different demands. You must spend money on these two things. If the same dollar can satisfy both, that was completely legitimate. There was no hiding of that fact. It's all public record, and it all comes from congressional acts that create these earmarks. There's nothing hidden underneath the hood.Will you give me examples of double earmarking in practice? What kinds of goals could you satisfy with the same dollar?There's an earmark for Development Innovation Ventures (DIV) to do research, and an earmark for education. If DIV is going to fund an evaluation of something in the education space, there's a possibility that that can satisfy a dual earmark requirement. That's the kind of thing that would happen. One is an earmark for a process: “Do really careful, rigorous evaluations of interventions, so that we learn more about what works and what doesn't." And another is, "Here's money that has to be spent on education." That would be an example of a double dip on an earmark.And within those categories, the job of Chief Economist was to help USAID optimize the funding? If you're spending $2 billion on education, “Let's be as effective with that money as possible.”That's exactly right. We had two teams, Evidence Use and Evidence Generation. It was exactly what it sounds like. If there was an earmark for $1 billion dollars on education, the Evidence Use team worked to do systematic analysis: “What is the best evidence out there for what works for education for primary school learning outcomes?” Then, “How can we map that evidence to the kinds of things that USAID funds? What are the kinds of questions that need to be figured out?”It's not a cookie-cutter answer. A systematic review doesn't say, "Here's the intervention. Now just roll it out everywhere." We had to work with the missions — with people who know the local area — to understand, “What is the local context? How do you appropriately adapt this program in a procurement and contextualize it to that country, so that you can hire people to use that evidence?”Our Evidence Generation team was trying to identify knowledge gaps where the agency could lead in producing more knowledge about what works and what doesn't. If there was something innovative that USAID was funding, we were huge advocates of, "Great, let's contribute to the global public good of knowledge, so that we can learn more in the future about what to do, and so others can learn from us. So let's do good, careful evaluations."Being able to demonstrate what good came of an intervention also serves the purpose of accountability. But I've never been a fan of doing really rigorous evaluations just for the sake of accountability. It could discourage innovation and risk-taking, because if you fail, you'd be seen as a failure, rather than as a win for learning that an idea people thought was reasonable didn't turn out to work. It also probably leads to overspending on research, rather than doing programs. If you're doing something just for accountability purposes, you're better off with audits. "Did you actually deliver the program that you said you would deliver, or not?"Awards over $100 million dollars did go through the front office of USAID for approval. We added a process — it was actually a revamped old process — where they stopped off in my office. We were able to provide guidance on the cost-effectiveness of proposals that would then be factored into the decision on whether to proceed. When I was first trying to understand Project 2025, because we saw that as a blueprint for what changes to expect, one of the changes they proposed was actually that process. I remember thinking to myself, "We just did that. Hopefully this change that they had in mind when they wrote that was what we actually put in place." But I thought of it as a healthy process that had an impact, not just on that one award, but also in helping set an example for smaller awards of, “This is how to be more evidence-based in what you're doing.”[Further reading: Here's a position paper Karlan's office at USAID put out in 2024 on how USAID should evaluate cost-effectiveness.]You've also argued that USAID should take into account more research that has already been done on global development and humanitarian aid. Your ideal wouldn't be for USAID to do really rigorous research on every single thing it does. You can get a lot better just by incorporating things that other people have learned.That's absolutely right. I can say this as a researcher: to no one's surprise, it's more bureaucratic to work with the government as a research funder than it is to work with foundations and nimble NGOs. If I want to evaluate a particular program, and you give me a choice of who the funder should be, the only reason I would choose government is if it had a faster on-ramp to policy by being inside.The people who are setting policy should not be putting more weight on evidence that they paid for. In fact, one of the slogans that I often used at USAID is, "Evidence doesn't care who pays for it." We shouldn't be, as an agency, putting more weight on the things that we evaluated vs. things that others evaluated without us, and that we can learn from, mimic, replicate, and scale.We — and the we here is everyone, researchers and policymakers — put too much weight on individual studies, in a horrible way. The first to publish on something gets more accolades than the second, third and fourth. That's not healthy when it comes to policy. If we put too much weight on our own evidence, we end up putting too much weight on individual studies we happen to do. That's not healthy either.That was one of the big pieces of culture change that we tried to push internally at USAID. We had this one slide that we used repeatedly that showed the plethora of evidence out there in the world compared to 20 years ago. A lot more studies are now usable. You can aggregate that evidence and form much better policies.You had political support to innovate that not everybody going into government has. On the other hand, USAID is a big, bureaucratic entity. There are all kinds of cross-pressures against being super-effective per dollar spent. In doing culture change, what kinds of roadblocks did you run into internally?We had a lot of support and political cover, in the sense that the political appointees — I was not a political appointee — were huge fans. But political appointees under Republicans have also been huge fans of what we were doing. Disagreements are more about what to do and what causes to choose. But the basic idea of being effective with your dollars to push your policy agenda is something that cuts across both sides.In the days leading up to the inauguration, we were expecting to continue the work we were doing. Being more cost-effective was something some of the people who were coming in were huge advocates for. They did make progress under Trump I in pushing USAID in that direction. We saw ourselves as able to help further that goal. Obviously, that's not the way it played out, but there isn't really anything political about being more cost-effective.We'll come back to that, but I do want to talk about the 2.5 years you spent in the Biden administration. USAID is full of people with all kinds of incentives, including some folks who were fully on board and supportive. What kinds of challenges did you have in trying to change the culture to be more focused on evidence and effectiveness?There was a fairly large contingent of people who welcomed us, were eager, understood the space that we were coming from and the things that we wanted, and greeted us with open arms. There's no way we would've accomplished what we accomplished without that. We had a bean counter within the Office of the Chief Economist of moving about $1.7 billion towards programs that were more effective or had strong evaluations. That would've been $0 had there not been some individuals who were already eager and just didn't have the path for doing it.People can see economists as people who are going to come in negative and a bit dismal — the dismal science, so to speak. I got into economics for a positive reason. We tried as often as possible to show that with an economic lens, we can help people achieve their goals better, period. We would say repeatedly to people, "We're not here to actually make the difficult choices: to say whether health, education, or food security is the better use of money. We're here to accept your goal and help you achieve more of it for your dollar spent.” We always send a very disarming message: we're there simply to help people achieve their goals and to illuminate the trade-offs that naturally exist.Within USAID, you have a consensus-type organization. When you have 10 people sitting around a room trying to decide how to spend money towards a common goal, if you don't crystallize the trade-offs between the various ideas being put forward, you end up seeing a consensus built: that everybody gets a piece of the pie. Our way of trying to shift the culture is to take those moments and say, "Wait a second. All 10 might be good ideas relative to doing nothing, but they can't all be good relative to each other. We all share a common goal, so let's be clear about the trade-offs between these different programs. Let's identify the ones that are actually getting you the most bang for your buck."Can you give me an example of what those trade-offs might be in a given sector?Sure. Let's take social protection, what we would call the Humanitarian Nexus development space. It might be working in a refugee area — not dealing with the immediate crisis, but one, two, five, or ten years later — trying to help bring the refugees into a more stable environment and into economic activities. Sometimes, you would see some cash or food provided to households. The programs would all have the common goal of helping to build a sustainable livelihood for households, so that they can be more integrated into the local economy. There might be programs providing water, financial instruments like savings vehicles, and supporting vocational education. It'd be a myriad of things, all on this focused goal of income-generating activity for the households to make them more stable in the long run.Often, those kinds of programs doing 10 different things did not actually lead to an observable impact over five years. But a more focused approach has gone through evaluations: cash transfers. That's a good example where “reducing” doesn't always mean reduce your programs just to one thing, but there is this default option of starting with a base case: “What does a cash transfer generate?"And to clarify for people who don't follow development economics, the cash transfer is just, “What if we gave people money?”Sometimes it is just that. Sometimes it's thinking strategically, “Maybe we should do it as a lump sum so that it goes into investments. Maybe we should do it with a planning exercise to make those investments.” Let's just call it “cash-plus,” or “cash-with-a-little-plus,” then variations of that nature. There's a different model, maybe call it, “cash-plus-plus,” called the graduation model. That has gone through about 30 randomized trials, showing pretty striking impacts on long-run income-generating activity for households. At its core is a cash transfer, usually along with some training about income-generating activity — ideally one that is producing and exporting in some way, even a local export to the capital — and access to some form of savings. In some cases, that's an informal savings group, with a community that comes and saves together. In some cases, it's mobile money that's the core. It's a much simpler program, and it's easier to do it at scale. It has generated considerable, measured, repeatedly positive impacts, but not always. There's a lot more that needs to be learned about how to do it more effectively.[Further reading: Here's another position paper from Karlan's team at USAID on benchmarking against cash transfers.]One of your recurring refrains is, “If we're not sure that these other ideas have an impact, let's benchmark: would a cash-transfer model likely give us more bang for our buck than this panoply of other programs that we're trying to run?”The idea of having a benchmark is a great approach in general. You should always be able to beat X. X might be different in different contexts. In a lot of cases, cash is the right benchmark.Go back to education. What's your benchmark for improving learning outcomes for a primary school? Cash transfer is not the right benchmark. The evidence that cash transfers will single-handedly move the needle on learning outcomes is not that strong. On the other hand, a couple of different programs — one called Teaching at the Right Level, another called structured pedagogy — have proven repeatedly to generate very strong impacts at a fairly modest cost. In education, those should be the benchmark. If you want to innovate, great, innovate. But your goal is to beat those. If you can beat them consistently, you become the benchmark. That's a great process for the long run. It's very much part of our thinking about what the future of foreign aid should look like: to be structured around that benchmark.Let's go back to those roundtables you described, where you're trying to figure out what the intervention should be for a group of refugees in a foreign country. What were the responses when you'd say, “Look, if we're all pulling in the same direction, we have to toss out the three worst ideas”?One of the challenges is the psychology of ethics. There's probably a word for this, but one of the objections we would often get was about the scale of a program for an individual. Someone would argue, "But this won't work unless you do this one extra thing." That extra thing might be providing water to the household, along with a cash transfer for income-generating activity, financial support, and bank accounts. Another objection would be that, "You also have to provide consumption and food up to a certain level."These are things that individually might be good, relative to nothing, or maybe even relative to other water approaches or cash transfers. But if you're focused on whether to satisfy the household's food needs, or provide half of what's needed — if all you're thinking about is the trade-off between full and half — you immediately jump to this idea that, "No, we have to go full. That's what's needed to help this household." But if you go to half, you can help more people. There's an actual trade-off: 10,000 people will receive nothing because you're giving more to the people in your program.The same is true for nutritional supplements. Should you provide 2,000 calories a day, or 1,000 calories a day to more people? It's a very difficult conversation on the psychology of ethics. There's this idea that people in a program are sacrosanct, and you must do everything you can for them. But that ignores all the people who are not being reached at all.I would find myself in conversations where that's exactly the way I would try to put it. I would say, "Okay, wait, we have the 2,000,000 people that are eligible for this program in this context. Our program is only going to reach 250,000. That's the reality. Now, let's talk about how many people we're willing to leave untouched and unhelped whatsoever." That was, at least to me, the right way to frame this question. Do you go very intense for fewer people or broader support for more people?Did that help these roundtables reach consensus, or at least have a better sense of what things are trading off against each other?I definitely saw movement for some. I wouldn't say it was uniform, and these are difficult conversations. But there was a lot of appetite for this recognition that, as big as USAID was, it was still small, relative to the problems being approached. There were a lot of people in any given crisis who were being left unhelped. The minute you're able to help people focus more on those big numbers, as daunting as they are, I would see more openness to looking at the evidence to figure out how to do the most good with the resources we have?” We must recognize these inherent trade-offs, whether we like it or not.Back in 2023, you talked to Dylan Matthews at Vox — it's a great interview — about how it's hard to push people to measure cost-effectiveness, when it means adding another step to a big, complicated bureaucratic process of getting aid out the door. You said,"There are also bandwidth issues. There's a lot of competing demands. Some of these demands relate to important issues on gender environment, fairness in the procurement process. These add steps to the process that need to be adhered to. What you end up with is a lot of overworked people. And then you're saying, ‘Here's one more thing to do.'”Looking back, what do you think of those demands on, say, fairness in the procurement process?Given that we're going to be facing a new environment, there probably are some steps in the process that — hopefully, when things are put back in place in some form — someone can be thinking more carefully about. It's easier to put in a cleaner process that avoids some of these hiccups when you start with a blank slate.Having said that, it's also going to be fewer people to dole out less money. There's definitely a challenge that we're going to be facing as a country, to push out money in an effective way with many fewer people for oversight. I don't think it would be accurate to say we achieved this goal yet, but my goal was to make it so that adding cost-effectiveness was actually a negative-cost addition to the process. [We wanted] to do it in a way that successfully recognized that it wasn't a cookie-cutter solution from up top for every country. But [our goal was that] the work to contextualize in a country actually simplified the process for whoever's putting together the procurement docs and deciding what to put in them. I stand by that belief that if it's done well, we can make this a negative-cost process change.I just want to push a little bit. Would you be supportive of a USAID procurement and contracting process that stripped out a bunch of these requirements about gender, environment, or fairness in contracting? Would that make USAID a more effective institution?Some of those types of things did serve an important purpose for some areas and not others. The tricky thing is, how do you set up a process to decide when to do it, when not? There's definitely cases where you would see an environmental review of something that really had absolutely nothing to do with the environment. It was just a cog in the process, but you have to have a process for deciding the process. I don't know enough about the legislation that was put in place on each of these to say, “Was there a better way of deciding when to do them, when not to do them?” That is not something that I was involved in in a direct way. "Let's think about redoing how we introduce gender in our procurement process" was never put on the table.On gender, there's a fair amount of evidence in different contexts that says the way of dealing with a gender inequity is not to just take the same old program and say, "We're now going to do this for women." You need to understand something more about the local context. If all you do is take programs and say, "Add a gender component," you end up with a lot of false attribution, and you don't end up being effective at the very thing that the person [leading the program] cares to do.In that Vox interview, your host says, "USAID relies heavily on a small number of well-connected contractors to deliver most aid, while other groups are often deterred from even applying by the process's complexity." He goes on to say that the use of rigorous evaluation methods like randomized controlled trials is the exception, not the norm.On Statecraft, we talked to Kyle Newkirk, who ran USAID procurement in Afghanistan in the late 2000s, about the small set of well-connected contractors that took most of the contracts in Afghanistan. Often, there was very little oversight from USAID, either because it was hard to get out to those locations in a war-torn environment, or because the system of accountability wasn't built there. Did you talk to people about lessons learned from USAID operating in Afghanistan?No. I mean, only to the following extent: The lesson learned there, as I understand it, wasn't so much about the choice on what intervention to fund, it was procurement: the local politics and engagement with the governments or lack thereof. And dealing with the challenge of doing work in a context like that, where there's more risk of fraud and issues of that nature.Our emphasis was about the design of programs to say, “What are you actually going to try to fund?” Dealing with whether there's fraud in the execution would fall more under the Inspector General and other units. That's not an area that we engaged in when we would do evaluation.This actually gets to a key difference between impact evaluations and accountability. It's one of the areas where we see a lot of loosey-goosey language in the media reporting and Twitter. My office focused on impact evaluation. What changed in the world because of this intervention, that wouldn't otherwise have changed? By “change in the world,” we are making a causal statement. That's setting up things like randomized controlled trials to find out, “What was the impact of this program?” It does provide some accountability, but it really should be done to look forward, in order to know, “Does this help achieve the goals we have in mind?” If so, let's learn that, and replicate it, scale it, do it again.If you're going to deliver books to schools, medicine to health clinics, or cash to people, and you're concerned about fraud, then you need to audit that process and see, “Did the books get to the schools, the medicine to the people, the cash to the people?” You don't need to ask, "Did the medicine solve the disease?" There's been studies already. There's a reason that medicine was being prescribed. Once it's proven to be an effective drug, you don't run randomized trials for decades to learn what you already know. If it's the prescribed drug, you just prescribe the drug, and do accountability exercises to make sure that the drugs are getting into the right hands and there isn't theft or corruption along the way.I think it's a very intuitive thing. There's a confusion that often takes place in social science, in economic or education interventions. They somehow forget that once we know that a certain program generates a certain positive impact, we no longer need to track continuously to find out what happens. Instead, we just need to do accountability to make sure that the program is being delivered as it was designed, tested, and shown to work.There are all these criticisms — from the waste, fraud, and corruption perspective — of USAID working with a couple of big contractors. USAID works largely through these big development organizations like Chemonics. Would USAID dollars be more effective if it worked through a larger base of contractors?I don't think we know. There's probably a few different operating models that can deliver the same basic intervention. We need to focus on, ”What actually are we doing on the ground? What is it that we want the recipients of the program to receive, hear, or do?” and then think backwards from there: "Who's the right implementer for this?" If there's an implementer who is much more expensive for delivering the same product, let's find someone who's more cost-effective.It's helpful to break cost-effective programming into two things: the intervention itself and what benefits it accrues, and the cost for delivering that. Sometimes the improvement is not about the intervention, it's about the delivery model. Maybe that's what you're saying: “These players were too few, too large, and they had a grab on the market, so that they were able to charge too much money to deliver something that others were equally able to do at lower cost." If that's the case, that says, "We should reform our procurement process,” because the reason you would see that happen is they were really good at complying with requirements that came at USAID from Congress. You had an overworked workforce [within USAID] that had to comply with all these requirements. If you had a bid between two groups, one of which repeatedly delivered on the paperwork to get a good performance evaluation, and a new group that doesn't have that track record, who are you going to choose? That's how we ended up where we are.My understanding of the history is that it comes from a push from Republicans in the ‘80s, from [Senator] Jesse Helms, to outsource USAID efforts to contractors. So this is not a left-leaning thing. I wouldn't say it is right-leaning either. It was just a decision made decades ago. You combine that with the bureaucratic requirements of working with USAID, and you end up with a few firms and nonprofits skilled at dealing with it.It's definitely my impression that at various points in American history, different partisans are calling for insourcing or for outsourcing. But definitely, I think you're right that the NGO cluster around USAID does spring up out of a Republican push in the eighties.We talked to John Kamensky recently, who was on Al Gore's predecessor to DOGE in the ‘90s.I listened to this, yeah.I'm glad to hear it! I'm thinking of it because they also pushed to cut the workforce in the mid-90s and outsource federal functions.Earlier, you mentioned a slide that showed what we've learned in the field of development economics over the past 20 years. Will you narrate that slide for me?Let me do two slides for you. The slide that I was picturing was a count of randomized controlled trials in development that shows a fairly exponential growth. The movement started in the mid-to-late 1990s, but really took off in the 2000s. Even just in the past 10 years, it's seen a considerable increase. There's about 4-5,000 randomized controlled trials evaluating various programs of the kind USAID funds.That doesn't tell you the substance of what was learned. Here's an example of substance, which is cash transfers: probably the most studied intervention out there. We have a meta-analysis that counted 115 studies. That's where you start having a preponderance of evidence to be able to say something concrete. There's some variation: you get different results in different places; targeting and ways of doing it vary. A good systematic analysis can help tease out what we can say, not just about the effect of cash, but also how to do it and what to expect, depending on how it's done. Fifteen years ago, when we saw the first few come out, you just had, "Oh, that's interesting. But it's a couple of studies, how do you form policy around that?” With 115, we can say so much more.What else have we learned about development that USAID operators in the year 2000 would not have been able to act upon?Think about the development process in two steps. One is choosing good interventions; the other is implementing them well. The study of implementation is historically underdone. The challenge that we face — this is an area I was hoping USAID could make inroads on — was, studying a new intervention might be of high reward from an academic perspective. But it's a lot less interesting to an academic to do much more granular work to say, "That was an interesting program that created these groups [of aid recipients]; now let's do some further knock-on research to find out whether those groups should be made of four, six, or ten people.” It's going to have a lower reward for the researcher, but it's incredibly important.It's equivalent to the color of the envelope in direct marketing. You might run tests — if this were old-style direct marketing — as to whether the envelope should be blue or red. You might find that blue works better. Great, but that's not interesting to an academic. But if you run 50 of these, on a myriad of topics about how to implement better, you end up with a collection of knowledge that is moving the needle on how to achieve more impact per dollar.That collection is not just important for policy: it also helps us learn more about the development process and the bottlenecks for implementing good programs. As we're seeing more digital platforms and data being used, [refining implementation] is more possible compared to 20 years ago, where most of the research was at the intervention level: does this intervention work? That's an exciting transition. It's also a path to seeing how foreign aid can help in individual contexts, [as we] work with local governments to integrate evidence into their operations and be more efficient with their own resources.There's an argument I've seen a lot recently: we under-invest in governance relative to other foreign aid goals. If we care about economic growth and humanitarian outcomes, we should spend a lot more on supporting local governance. What do you make of that claim?I agree with it actually, but there's a big difference between recognizing the problem and seeing what the tool is to address it. It's one thing to say, “Politics matters, institutions matter.” There's lots of evidence to support that, including the recent Nobel Prize. It's another beast to say, “This particular intervention will improve institutions and governance.”The challenge is, “What do we do about this? What is working to improve this? What is resilient to the political process?” The minute you get into those kinds of questions, it's the other end of the spectrum from a cash transfer. A cash transfer has a kind of universality: Not to say you're going to get the same impact everywhere, but it's a bit easier to think about the design of a program. You have fewer parameters to decide. When you think about efforts to improve governance, you need bespoke thinking in every single place.As you point out, it's something of a meme to say “institutions matter” and to leave it at that, but the devil is in all of those details.In my younger years — I feel old saying that — I used to do a lot of work on financial inclusion, and financial literacy was always my go-to example. On a household level, it's really easy to show a correlation: people who are more financially literate make better financial decisions and have more wealth, etc. It's much harder to say, “How do you move the needle on financial literacy in a way that actually helps people make better decisions, absorb shocks better, build investment better, save better?” It's easy to show that the correlation is there. It's much harder to say this program, here, will actually move the needle. That same exact problem is much more complicated when thinking about governance and institutions.Let's talk about USAID as it stands today. You left USAID when it became clear to you that a lot of the work you were doing was not of interest to the people now running it. How did the agency end up so disconnected from a political base of support? There's still plenty of people who support USAID and would like it to be reinstated, but it was at least vulnerable enough to be tipped over by DOGE in a matter of weeks. How did that happen?I don't know that I would agree with the premise. I'm not sure that public support of foreign aid actually changed, I'd be curious to see that. I think aid has always been misunderstood. There are public opinion polls that show people thought 25% of the US budget was spent on foreign aid. One said, "What, do you think it should be?" People said 10%. The right answer is about 0.6%. You could say fine, people are bad at statistics, but those numbers are pretty dauntingly off. I don't know that that's changed. I heard numbers like that years ago.I think there was a vulnerability to an effort that doesn't create a visible impact to people's lives in America, the way that Social Security, Medicare, and roads do. Foreign aid just doesn't have that luxury. I think it's always been vulnerable. It has always had some bipartisan support, because of the understanding of the bigger picture and the soft power that's gained from it. And the recognition that we are a nation built on the idea of generosity and being good to others. That was always there, but it required Congress to step in and say, "Let's go spend this money on foreign aid." I don't think that changed. What changed was that you ended up with an administration that just did not share those values.There's this issue in foreign aid: Congress picks its priorities, but those priorities are not a ranked list of what Congress cares about. It's the combination of different interests and pressures in Congress that generates the list of things USAID is going to fund.You could say doing it that way is necessary to build buy-in from a bunch of different political interests for the work of foreign aid. On the other hand, maybe the emergent list from that process is not the things that are most important to fund. And clearly, that congressional buy-in wasn't enough to protect USAID from DOGE or from other political pressures.How should people who care about foreign aid reason about building a version of USAID that's more effective and less vulnerable at the same time?Fair question. Look, I have thoughts, but by no means do I think of myself as the most knowledgeable person to say, here's the answer in the way forward. One reality is, even if Congress did object, they didn't have a mechanism in place to actually object. They can control the power of the purse the next round, but we're probably going to be facing a constitutional crisis over the Impoundment Act, to see if the executive branch can impound money that Congress spent. We'll see how this plays out. Aside from taking that to court, all Congress could do was complain.I would like what comes back to have two things done that will help, but they don't make foreign aid immune. One is to be more evidence-based, because then attacks on being ineffective are less strong. But the reality is, some of the attacks on its “effectiveness,” and the examples used, had nothing to do with poorly-chosen interventions. There was a slipperiness of language, calling something that they don't like “fraud” and “waste” because they didn't like its purpose. That is very different than saying, “We actually agreed on the purpose of something, but then you implemented it in such a bad way that there was fraud and waste.” There were really no examples given of that second part. So I don't know that being more evidence-based will actually protect it, given that that wasn't the way it was really genuinely taken down.The second is some boundaries. There is a core set of activities that have bipartisan support. How do we structure a foreign aid that is just focused on that? We need to find a way to put the things that are more controversial — whether it's the left or right that wants it — in a separate bucket. Let the team that wins the election turn that off and on as they wish, without adulterating the core part that has bipartisan support. That's the key question: can we set up a process that partitions those, so that they don't have that vulnerability? [I wrote about this problem earlier this year.]My counter-example is PEPFAR, which had a broad base of bipartisan support. PEPFAR consistently got long-term reauthorizations from Congress, I think precisely because of the dynamic you're talking about: It was a focused, specific intervention that folks all over the political spectrum could get behind and save lives. But in government programs, if something has a big base of support, you have an incentive to stuff your pet partisan issues in there, for the same reason that “must-pass” bills get stuffed with everybody's little thing. [In 2024, before DOGE, PEPFAR's original Republican co-sponsor came out against a long-term reauthorization, on the grounds that the Biden administration was using the program to promote abortion. Congress reauthorized PEPFAR for only one year, and that reauthorization lapsed in 2025.]You want to carve out the things that are truly bipartisan. But does that idea have a timer attached? What if, on a long enough timeline, everything becomes politicized?There are economic theorems about the nature of a repeated game. You can get many different equilibria in the long run. I'd like to think there's a world in which that is the answer. But we have seen an erosion of other things, like the filibuster regarding judges. Each team makes a little move in some direction, and then you change the equilibrium. We always have that risk. The goal is, how can you establish something where that doesn't happen?It might be that what's happened is helpful, in an unintended way, to build equilibrium in the future that keeps things focused on the bipartisan aspect. Whether it's the left or the right that wants to do something that they know the other side will object to, they hold back and say, "Maybe we shouldn't do that. Because when we do, the whole thing gets blown up."Let's imagine you're back at USAID a couple of years from now, with a broader latitude to organize our foreign aid apparatus around impact and effectiveness. What other things might we want to do — beyond measuring programs and keeping trade-offs in mind — if we really wanted to focus on effectiveness? Would we do fewer interventions and do them at larger scale?I think we would do fewer things simpler and bigger, but I also think we need to recognize that even at our biggest, we were tiny compared to the budget of the local government. If we can do more to use our money to help them be more effective with their money, that's the biggest win to go for. That starts looking a lot like things Mark Green was putting in place [as administrator of USAID] under Trump I, under the Journey to Self-Reliance [a reorganization of USAID to help countries address development challenges themselves].Sometimes that's done in the context of, "Let's do that for five or ten years, and then we can stop giving aid to that country." That was the way the Millennium Challenge Corporation talked about their country selection initially. Eventually, they stopped doing that, because they realized that that was never happening. I think that's okay. As much as we might help make some changes, even if we succeed in helping the poorest country in the world use their resources better, they're still going to be poor. We're still going to be rich. There's still maybe going to be the poorest, because if we do that in the 10 poorest countries and they all move up, maybe the 11th becomes the poorest, and then we can work there. I don't think getting off of aid is necessarily the objective.But if that was clearly the right answer, that's a huge win if we've done that by helping to prove the institutions and governance of that country so that it is rolling out better policies, helping its people better, and collecting their own tax revenue. If we can have an eye on that, then that's a huge win for foreign aid in general.How are we supposed to be measuring the impact of soft power? I think that's a term that's not now much in vogue in DC.There's no one answer to how to measure soft power. It's described as the influence that we gain in the world in terms of geopolitics, everything from treaties and the United Nations to access to markets; trade policy, labor policy. The basic idea of soft power manifests itself in all those different ways.It's a more extreme version of the challenge of measuring the impact of cash transfers. You want to measure the impact of a pill that is intended to deal with disease: you measure the disease, and you have a direct measure. You want to measure the impact of cash: you have to measure a lot of different things, because you don't know how people are going to use the cash. Soft power is even further down the spectrum: you don't know exactly how aid is helping build our partnership with a country's people and leaders. How is that going to manifest itself in the future? That becomes that much harder to do.Having said that, there's academic studies that document everything from attitudes about America to votes at the United Nations that follow aid, and things of that nature. But it's not like there's one core set: that's part of what makes it a challenge.I will put my cards on the table here: I have been skeptical of the idea that USAID is a really valuable tool for American soft power, for maintaining American hegemony, etc. It seems much easier to defend USAID by simply saying that it does excellent humanitarian work, and that's valuable. The national security argument for USAID seems harder to substantiate.I think we agree on this. You have such a wide set of things to look at, it's not hard to imagine a bias from a researcher might lead to selection of outcomes, and of the context. It's not a well-defined enough concept to be able to say, "It worked 20% of the time, and it did not in these, and the net average…" Average over what? Even though there's good case studies that show various paths where it has mattered, there's case studies that show it doesn't.I also get nervous about an entire system that's built around [attempts to measure soft power]. It turns foreign aid into too much of a transactional process, instead of a relationship that is built on the Golden Rule, “There's people in this country that we can actually help.” Sure, there's this hope that it'll help further our national interests. But if they're suffering from drought and famine, and we can provide support and save some lives, or we can do longer term developments and save tomorrow's lives, we ought to do that. That is a good thing for our country to do.Yet the conversation does often come back to this question of soft power. The problem with transactional is you get exactly what you contract on: nothing more, nothing less. There's too many unknowns here, when we're dealing with country-level interactions, and engagements between countries. It needs to be about relationships, and that means supporting even if there isn't a contract that itemizes the exact quid pro quo we are getting for something.I want to talk about what you observed in the administration change and the DOGE-ing of USAID. I think plenty of observers looked at this in the beginning and thought, “It's high time that a lot of these institutions were cleaned up and that someone took a hard look at how we spend money there.”There was not really any looking at any of the impact of anything. That was never in the cards. There was a 90-day review that was supposed to be done, but there were no questions asked, there was no data being collected. There was nothing whatsoever being looked at that had anything to do with, “Was this award actually accomplishing what it set out to accomplish?” There was no process in which they made those kinds of evaluations on what's actually working.You can see this very clearly when you think about what their bean counter was at DOGE: the spending that they cut. It's like me saying, "I'm going to do something beneficial for my household by stopping all expenditures on food." But we were getting something for that. Maybe we could have bought more cheaply, switched grocery stores, made a change there that got us the same food for less money. That would be a positive change. But you can't cut all your food expenditures, call that a saving, and then not have anything to eat. That's just bad math, bad economics.But that's exactly what they were doing. Throughout the entire government, that bean counter never once said, “benefits foregone.” It was always just “lowered spending.” Some of that probably did actually have a net loss, maybe it was $100 million spent on something that only created $10 million of benefits to Americans. That's a $90 million gain. But it was recorded as $100 million. And the point is, they never once looked at what benefits were being generated from the spending. What was being asked, within USAID, had nothing to do with what was actually being accomplished by any of the money that was being spent. It was never even asked.How do you think about risky bets in a place like USAID? It would be nice for USAID to take lots of high-risk, high-reward bets, and to be willing to spend money that will be “wasted” in the pursuit of high-impact interventions. But that approach is hard for government programs, politically, because the misses are much more salient than the successes.This is a very real issue. I saw this the very first time I did any sort of briefing with Congress when I was Chief Economist. The question came at me, "Why doesn't USAID show us more failures?" I remember thinking to myself, "Are you willing to promise that when they show the failure, you won't punish them for the failure — that you'll reward them for documenting and learning from the failure and not doing it again?" That's a very difficult nut to crack.There's an important distinction to make. You can have a portfolio of evidence generation, some things work and some don't, that can collectively contribute towards knowledge and scaling of effective programs. USAID actually had something like this called Development Innovation Ventures (DIV), and was in an earmark from Congress. It was so good that they raised money from the effective altruist community to further augment their pot of money. This was strong because a lot of it was not evaluating USAID interventions. It was just funding a portfolio of evidence generation about what works, implemented by other parties. The failures aren't as devastating, because you're showing a failure of some other party: it wasn't USAID money paying for an intervention. That was a strong model for how USAID can take on some risks and do some evidence generation that is immune to the issue you just described.If you're going to do evaluations of USAID money, the issue is very real. My overly simplistic view is that a lot of what USAID does should not be getting a highly rigorous impact evaluation. USAID should be rolling out, simple and at scale, things that have already been shown elsewhere. Let the innovation take place pre-USAID, funded elsewhere, maybe by DIV. Let smaller and more nimble nonprofits be the innovators and the documenters of what works. Then, USAID can adopt the things that are more effective and be more immune to this issue.So yeah, there is a world that is not first-best where USAID does the things that have strong evidence already. When it comes to actual innovation, where we do need to take risks that things won't work, let that be done in a way that may be supported by USAID, but partitioned away.I'm looking at a chart of USAID program funding in Fiscal Year 2022: the three big buckets are humanitarian, health, and governance, all on the order of $10–12 billion. Way down at the bottom, there's $500 million for “economic growth.” What's in that bucket that USAID funds, and should that piece of the pie chart be larger?I do think that should be larger, but it depends on how you define it. I don't say that just because I'm an economist. It goes back to the comment earlier about things that we can do to help improve local governance, and how they're using their resources. The kinds of things that might be funded would be efforts to work with local government to improve their ability to collect taxes. Or to set up efficient regulations for the banking industry, so it can grow and provide access to credit and savings. These are things that can help move the needle on macroeconomic outcomes. With that, you have more resources. That helps health and education, you have these downstream impacts. As you pointed out, the earmark on that was tiny. It did not have quite the same heartstring tug. But the logical link is huge and strong: if you strengthen the local government's financial stability, the benefits very much accrue to the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Social Protection, etc.Fighting your way out of poverty through growth is unambiguously good. You can look at many countries around the world that have grown economically, and through that, reduced poverty. But it's one thing to say that growth will alleviate poverty. It's another to say, "Here's aid money that will trigger growth." If we knew how to do that, we would've done it long ago, in a snap.Last question. Let's say it's a clean slate at USAID in a couple years, and you have wide latitude to do things your way. I want the Dean Karlan vision for the future of USAID.It needs to have, at the high level, a recognition that the Golden Rule is an important principle that guides our thinking on foreign aid and that we want to do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Being generous as a people is something that we pride ourselves in, our nation represents us as people, so we shouldn't be in any way shy to use foreign aid to further that aspiration of being a generous nation.The actual way of delivering aid, I would say, three things. Simpler. Let's focus on the evidence of what works, but recognize the boundaries of that evidence and how to contextualize it. There is a strong need to understand what it means to be simpler, and how to identify what that means in specific countries and contexts.The second is about leveraging local government, and working more to recognize that, as big as we may be, we're still going to be tiny relative to local government. If we can do more to improve how local government is using its resources, we've won.The third is about finding common ground. There's a lot. That's one of the reasons why I've started working on a consortium with Republicans and Democrats. The things I care about are generally non-partisan. The goal is to take the aspirations that foreign aid has — about improving health, education, economic outcomes, food security, agricultural productivity, jobs, trade, whatever the case is — and how do we use the evidence that's out there to move the needle as much as we can towards those goals? A lot of topics have common ground. How do we set up a foreign aid system that stays true to the common ground? I'd like to think it's not that hard. That's what I think would be great to see happen. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

We have something complementary for you today ... a lesson in COMPLEMENTARY colors and how to use them to your advantage in your decorating.Blue - OrangeYellow - PurpleGreen - RedYup, those are the 'complementary' colors, but are they or are they not.Science says they are and we explain how you can use them in your home to great effect.Plus we ring in on things like the Howard Johnson's logo and what to do with your kids when you want to DIY... all in this one episode. Tune in for all that and more...and more, like our crushes:We participate in the Amazon affiliate program, so your purchases may qualify us for a small fee, but in no way does that increase the cost to you.Crushes: Kelly has fallen for grocery tote bags that look like old fashioned picnic baskets. Have a look ⁠HERE⁠.Anita shares a podcast she is enjoying the Graham Norton Show. Find it ⁠HERE⁠.We are a part of the Amazon affiliate program, and if you make a purchase we can earn money. Anita's Amazon favorites are ⁠HERE⁠Need help with your home? We'd love to help! We do personalized consults, and we'll offer advice specific to your room that typically includes room layout ideas, suggestions for what the room needs, and how to pull the room together. We'll also help you to decide what isn't working for you. We work with any budget, large or small. Find out more ⁠HERE⁠Hang out with us between episodes at our blogs, IG and Kelly's YouTube channels. Links are below to all those places to catch up on the other 6 days of the week!Kelly's IG ⁠HERE⁠ Kelly's Youtube ⁠HERE⁠ Kelly's blog ⁠HERE⁠Anita's IG ⁠HERE⁠ Anita's blog ⁠HERE⁠Are you subscribed to the podcast? Don't need to search for us each Wednesday let us come right to your door ...er...device. Subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts. Just hit the SUBSCRIBE button & we'll show up!If you have a moment we would so appreciate it if you left a review for DTT on iTunes. Just go ⁠HERE⁠ and click listen in apple podcasts. XX, Anita & KellyDI - 12:00 / 16:43See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today, I'm thrilled to welcome a legend in the skincare world—Renee Rouleau. With a career spanning over 30 years, Renee is known for her science-forward yet totally accessible approach to skin health. She's the trusted esthetician behind the glowing complexions of stars like Sabrina Carpenter, Demi Lovato and  Lili Reinhart —and the brilliant mind behind the game-changing 9 Skin Types system. In this episode, Renee shares: Her go-to facial steps that you can do at home for that celebrity glow The beauty tools and ingredients she actually believes in And what's next in skincare innovation from someone who's been shaping the industry for decades If you've ever felt overwhelmed by skincare advice or product overload, this episode will bring clarity, science, and a breath of fresh air to your routine. Let's dive into glowing skin the Renee Rouleau way. XX, Lindsey Next Steps: Book a ONE on ONE Skincare Routine coaching call with me to get you Radiant skin!  LISTEN TO EXCLUSIVE PODCAST CONTENT and Download our FREE Esthetician led Skincare app: Apple IOS  Here OR Google Play Here Download my Free 7 Day Skincare Guide: Here  If you liked this episode, you will also like this one : Discover Your Skin type: HERE Favorite Skincare Products HERE Aha/bha Blemish Control Cleanser Hyperfix Fading Toner Rapid Response Detox Masque Triple Berry Smoothing Peel Anti Bump Solution Chin Breakout Treatment Kit (Rapid Response Detox Masque + Anti Bump Solution) Skin Correcting Serum Vitamin C&e Treatment Better Than Balm Mint Renewal Cleanser Aha/bha Blemish Control Cleanser Rapid Response Detox Cleanser Hydraboost Rescue Creme Intensive Firming Neck Creme Sheer Moisture Lotion Connect with me:  @lindseyrholder and @spaskinandbeauty  Leave a review and get instant access to my  48 Hour Skincare Makeover Guide: HERE Listen to related episodes: The Face Cream I Love (That No One's Talking About) 10 Game-Changing Hair Tips You'll Wish You Knew Sooner Sunscreen Slip-Ups Part 2: 5 More Mistakes Even Smart Skincare Lovers Make  

Hey Intentional Wellness Warrior!  If you're a nurse, healthcare professional, or caregiving mama, you're probably used to wearing scrubs or a uniform most days—and let's be honest, when it's time to get dressed for anything else, it can feel frustrating, overwhelming, or just plain exhausting. In today's episode, I'm sitting down with Nikki Hinrichs—a homeschool mom of 4 and personal brand stylist—who totally gets the juggle of motherhood, function, and faith. We talk about how what we wear affects how we feel, how to bring confidence back into your closet without stress, and why getting dressed can be a form of self-care and stewardship. If you've ever said, “I don't even know where to start when it comes to clothes,” this conversation will meet you with grace, practical tips, and maybe even some renewed joy in showing up as the woman God created you to be—outside the scrubs. Shalom Shalom,  Xx, Shan  ……CONNECT…… WITH NIKKI: Website Link: CLICK HERE Free Gift Link: CLICK HERE Instagram Link: CLICK HERE Youtube Link: CLICK HERE

Te invitamos a pensarnos de una manera diferente echando un rápido vistazo a la rica y muy diversa Historia Africana. Hoy en día el llamado “sur global” se contrapone al norte por experiencias históricas similares que probablemente sólo América Latina, África y el Sudeste Asiático comparten. Nuestros pueblos pueden comprenderse más a sí mismos al escuchar las historias de los demás, conociendo otras luchas por conquistar la libertad. En esta entrega te ofrecemos un análisis sobre cómo funcionó el sistema global de la colonia, la importancia de las narrativas y el dominio mental, y el poder de establecer límites políticos en un mapa. Recopilando acontecimientos estelares del siglo XIX y el siglo XX, recordamos experiencias africanas de descolonización, como la de Etiopía y Mussolini, la Francia de Vichy durante la ocupación nazi, Kenia y los Mao Mao, el panarabismo y la nacionalización del canal del Suez, la revolución de los claveles en Portugal, y el caso sudafricano liderado por Mandela. Todo esto con la esperanza de que, al revisitar el pasado africano, construyamos un mejor futuro. Notas del episodio  Este episodio fue traído a ustedes gracias a Boston Scientific Si quieres conocer más detalles sobre las historias aquí contadas, te recomendamos consultar el libro de Diana Uribe “África, nuestra tercera raíz”, una investigación profunda sobre la configuración del continente africano y su diáspora en Colombia. Si estás interesado en comprender más a fondo cómo funciona la distinción entre civilización y barbarie, visita el libro “Orientalismo” de Edward W. Said, un clásico histórico que se ocupa de analizar la configuración de la mirada hegemónica occidental sobre otros pueblos.  Si lo que buscas es analizar cómo el poder de los imperios europeos continuaron influenciando las realidades africanas después de sus procesos de descolonización, te sugerimos revisar el texto conceptual del historiador camerunés Achille Mbembe, “Necropolítica”. Si quieres indagar sobre cómo las naciones africanas se han ocupado durante las últimas décadas en descolonizar sus culturas, te invitamos a escuchar la charla “El peligro de una sola historia” ofrecida por la literata nigeriana Chimamanda Adichie. Si quieres leer una buena novela de ficción africana que de cuenta de las realidades de sus pueblos, te recomendamos “Todo se desmorona” de Chinua Achebe. Gracias de nuevo a nuestra comunidad de Patreons por apoyar la producción de este episodio. Si quieres unirte, visita www.dianauribe.fm/comunidad   Sigue mis proyectos en otros lugares:  YouTube ➔ youtube.com/@DianaUribefm  Instagram ➔ instagram.com/dianauribe.fm Facebook ➔ facebook.com/dianauribe.fm Sitio web ➔ dianauribe.fm Twitter ➔ x.com/DianaUribefm  LinkedIn ➔ www.linkedin.com/in/diana-uribe   

Sergio calls in to explain exactly how he increased both the length ANDDDD width of his d** (without surgery.) How small was it before? How big did it get? What exactly did he do? How long did it take? How much did it cost? Tune in for to find out plus hear all about where he found all the info on how to increase his size, how his wife found out and how she reacted, how he learned about jelqing and exactly how do it, all the equipment you need and exactly what you need to do to increase your d** size plus a whole lot more. REPEAT THURSDAY originally aired 11/2023 Here are links to similar products that he used: Andromedical enlarger ⁠https://amzn.to/49RZZpZ⁠ Hydromax pump ⁠https://amzn.to/3uxeHmf **To see HOT pics of my female guests + gain access to my PRIVATE Discord channel where people get super XX naughty + hear anonymous confessions + get all the episodes early and AD FREE, join my Patreon! It's only $7 a month and you can cancel at any time. You can sign up here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/StrictlyAnonymousPodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ MY BOOK IS NOW OUT FOR PRE-ORDER!!!! Strictly Anonymous Confessions: Secret Sex Lives of Total Strangers. A bunch of short, super sexy, TRUE stories. GET YOUR COPY NOW: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://amzn.to/4i7hBCd⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  To join SDC and get a FREE Trial! click here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.sdc.com/?ref=37712⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or go to SDC.com and use my code 37712  Want to be on the show? Email me at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠strictlyanonymouspodcast@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://www.strictlyanonymouspodcast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and click on "Be on the Show" Have something quick you want to confess while remaining anonymous? Call the CONFESSIONS hotline at 347-420-3579. You can call 24/7. All voices are changed.  Sponsors:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://viia.co/STRICTLYANON⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Try VIIA and use code STRICTLYANON for great SEX and sleep ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://butterwellness.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Use the code “STRICTLY” at checkout for 20% off your entire order ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://liferx.md⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Start your transformation now and get $50 OFF your first month, use code: ANONYMOUS ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://vb.health ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To get 10% off Load Boost and Drive Boost by VB Health use code: STRICTLY ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bluechew.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Get your first month of the new Blewchew Max FREE! use code: STRICTLYANON ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://beducate.me/pd2520-anonymous⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Use code: ANONYMOUS to get 50% off your yearly pass plus get a 14-day money-back guarantee  Follow me! Instagram ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/strictanonymous/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Twitter ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/strictanonymous?lang=en⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://www.strictlyanonymouspodcast.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Everything else ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/Strictlyanonymouspodcas⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices